Hillary Clinton spent her time at the State Department destabilizing the Middle East, aggravating tensions with Russia and taking donations from Saudi Arabia via her family’s charity foundation. And though it’s tempting to believe Clinton’s days of manipulating foreign policy are over, it’s hard to deny that recent developments look like her handiwork.
The Clinton campaign this week demanded declassification of any information the CIA has on potential Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Clinton campaign chairman and master media manipulator John Podesta on Monday suggested that Trump’s election was the result of Russian efforts “to undermine the bedrock of our democracy.”
“This is not a partisan issue, and we are glad to see bipartisan support in the Congress for an investigation into Russia’s role,” he said, according to The New York Times. “We believe that the administration owes it to the American people to explain what it knows regarding the extent and manner of Russia’s interference and this be done as soon as possible. To that end, we also support the request from members of the Senate Intelligence Committee to declassify information around Russia’s roles in the election and to make this data available to the public.”
Of course, the Obama White House maintains that Russia “did not hack the electoral process or the counting of votes.”
There was, however, this caveat from White House press secretary Josh Earnest: “But what is also clear is that the results of the hack and leak effort carried out on the orders of Russia were extensively discussed prior to the election.”
If you’re having a tough time following what looks like a mixed message coming from the White House, it’s because it doesn’t make any sense.
The Obama administration is telling Americans that the voting systems were secure. This means the Russians did not hack the election in a way that would “undermine the bedrock of our democracy,” as Podesta put it.
If the Russians hacked anything, it was the DNC’s email servers. And this is where real fake news comes into play.
Replace headlines screaming “CIA says Russians hacked the elections” with the more accurate “CIA says Russians hacked DNC emails,” and already the story seems far less significant. Go a step further and inject a modicum of objectivity into the reports on the supposed hacking by noting WikiLeaks has repeatedly said none of its sources were Russian, and the shock factor is almost completely eliminated.
There are a few potential reasons for the political and media establishments to blame Russia, rather than disgruntled DNC insiders as the source of the leaks.
If you’re the Democratic Party leadership, admitting that it’s possible a DNC worker leaked the emails because they felt Bernie Sanders was mistreated during the primary is the same as admitting there’s a massive rift in the party that affects even its most dedicated members. As the Republicans learned during the most productive years of the Tea Party movement, the slightest public perception of a chance to fundamentally alter the party can cause big headaches for the establishment.
If you’re the media, running without question with the Russia-hacked version of events is beneficial in two parts. First, it provides cover for anyone who spent the entire election season guaranteeing that Trump would lose the election. Second, it absolves mainstream media failures to report on some of the more controversial revelations provided in the leaks. See, we weren’t wrong… we never could have accounted for Russian efforts to “undermine the bedrock of our democracy” in our election coverage. And good thing we didn’t spend much time connecting the dots from the information provided in those emails— only fake news outlets use Russian propaganda as a source.
Clinton spent her life in the public spotlight. And she’s surrounded herself with people like Podesta because she too is one of the most masterful media manipulators of a political generation.
Clinton is nothing if she isn’t politically astute; and the idea that she’d retire to her Chappaqua mansion to live out her final years bathing quietly in wine and tears after losing the election is ludicrous.
However quiet Clinton’s post-election lifestyle appears, you can bet it’s been peppered with strategy sessions and hurriedly arranged meetings with policy influencers. She knew the DNC would run with the Russian hack propaganda, media would eat it up and disaffected never-Trumpers would pile on.
In other words, until Americans have information more substantial than mainstream media’s loose quoting of an unnamed intelligence source, it bears reason that Clinton is thoroughly involved in circulating the idea that Russia hacked the election.
It’s no secret that Russian President Vladimir Putin is no fan of Clinton’s foreign policy brand. And the Russian leader has made clear that he’s more open to working with a Trump administration toward diplomatic solutions to disagreements between the two nations.
But despite the president-elect’s lack of the harshly anti-Russia rhetoric Clinton embraces, Putin’s preference of working with a Trump administration is hardly solid proof of motive to manipulate the U.S. election.
Real attacks on the U.S. political system would mean real retaliation in the form of harsh sanctions, cyberattacks and possibly even military action. Would such risks to deny Clinton the presidency be worth the reward for Russian leaders?
