Whom do you believe: Putin or Hillary?

In responding to the WikiLeaks emails that document corruption and lies, such as Hillary advocating open borders and open trade, pay for play at the William J. Corleone Foundation, Bill Clinton Inc. making over $30 million plus $67 million deferred from contributors to the foundation,  and that Obama lied when he said he did not know Hillary was using a private email server, Hillary's defense is that the emails were hacked by the Russians, who are interfering with the U.S. election.

If Hillary has evidence that the Russians hacked the emails or doctored them, then present it.  Of course, the MSM do not ask Hillary for the evidence.  Nor have the MSM asked why the Russians would do this since Hillary gave 20% of our uranium reserves to them.

Hillary does not deny the content of the emails.  In fact, at the third debate, when Chris Wallace asked her about the email that said she favored "open borders and open trade," Hillary told Wallace he should read the rest of the email that supposedly explains that "open borders and open trade" means energy such as electrical grids moving across borders.  By saying this, Hillary admitted that the emails are accurate and she authenticated the emails.  If Hillary ever grants a real press interview, maybe someone can remind her that she authenticated the accuracy of the emails.

If we follow the logic of the Democrats, and accept as true for the sake of argument that the Russians hacked the emails, then the Russians are interfering with the November 8 election by publishing the truth about Hillary and Obama.  Hillary is attacking the messenger of the truth but not dealing with the truth.  She did this with Ken Starr, the "vast right wing conspiracy," and anyone who tells the truth about the Clintons.

Someone illegally gave the N.Y. Times a copy of Trump's tax return.  But this does not count or matter, because it is about Trump.  The Democrats believe that the truth about Obama and Hillary is an interference with the election that cannot be tolerated.

On October 27, 2016, CBS News reported:

President Vladimir Putin says the claims of Russia's interference in the U.S. presidential election are designed to distract public attention from real issues…

He argued that U.S. elites have used the "mythical and fictitious" issue to distract attention from real problems such as government debt and police violence.

Putin disputed that the U.S. is "some kind of 'banana republic'" that could be susceptible to Russia's influence, calling America "a great power."

Putin is more honest than the mainstream media by pointing out that the claim of Russian interference is designed to distract attention from the real issues.  He just names two issues: the debt and police violence.  Hillary agrees with Putin about police violence but not about the debt.

It is possible that before November 8, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times will say the obvious: that Hillary's claim of Russian hacking emails, if true, does not mean that the contents of the emails are not true.  Maybe they will ask Hillary for the evidence to back up her charge that the Russians hacked the emails or altered them.  It is possible, but it will not happen.

Regardless of how we got the emails, we are entitled to the truth about Hillary and Obama.

In responding to the WikiLeaks emails that document corruption and lies, such as Hillary advocating open borders and open trade, pay for play at the William J. Corleone Foundation, Bill Clinton Inc. making over $30 million plus $67 million deferred from contributors to the foundation,  and that Obama lied when he said he did not know Hillary was using a private email server, Hillary's defense is that the emails were hacked by the Russians, who are interfering with the U.S. election.

If Hillary has evidence that the Russians hacked the emails or doctored them, then present it.  Of course, the MSM do not ask Hillary for the evidence.  Nor have the MSM asked why the Russians would do this since Hillary gave 20% of our uranium reserves to them.

Hillary does not deny the content of the emails.  In fact, at the third debate, when Chris Wallace asked her about the email that said she favored "open borders and open trade," Hillary told Wallace he should read the rest of the email that supposedly explains that "open borders and open trade" means energy such as electrical grids moving across borders.  By saying this, Hillary admitted that the emails are accurate and she authenticated the emails.  If Hillary ever grants a real press interview, maybe someone can remind her that she authenticated the accuracy of the emails.

If we follow the logic of the Democrats, and accept as true for the sake of argument that the Russians hacked the emails, then the Russians are interfering with the November 8 election by publishing the truth about Hillary and Obama.  Hillary is attacking the messenger of the truth but not dealing with the truth.  She did this with Ken Starr, the "vast right wing conspiracy," and anyone who tells the truth about the Clintons.

Someone illegally gave the N.Y. Times a copy of Trump's tax return.  But this does not count or matter, because it is about Trump.  The Democrats believe that the truth about Obama and Hillary is an interference with the election that cannot be tolerated.

On October 27, 2016, CBS News reported:

President Vladimir Putin says the claims of Russia's interference in the U.S. presidential election are designed to distract public attention from real issues…

He argued that U.S. elites have used the "mythical and fictitious" issue to distract attention from real problems such as government debt and police violence.

Putin disputed that the U.S. is "some kind of 'banana republic'" that could be susceptible to Russia's influence, calling America "a great power."

Putin is more honest than the mainstream media by pointing out that the claim of Russian interference is designed to distract attention from the real issues.  He just names two issues: the debt and police violence.  Hillary agrees with Putin about police violence but not about the debt.

It is possible that before November 8, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times will say the obvious: that Hillary's claim of Russian hacking emails, if true, does not mean that the contents of the emails are not true.  Maybe they will ask Hillary for the evidence to back up her charge that the Russians hacked the emails or altered them.  It is possible, but it will not happen.

Regardless of how we got the emails, we are entitled to the truth about Hillary and Obama.