Proved: Russian Trolls Interfered in the U.S. Presidential Election…
… What the U.S. Does in the Elections of Other Nations
According to the indictment by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election: through internet trolls!
There is much deliberate confusion regarding this meddling. But one thing is definitely clear: The American and global Left was solidly behind their candidate Hillary Clinton. For them, anyone or any nation hindering Clinton’s victory committed an “unpardonable” sin. And what did American investigation show? That Russian trolls acted definitely against Clinton, who lost the election.
Patrick J. Buchanan, a former adviser to President Ronald Reagan and former Republican presidential candidate, said, “One imaginative Russian troll urged Trumpsters to dress up a female volunteer in an orange prison jump suit, put her in a cage on a flatbed truck, then append the slogan, ‘Lock Her Up!’”
Russians committed the “unpardonable” sin, and now Democrats and Republicans, U.S. left-wingers and right-wingers want make Russia pay for allegedly helping Donald Trump win, as if the heavy sanctions Obama imposed — and not discontinued by Trump — on Russia were not enough.
Often, I think that U.S. left-wingers and right-wingers use to attack Russia as a scarecrow to distract the American public and the world. While both sides keep us distracted, they can advance any agenda they share. And there is a shared agenda: the neocon ideology.
While Mueller’s indictments confirm that Russian trolls meddled in the U.S. election, what explains the left-wing and right-wing hysteria against Russia?
In this point, I agree with Rev. Chuck Baldwin, who said “The War Party Marches On.” This party is comprised by both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. The Neocon Party, which is above all parties in the U.S., needs a scarecrow.
Socialists accuse Russia, because their candidate lost. But conservatives, especially neoconservatives (neocons), are also accusing Russia.
If the alleged Russian meddling through trolls is an act supreme hostility, why during his 2016 campaign, did candidate Trump say, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing”? He was referring to emails on Clinton’s private server that she said she deleted, according to an Associated Pres report.
Trump made such daring public request because it was clear, for him, that Russia was against Clinton.
Now he is showing dissatisfaction with the alleged Russian meddling in the U.S. elections, but he seems to ignore the U.S. meddling in the elections of other nations. John Perkins, in his book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man,” has said that U.S. intelligence agencies have rigged elections in other nations for decades.
According to Joseph Farah, WND (WorldNetDaily) chief, even Israel did not escape from U.S. meddling in Israeli elections. Farah said, “Barack Obama used U.S. taxpayer money openly to influence the election of its best ally in the Middle East, Israel.” He added, “The late Sen. Ted Kennedy actually asked for the Soviet Union’s help in defeating Ronald Reagan’s re-election effort in 1988. Where were the scowls of outrage back then?”
If Democrats could ask Soviet Union to help defeat a Republican candidate, why cannot a Republican candidate ask a conservative Russia to help defeat a Democrat candidate? It was what Trump did in 2016.
In his WND article titled “Is that Russia troll farm an act of war?” Patrick J. Buchanan said:
As for Russian trolling in our election, do we really have clean hands when it comes to meddling in elections and the internal politics of regimes we dislike?
Sen. John McCain and Victoria Nuland of State egged on the Maidan Square crowds in Kiev that overthrew the elected government of Ukraine. When the democratically elected regime of Mohamed Morsi was overthrown, the U.S. readily accepted the coup as a victory for our side and continued aid to Egypt as tens of thousands of Muslim Brotherhood members were imprisoned.
Are the CIA and National Endowment for Democracy under orders not to try to influence the outcome of elections in nations in whose ruling regimes we believe we have a stake?
“Have we ever tried to meddle in other countries’ elections?” Laura Ingraham asked former CIA Director James Woolsey this weekend.
With a grin, Woolsey replied, “Oh, probably.”
“We don’t do that anymore, though?” Ingraham interrupted. “We don’t mess around in other people’s elections, Jim?”
“Well,” Woolsey said with a smile. “Only for a very good cause.”
Indeed, what is the National Endowment for Democracy all about, if not aiding the pro-American side in foreign nations and their elections?
Did America have no active role in the “color-coded revolutions” that have changed regimes from Serbia to Ukraine to Georgia?
When Republicans discuss Iran on Capitol Hill, the phrase “regime change” is frequently heard… in 2009, Republicans denounced President Obama for not intervening more energetically to alter the outcome [in Iran].
When China, Russia and Egypt expel NGOs, are their suspicions that some have been seeded with U.S. agents merely marks of paranoia?
The U.S. role in the overthrow of Premier Mossadegh in Iran in 1953, and of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954, and of President Ngo Dinh Diem in Saigon in 1963 are established facts.
So when the U.S. does exactly what it condemns in other nations, it is correct and democratic. But no nation is entitled to copy U.S. actions. Journalist Glenn Greenwald said about “the most vivid distillations of American Exceptionalism” in his Twitter account: “the US has the full, unfettered right to do exactly what we demand other nations don’t do because — unlike them — we’re Good, so it’s done for Good ends, not Bad ones.”
In my Twitter account, I answered him: “Sad, but true. Only evangelical Christians, who made a difference in the birth of America, can also make a difference today against neocons’ interference and discrepancy in the US foreign policy.”
The U.S. government, under left-wing and right-wing presidents, makes a big fuss over minimal meddling in the U.S. election (even internet trolls are a supreme crime against the U.S., according to neocons), but both sides heavily meddle, with covert CIA operations through NGOs and other ways, in the elections of other nations.
As Jesus said,
“And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.” (Luke 6:31 ESV)
Instead making fuss over Russian trolls and using Russia as a scarecrow for the sake of neocon policies, America under Trump should prosecute Obama for creating ISIS, which committed genocide of Christians in Syria and Iraq. Trump himself said in 2016 that Obama created ISIS. So Obama and Hillary Clinton were accomplices of genocide of Christians. By the U.S. law, which condemns accomplices of mass murders, would not both deserve capital punishment for aiding and abetting the genocide of Christian through ISIS?
America under Trump should prosecute Obama and Clinton for provoking Russia since Putin passed in 2013 a law banning homosexual propaganda to children and teens.
America under Trump should prosecute Obama and Clinton for overthrowing the Ukrainian government in 2014 and imposing sanctions on Russia in the aftermath of U.S. interference in Ukraine.
America under Trump should prosecute Obama and Clinton for using the U.S. government to promote Islam, abortion and the homosexual agenda around the world.
The U.S. should stop using Russia as a scarecrow and deal with Obama’s and Clinton’s crimes.
Trump should discontinue Obama’s left-wing legacy of sanctions and other unconservative actions against a more conservative Russia.
Russia could retaliate Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s mischiefs through nuclear attack. Who can blame them for using internet trolls to vent their complaints against Clinton?
Portuguese version of this article: Provado: Trolls russos fizeram na eleição presidencial americana… o que os EUA fazem nas eleições de outros países
Top 6 on BarbWire.com
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.