Trump, after all, would only become president. And in the United States, the president doesn’t have all the power needed to make long-term nice with Russia— at least not yet.
Clinton’s motives to frame Russia are probably a little stronger— and they definitely reach beyond bitterness over an embarrassing political defeat.
Sure, it’s becoming increasingly possible that blaming Russian hackers for the election outcome could lead to a surprise from the Electoral College. But it remains unlikely.
More likely is that Americans are witnessing Clinton’s efforts to get creative to repay a few small favors without the benefit of the bully pulpit she promised folks she would have beginning in 2017.
If you paid attention to the leaks the establishment is now blaming on the Russians, you learned that Clinton’s family foundation received some pretty generous donations from Saudi Arabian benefactors. Clinton would certainly contend that the kingdom, which has made human rights violations a matter of public policy and financed the spread of fanatical Islam and the death that accompanies it throughout the world, is simply interested in the foundation’s mission.
Even if that makes no sense at all.
The Clinton Foundation lists empowering women throughout the world as one of its primary objectives. But women’s liberation hasn’t exactly caught on in Saudi Arabia—and it’s doubtful that well-connected Saudis donated tens of millions of dollars to the Clintons for advice on how to westernize the role of women in their society.
Also, it’s worth noting that the Saudis haven’t been so generous with donations to other world aid organizations.
Here’s what we know all those millions of charity dollars paid for: special access while Clinton was at the State Department. We learned that from the emails… but that was before the Russian hacking of the election.
Again, if it’s reasonable to believe, based on information from an unnamed source, that Russia definitely hacked the U.S. election, it should be equally reasonable to question whether, based on her foundation’s past dealings and the access she already provided, Clinton has unsettled business with the House of Saud.
That’s especially true when it explains why blame-Russia is big news.
If you’ve watched or read mainstream media reports over the past several days, you’ve probably noticed intensified focus on the situation in Syria.
There’s some serious dog-wagging going on.
But the Syrian situation has been a nightmare since the U.S.-NATO alliance began quiet efforts to destabilize the nation several years ago. It didn’t just get worse overnight. What did happen was that Trump got elected by U.S. voters last month, frightening the hell out of factions who saw Clinton’s election as a promise of continued destabilization and official U.S. condemnation of Russian efforts to restore leader Bashar al Assad. Trump’s more diplomatic tone toward Russia and supposed rejection of the idea of the U.S. as international kingmaker threatens the entire plan.
It’s also significant that Russian forces have made major moves in the region in recent weeks.
Saudi Arabia, not stability in the region or democratic governance, is the reason globalists can’t abide the Russian meddling in Syria.
Clinton, you see, isn’t the only one who has taken from the Saudis. American financiers, military contractors and the government itself all stand to lose a massive amount of money and international power if Saudi Arabia ever steps away from its petrodollar agreement with the U.S. The petrodollar system stipulates that Saudi oil sales to other countries are handled exclusively in U.S. fiat currency.
Current global trends and plummeting oil prices last year threaten the House of Saud’s continued economic prosperity. And unless the country is able to kill off as much competition as possible, the Saudis are likely to look for other trade options. They really don’t want to do that. After all, we treat them like kings.
Russia quietly abandoned the petrodollar earlier this year. Syria did the same shortly before unrest bubbled up in the country. And a Syria/Russia alliance in the region is a nightmare for the Saudis.
Clinton’s job as president would have been the same as George Bush’s and every other establishment-approved president since the inception of the petrodollar agreement: Allowing the Saudis to get away with actual murder while applying massive pressure on any country that would dare undermine petrodollar-enabled hegemony.
The Russia hacking farce is simply a convenient way for her to attempt to further that agenda from outside the Oval Office.
And it’s working. Congress is already getting whipped into a Cold War-style bipartisan frenzy over the idea that Russia would dare hack the election. John McCain and the rest of the defense-funded hawks are gleefully watching Democrats join their hard-line stance against Russia as the artfully deployed hysteria takes hold.
Try as he might, Trump probably won’t be able to avoid the big war that Clinton and the people who backed her were counting on starting. Only time will tell whether he’ll be able to manage it— if not, Trump will be scapegoated for what’s likely to be the biggest military shitshow in U.S. history.