Hillary Clinton recently stated somewhere that she lost the presidential election because her campaign neglected the “ordinary people”. And, of course it is the “ordinary people” who form or should form the majority of voters in any democratic state. Clinton was therefore right for once, insofar as her neglect of the ordinary people was the real reason for her defeat. Conversely, the reason for mr Trump’s success was his respect for and interest in the ordinary people. In a true democracy, the voice of the “ordinary people” is indeed the one that counts, even though the out-of-touch, servile and conformist “main Stream” media have been trying for years to make everyone believe that democracy by this definition is some sort of horror, described as “demagoguery” or “populism”.
The honorable thing for Clinton to have done was to follow her own diagnosis for her electoral defeat. Instead, president Barack Obama and Clinton have ever since been trying hard to pin their defeat on a scapegoat, namely Russia. Plainly stated, Russia and president Putin were the real reason why Clinton lost. One wonders how many “ordinary people” in America would buy this. Certainly the many millions of Americans who voted for Donald Trump did not. And is this blaming of Putin not yet another slap in the face of the millions of “ordinary people” who voted for Trump ? As though “ordinary Americans” are incapable of thinking and deciding for themselves and need Putin to make up their minds for them .
Why cannot, or will not Obama and Hillary understand that the most painless expedient available to them, is simply to submit to the will of the people, concede defeat and bow out gracefully. Instead the Democratic Party leadership prefers to ridicule itself in the eyes of the world by behaving like a couple of spoilt brats. Obama is even threatening reprisals against Russia! What reprisals can he make against a world power in the month that remains to him as President.
Fact is that both Obama and Clinton have not the slightest proof for their accusations that Putin manipulated the presidential election. What they do have is circumstantial evidence from which they draw the most outrageous conclusions such as that Putin launched an “unprecedented Attack” against the United States of America or “pirated the electoral system” or was the author of “massive cyber attacks”, whatever these phrases may mean. Putin also gets the blame for a letter from the Director of the FBI eleven days before the election, reopening the enquiry into Clinton’s controversial e-mail server.
There are however reasons to believe (and in this case sound evidence does exist) that much of the compromising information which damaged Clinton’s campaign were smuggled to Wikileaks by Democratic Party insiders, disgruntled by corruption within her election campaign and the unceremonious way mr Bernie Sanders was ushered out of the way to facilitate things for Clinton. The ascertion that Moscow was responsible for “pirating” the US electoral process, for example, is based on the fact that information contained in the e-mail correspondence of Clinton’s campaign director, John Podesta, was passed to Wikileaks by Democratic party officials “close to Moscow”. There is no explanation of the way in which these people were “close to Moscow”. Did they visit Russia once, or support the Russian soccer team or go to a performance of the Bolshoi theatre or get interviewed on RT Television?
Incidentally, speaking of RT Television, the reason why the leftist establishment and the “mainsteam media” hate RT so much is that RT, for the first time, is presenting an alternative point of view and an alternative reality to that which the popinjay media have been using to try and condition public opinion over the past fifty of sixty years. In the end the brainwashing by the “mainstream media” turned out to be flop.
Whether Putin had attempted to influence the American election is not known, but it is unlikely despite of what Obama, Clinton and the CIA claim . However, if it were so that Putin’s government had attempted to influence the American election in any particular direction, this would be in line with what is considered normal and acceptable practice world wide. The world champion in this regard is in fact the United States of America themselves who interfere and spy and manipulate elections and governments around the globe, going as far as fomenting uprisings and revolutions, removing presidents and prime ministers and bringing about ” regime change” wherever they consider it to be in their interest. Saddam Husein, Moammar Ghaddafi and Bachir al Assad are among the recent examples that come to mind. Readers will be able to add dozens more.
Even the recent history of South Africa and the transition to ANC government can be regarded as a form of “regime change” which was made possible by American pressure of all sorts, including the refusal of landing rights to South African civil aircraft, economic sanctions and what not . There was even a prohibition of selling books to South African university libraries! Perhaps they are already working on “regime change” in Russia, too. It is widely believed that Clinton was instrumental in organising the massive demonstrations against Putin just after his election in 2011. At the time she publicly claimed that the Russian elections were “rigged”. Soon Obama and Clinton would have realized that Russia is a slightly harder nut to crack than South Africa was, had they stayed in power long enough to try..
All reasonable and sensible people will agree that Trump was the choice of the American people because he was the better candidate. Obama and Clinton’s sour grape antics will only serve to show what little people they really are. The fiasco in Iraq when general Colin Powell stood up in the United Nations with a phoney little bottle in his hand containing a “chemical weapon” already tore American prestige in the eyes of the world to tatters.
Obama and Clinton are now only enhancing that image of shabbiness with a new set of even more transparent lies in the process of taking America to the brink of catastrophic confrontation with Russia. If Trump can succeed in getting the world to believe and respect the United States of America once more, he would have met the most difficult and important challenge of his career.