Hint: it ain’t Trump.
Even if Putin didn’t hate Hillary Clinton, it’s likely he would have sought to sow discord within the American electorate. Using his vast cyber warfare capabilities, Putin ordered attacks on computer servers at the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee headquarters. The Republican servers were better defended, whereas the Democratic servers were compromised quickly. Thus, it was easy for Putin’s agents to get their hands on damning information (like how the DNC had rigged their primary to favor Hillary Clinton) and spread it like wildfire.
While Russia is a purveyor of “fake news” with their state-owned propaganda arms, such as TASS and Russia Today, the hacked information that had been disseminated to WikiLeaks and other sources was factually true. This only did more damage to the Clinton campaign, which had been ailing from its outset.
Even so, as accusations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russian intelligence during the campaign mount, there is no verifiable proof that this ever occurred. What did happen was that the Trump campaign was boosted by the timely Russian leaks of DNC and Clinton campaign emails—but so what? Politics is often impacted by international events.
Recently, the Washington Post published a story headlined, “Obama’s Secret Struggle to Punish Russia for Putin’s Election Assault.” According to the Post, senior CIA officials met with President Obama last August and warned him that the Russians were aiming to undermine the American election by helping to defeat Clinton and elect Trump. The mainstream media has taken this as proof-positive that Trump’s presidency is illegitimate and that the ceaseless investigations into Trump-Russia collusion accusations should expand. In fact, all that this proves was that the Obama Administration’s continuous soft spot for the Russians came into play again.
Was the revelation that Putin may have ordered a cyber offensive against the American election system in 2016 really that groundbreaking? We’ve known for some time that Russian hackers were running roughshod over the entire election process, particularly on the DNC side. What does this prove? That the Russian command-and-control system for conducting cyber warfare is strong? Don’t all political leaders have to order their armed forces to launch any kind of attack against another state? And, in what way does this prove the Left’s other claims that Trump’s campaign staff colluded with the Russians to bring down the Clinton Campaign? How? And, even if they did, what law did they violate?
Fact is, today we’re dealing with this “scandal,” because Obama’s posture toward Russia was weak and submissive. From the start, Obama (and Clinton) had a poor understanding of who Putin was and what Russia means to our foreign policy. Obama had a minimum of four months to respond to Putin, thereby saving Hillary’s candidacy (potentially). Yet, he delayed and deferred his response to the next administration (as with so much else).
Face it: Barack Obama’s continual weakness and thoughtlessness in the face of increasing Russian aggression created the current strategic environment that we’re all suffering through today. I’ve never been happier knowing that Donald Trump defeated Clinton in 2016. Under Trump, we will be dealing with Russia from a position of strength, as opposed to weakness.
Obama is, was, and will forever remain a gutless, America-hating pussy. It wasn’t just the Russians that were laughing at his weakness, his complete vapid cluelessness on the realities of foreign policy, his pusillanimous eagerness to suck up to and appease America’s every adversary. You could almost see the surprise on Putin’s face sometimes at how easy it was to punk Obama again and again. Putin’s contempt for Obama was palpable, and entirely justified.
Obama is an almost unbelievably small man, his ego in directly inverse proportion to any conceivable rationale for his monumental arrogance. His only real competence was in the damage he wrought on America; that was his primary ambition, and will be his only legacy. Which makes perfect sense: he despises this country strongly enough that it was clear from the start his primary malignant focus would be on weakening and humbling it. His most hated enemies were here at home, and he worked far harder to do them harm than he ever did, say, ISIS or anyone else. Certainly he was more effective at it.
As for foreign policy, apart from his muttonheaded creation of hideous and enduring chaos in Libya for no good reason at all, his footprints are written in sand; the tide of history will soon wash them away without leaving the least trace. Which is precisely as it should be, and no more nor less than the little twerp deserves.