Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor
Jun 9, 2017
Liberal activism has been taken to an entirely new level in 2017 in terms of what progressives are willing to compromise to protect their movement. And it’s quite disturbing to observe where our nation and its citizens fall on their list of priorities.
Liberal hypocrisy, for example, leaves nothing to the imagination when it comes to U.S. relations with Russia. But for perspective, let’s look at a couple of examples.
In March 2012, when Barack Obama was running for re-election, a live microphone picked up his private conversation with then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev during a gathering in Seoul, South Korea.
President Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.”
President Medvedev: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ”
President Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”
President Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you.”
Can you imagine how liberals and the major news outlets would have lambasted President Trump if he had been covertly recorded making such a remark? We would likely have millions of liberals marching in Washington calling for the president’s immediate impeachment for obvious and shameless Russian collusion.
In March 2009, during a trip to Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov a small red button meant to represent a “Russian reset” of sorts between the U.S. and the Kremlin. While visiting Moscow in March 2010, Hillary explained the “reset’s” purpose: “Our goal is to help strengthen Russia,” as reported in an April 7 column by Deroy Murdock in National Review.
While the reset was a total failure for the U.S., many believe the ultimate Clinton/Russia relationship became profitable for the Clintons. In a deal known as “Uranium One,” Bill and Hillary may have sown some of their “entrepreneurial” oats for personal gain.
In April 2015, a story by Jo Becker and Mike McIntire in The New York Times detailed tens of millions of dollars in donations made to the Clinton Foundation following the approval by then-Secretary of State Clinton of the Russian acquisition of a company holding 20 percent of America’s uranium.
And Bill Clinton reportedly received a $500,000 speaking fee from a Russian government-connected bank during this time, as written by Jerome Hudson of Breitbart in March 2017.
Can anyone say liberal Russian collusion? Imagine, for a moment, the field day progressives would have if someone had even suggested Donald Trump or any one of his surrogates were involved in such deals!
Yet, progressive “snowflakes,” as they’ve been called, run around crying “election foul” when they don’t have a single shred of evidence, all the while ignoring fact-laden events of potential collusion that don’t support their ideology.
Frankly, this liberal hypocrisy and selective focus is very telling. One could surmise that progressives are only concerned with winning for their cause, regardless of the impact on our country.
Is there anything less patriotic?
Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.
Free State Patriot 
Leave a Reply