Tag Archives: Russian Collusion

Mark Caserta: DOJ should consider some factual Russian collusion

9 Dec

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot editor

December, 8, 2017

 

putin

 

For nearly a year, liberals have been frantically attempting to delegitimize the presidency of Donald J. Trump by asserting American voters somehow fell victim to the influence of “evil” Russians who wanted Trump to win and Hillary to lose.

It lacks credulity at face value! Whose ideology aligns more closely with Vladimir Putin, the socialist rationale of Hillary or the capitalist conviction of Trump?

To date, liberal Democrats have failed to produce any evidence that even a single vote was fraudulently impacted by the Russians. And special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into this progressive pipe dream has cost taxpayers over $5 million thus far, per a report by Pierre Thomas of ABC News.

Liberals are repulsed by President Trump because he’s committed to negating the failed policies of the previous administration. Unlike his predecessor, he lacks the willingness to appease his enemies or apologize for his country. His performance isn’t a factor in moving the liberal “hate-ometer.” He could perform superbly for Americans, and progressives would still hate him.

Frankly, the futility of the fight makes one wonder about the patriotism of a faction of people willing to vigorously pursue the demise of an individual and possibly themselves over the success of their nation. Once again, I’m reminded of those famous final words of Captain Ahab in Herman Melville’s “Moby-Dick”:

“Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering whale; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee.”

The emotional, nonsensical nature of this quote just seems befitting of progressives.

Factually, when one considers how liberals have turned a blind eye to verifiable acts of Russian collusion by their peers, it makes the accusations against Trump laughable. For posterity’s sake, let’s reverse roles in some of the liberal-Russian interactions over the past few years.

Imagine, for a moment, the mainstream media’s reaction to a “hot mic” inadvertently picking up President Trump’s conversation with outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev relaying that Vladimir Putin should “give him more space” and that after his re-election Trump would have “more flexibility,” as happened with President Obama.

Suppose President Trump gave Russia control of approximately 20 percent of U.S. uranium capacity and in turn received $2.35 million in donations to the Donald J. Trump Foundation, as happened with Obama and the Clinton Foundation. And supplemental to the deal, the FBI gathered evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaging in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering inside the U.S. as reported by The New York Times.

And suppose, germane to the Uranium One deal, Melania Trump delivered a speech to a Russian bank, promoting Uranium One stock and received $500,000, as happened with Bill Clinton.

Liberals would be calling for Trump’s immediate removal from office and subsequent prosecution for treason.

I’m convinced liberal allegations against Trump were a premeditated diversion from the real Russian collusion that transpired under the Obama administration.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions should launch an immediate counter-investigation.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Mark Caserta: Liberal hypocrisy over Russia is telling

9 Jun

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor

russian-flag

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.

%d bloggers like this: