Months ago, I went on a radio show to discuss the then-emerging leftist-driven suggestion that the newly elected Donald Trump and his team colluded with Russia to win the White House — to rip it from under Hillary Clinton’s very feet — and I offered up a quick reaction that went like this: That doesn’t make sense. If I were Vladimir Putin, I’d want Clinton, not Trump, to win.
Because Clinton’s a known deal-maker, a savvy politico with a seedy past. Trump’s a known “America First” type of guy, new to politics, unconcerned about diplomatic double-speak.
The response from the show’s hosts over this assessment? About two seconds of silence — a real “what did I say that was wrong?” moment.
But fast-forward to today’s deep state intrigues and it’s only becoming clearer and clearer: Trump’s not involved in any sort of collusion.
Clinton is the bigger suspect.
And honestly, that circles right on back to common sense, to the shoe that fits — the idea that if Russia had its druthers, Clinton would’ve been its pick in the first place.
In other words: The whole Trump-colluded-with-Russia line of argument just doesn’t make sense — and never did.
Clinton would’ve been better for Russia, for Putin.
She would’ve continued Barack Obama’s globalist agenda of putting U.N. visions first, America’s second. She would’ve double-talked her way through foreign policy and trade deals that furthered progressive-minded political goals, rather than American interests, and sold them through a complicit press as win-wins for all. She would’ve cut deals that didn’t always favor the United States — but with a little luck, enriched her own family’s pocketbook, either immediately or indirectly, down the line.
She would’ve cut deals with the enemy because in Clinton’s mind, the larger enemy would always loom as a free and sovereign America populated by free-loving and patriotic Americans with penchants for limited government.
Trump, on the other hand?
It was always Make America Great Again. America First. America back on top.
To Trump, the Iran nuke treaty was treacherous, the United Nations was corrupt, and the biggest foreign policy failure of the previous administration was that the nations of the world, including Russia, just didn’t respect the United States.
“President Trump would be so much better for U.S.-Russian relations” than Clinton, Trump said, from the campaign trail in July 2016, as the New York Times reported. “I don’t think Putin has any respect whatsoever for Clinton.”
Trump may be the art of the deal guy — but he certainly is not a sell-out America guy. Clinton’s political past? Books have been written about her scandalous dealings.
Media coverage now speaks of her scandalous dealings.
And on Russia? Well, the more that’s unearthed, the darker the arrow pointing Clinton’s way becomes. It’s all starting to make sense again — the evidence is all starting to fall in line with the logical. If Putin had been given the pick, the smart money says he would’ve gone for Clinton — and so do the cooler heads and logical minds. And that just makes the whole Trump-Russia collusion investigation one huge question mark, one massive political debacle.
First appeared at The Washington Times.