“There is no serious person who would suggest it was possible to rig American elections. I’d invite Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes. If whenever things are going badly for you and you lose, you start blaming somebody else, then you don’t have what it takes to be in this job, because there are times when things don’t go our way — or my way.”- President Barack Obama, Colorado Springs, CO, Oct. 18, 2016.
Obama, Clinton and their tidy team of lefties will not go quietly into the night. Appearing in front of Congress last week Clinton went off on “fake news” as a causal effect of her loss. Her pathetic attempt to paint internet driven “fake news” sights as dangerous and implicative in her loss borders on hysteria. The further collusion of Clinton, Intelligence Agencies and Obama implicating Russian hacking of the election brings the hysteria full circle. In fact, the premise of Russians somehow hacking and influencing the election’s outcome is the height of hysteria and the epitome of actual fake news. It is a stunning about-face in light of the President’s stance just weeks ago.
With the election coverage in 2016 revealing clearly that mainstream media is nothing more than a propaganda machine for Clinton and the left, the average viewer is left asking “what news is real and what news is fake?” Is it alternative sites such as Alex Jones, Breitbart, Drudge, Mark Dice, Next News Network, X22 report and others? Or is it CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and their ilk? While many of the internet news channels do not share the same journalistic resources and power that mainstream media does they are, for the most part, sincere efforts at trying to report newsworthy items the mainstream will ignore or obfuscate. These internet based sites are unapologetic about their biases, while mainstream venues continue to try and claim objectivity. Such objectivity appears to more and more of a stretch.
And now, in a complete reversal of past stances on the impervious nature of our electoral process, comes a concoction of politically motivated branches of our intelligence agencies, parroted by Clinton and “investigated” by Obama. This is the absurd notion that the Russians somehow hacked and threw the election for Trump. The Russians are being blamed for WikiLeaks, voter fraud and more. Pity the mainstream media missed Dr. Steve Pieczenik’s videos prior to the election (released by Mr. Fake News himself Alex Jones’ web channel), that he represented our intelligence community, specifically the NSA, in announcing it was THEY, not the Russians, who provided the material used by WikiLeaks. Our own men behind the scenes have already taken public credit for these actions! This premise was confirmed by Judge Andrew Napolitano last night on Fox News. Funny how every other “not fake news” media outlet missed these claims. Judge Napolitano’s analysis can be seen here:
Somehow, because Dr. Pieczenik’s admissions were not made on CNN or some other mainstream channel, they are ignored and passed over as the actual fake news dialogue continues unchallenged. For anyone who does not know Dr. Pieczenik, he is a former Deputy Secretary of State, NSA Director and the man Tom Clancy modeled his fictional character Dr. Jack Ryan after in his many spy novels. He is deeply connected to the U.S. Intelligence community and has surfaced after many years of self-imposed privacy to represent those aspects of our government looking for a fair transition of power away from globalist influenced leftists like Obama and Hillary.
But those same leftists are now fighting back. Note that the recounts ordered by Jill Stein all backfired, as votes for Clinton in predominantly Democrat precincts are showing as highly overstated. The more they audit, the wider the margin of Trump’s victory. It begs the question of who was really trying to do some election hacking. It does not sound like Russians, but more like devious Democrats. After all, what do the Russians have to gain by seeing Trump elected over Clinton? Other than their belief Trump will actually open a productive dialogue and reverse eight years of acrimonious foreign policy, Clinton was much close to a Marxist than Trump. It would not be unfair to postulate a Russian preference for a western leader more closely aligned to their political philosophies. Then whence the hacking?
The false reports that Obama, Clinton, and others are forwarding, and are being roundly supported and legitimized in mainstream media, can only have one objective. That objective is to simply de-legitimize the election of Trump. Since the recount strategy did not work, what can be done further to try and cloud election results? The problem is, the harder they push such fairy tales, the more desperate and untrustworthy they appear. So much for helping to unite the country, as such stories only fuel divisiveness for the uninformed.
While American voters have requested, if not overwhelmingly, new direction for the country with the election of Donald Trump, elite figures in current government and media are fighting hard to ensure that may never happen. It begs the question of the real intent of such opaquely manufactured falsehoods. If leftist ideals and false political smokescreens meant to interrupt our fair democratic processes are put ahead of the real process of our Republic at work, and Trump’s election for better or worse is part of that process, we have a big problem. And the current rhetoric, fake or not, portends more trouble ahead. Perhaps it is best if the average American viewer should NOT stay tuned when such nonsense is passed off as “real news.”