Don's Tuesday Column

                 THE WAY I SEE IT   by Don Polson  Red Bluff Daily News   4/11/2017

                       Syrian praise, Hillary’s delusion

A rather obvious, glaring note of irony (even hypocrisy), over Pres. Trump’s missile strike on Syria, was ignored by our news media, vigilant to protect Barack Obama’s ephemeral legacy, while avoiding any vindication of Obama’s predecessor. It’s simply this: When G. Bush was “wrong” on Iraq’s WMDs (remnants but no stockpiles), it was “Bush lied, people died”; but as Obama/Susan Rice/John Kerry were proven wrong about the “100 percent” removal of Syria’s WMDs to Russia, we had virtual crickets from the Democrat press.

A CNN interviewer had a Syrian man responding live over Trump’s action; she cued up a softball question and obviously expected an answer criticizing Trump for not taking in Syrian refugees while ordering a limited missile strike. To her speechless surprise, he praised Trump, lambasted Obama (over phony “red lines”) and insisted on expressing the heartfelt determination of many Syrians to simply be protected from dictator Assad where they live and not become America-bound refugees.

I recall that we had the same scenario when Bush’s military invaded Iraq, to welcoming cheers and flowers from many Iraqis; the MSN buried that joyous reaction so as not to reflect well on then-President Bush. On a related note, Rush reminded his listeners on Monday that during the “Arab spring” upheaval, a CNN reporter urged Egyptians, in interviews, to credit community-organizer-in-chief Obama for the fall of strongman Hosni Mubarak and the election of Mohamed Morsi. “We did this; Obama didn’t do anything” retorted one man. CNN amazingly still credited Obama. Had ocean levels fallen, sycophantic media would have thanked Obama.

Further illustrating the obsession of mainstream news (MSN) with protecting and burnishing the reputation of Democrats, we had CNN/NYT coverage of Hillary Clinton’s first public address at the “Women in the World” summit in New York City. Those who had pinned their fervent hopes for America’s first woman president on Hillary probably found reassurance in the assigning of blame she shared with listeners, as reported by MSN. Those not enamored of the failed candidate probably shook their heads in astonishment at the display of continued delusion.

Read the CNNPolitics.com article for yourself. “Clinton on Russian election meddling: ‘More effective even than Watergate’” sums up Hillary’s rationalizations and excuse-making—or, to paraphrase, “It’s everyone else’s fault, you idiots.” Her actual words: “A foreign power (Russia) meddled with our election and did so in a way that we are learning more about every single day”…The Russian hackings appeared to be a “more effective theft even than Watergate.” She accused Russian President Putin of wanting to “sow distrust and confusion, and influence our election.” On white women voting for Trump: “certainly misogyny played a role.”

“Hillary Clinton: A lot of other people are to blame for my 2016 election loss,” by John Sexton, also recounted her responses in interviews. The factors that she cited included “The outside intervention—the combination of the [FBI Director] Comey letter on October 28^th; Wikileaks, which played a much bigger role than I think many people understand yet—had the determinative effect.” She described the Wikileaks/Russia interference as being “successful in influencing voters…It was really the weaponization of information. It created doubts in people” and moved the election towards Trump in the end.

Let’s try to “unpack” this, given space constraints. I could provide “The top 10 of the (so far) top 100 wikileaks” (Andrew Bolton, 10/31/2016); or “A List Of The 17 Most Damaging WikiLeaks Emails Released So Far” (Hannity.com Staff, 10/17/2016). WikiLeaks revelations were simply not very well covered by MSN; you’d be unable to show how any sizable blocks of voters were swayed to abandon Hillary for Trump, given her winning margin of 2.9 million votes (thanks to LA and SF Bay counties’ 5 million Hillary surplus over Trump).

The blue-collar, working and middle class voting margin in the crucial swing states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan gave Trump his winning 46 Electoral College vote win; I assure you they were not Hillary voters that heard about WikiLeaks and went to Trump. The only thin reed on which she (and the entire Democrat/media complex) hang their “Russia meddling swung the election” narrative is the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC emails (hacking of the RNC failed); John Podesta’s embarrassing emails resulted from his clumsy response to a “phishing” attack. That did not change the election; no way, try again. The narrative fails.

Remember, regarding the Comey letter, impartial legal analysis found the only impediment to Comey bringing charges against Hillary was her “lack of intent.” Hillary’s intent was pretty obvious to voters paying attention, Comey’s exoneration aside. “The Comey letter wouldn’t have mattered if it didn’t play into pre-existing concerns many people had about Hillary.

“Of course there’s a very good reason people were susceptible to serious doubts about her character. First, there were the blatant lies she offered the public from before she was a candidate until late in the campaign. Then there was the time she spent avoiding questions and the times her subordinates spent pleading the 5^th to avoid incriminating themselves. The result is someone who doesn’t appear very trustworthy.” (J. Sexton)

More should be written on how the real scandal exceeded Watergate corruption and political manipulation; on the real “weaponization” of the federal agencies that worked with a “weaponized” press to engage in unprecedented subversion and sabotage of Donald Trump, America’s legitimately-elected president, from November through now, as I see it.