http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...iders.html

 

It is my personal belief that the fervor around this story leading up to the electoral college on 12-19 is being driven solely by the left entering the bargaining phase of grief.    In reality, none of these allegations are new or present any new evidence.  Usually when you rehash something like this, there was some form of cover up or gross misrepresentation.  That's not the case here.  The head of WikiLeaks was on television and radio multiple times during the election cycle.  People were given full access to his background, publishing history and accuracy.  The left made several allegations during the debates and on television alleging Russian involvement with no real evidence.  It was left for the people to decide what to believe and how best to use the information when making their decision on who to vote for. 

 

Another remarkable consistency is that no one on the left is actually challenging the veracity of the leaked emails.  Think about this.  A major party in the united states of America was basically caught red handed rigging their primary elections and proliferating the biggest media collusion in a general election in the history of the television era.  Who's talking about that now?  The fact that the truth got out means that the cheaters actually won?  What kind of backward logic is this? 

 

When did we descend into this kind of pseudo McCarthyism by the way?  And if this is to believed why aren't the new Russo-warmongers concerned with this little bit of history:

http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/ted-ken...inson.html

 

So now we are to believe that the party willing to preserve the former soviet union in exchange for undermining the presidency of Ronald Reagan is our chief check against Russian aggression?  Was this before or after they gave 150 billion dollars to their subsidiary IRan?   Was this before or after we sold them 20% of our Uranium?  Was this before or after the Start Treaty?  Was this before or after the annexing of the Crimea?  Was this before or after the Russian Reset?  Was this before or after Russian state actors gave the Clinton foundation millions of dollars?  Was this before or after Russian state interests paid Bill Clinton millions of dollars in speech fees? 

 

And now we get this garbage "unnamed high ranking officials speculate that it might have been a hacking group affiliated with Russian state agencies and if the Russian actors were behind the possible hackers possibly hacking then more likely than not on a Thursday with the window open Putin May or may not have been involved directly while taking his morning Tea watching "Wrecking ball" with what may or may not have been a sarcastic grin..."  Headline on CNN: RUSSIAN HACK HAS PUTINS SIGNATURE!!!! 

---