Boris Badenov image by post’s author

Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale finally scored a victory for their side. They and their Fearless Leader are being accused of helping Donald Trump to win the 2016 presidential election.

For the sake of argument, suppose that Russian hackers did acquire information about Hillary Clinton through illegal means. Suppose that the Russians then publicized that information through another party.

How could the publication of data about Clinton harm Clinton if the the data didn’t show Clinton doing something wrong?

If the data did show that Clinton did something wrong, then who’s fault is that? Did the Russians make Clinton do wrong stuff?

Sure, I am in favor of federal officials investigating cyber-crime committed by foreign agents.

Yet, this fussing about alleged Russian hackers is akin to fussing about who took the photo of Clinton with her hand in the cookie jar.

What exactly did alleged Russian hackers expose that helped Trump?

Hackers couldn’t expose Clinton’s misdeeds if there were no misdeeds to begin with. There would be no photo of Clinton with her hand in the cookie jar if Clinton hadn’t stuck her hand in the cookie jar.

This situation is like a scene in the movie Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. In that scene, Harry, Hermione, Ron and Draco are given detention because the four of them were outside of the castle when they were not allowed to.

It is Draco who exposes the rule-breaking of the other three, but in doing so, he exposes his own rule-breaking.

Yes, Draco is an antagonist, but the other three still broke the rules. Draco’s misdeed was not an excuse to let the other three off the hook for their misdeed.

Considering how crazy this election year has been, anything could still happen between now and the time that the Electoral College meets to formally elect the next POTUS. However, all hell would break loose if Electors used alleged Russian hacking as an excuse to throw the election to Clinton.

If Trump’s election still stands after the Electoral College adjourns, then perhaps Clinton can hire Rocky and Bullwinkle to go after Boris and Natasha. Clinton could even offer a monetary reward for the latter’s capture.

As for Trump remaining the President-Elect . . . well, that’s how the cookie crumbles.

David Robertson
Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 The Moderate Voice
  • Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

    Wow! I now can see how some “uncivility” can arise.

    Not as much because I strongly disagree with the author, but more because of the laughable, obtuse, self-serving logic and reasoning he uses.

    Russia exposes DNC/Clinton’s unsavory emails but none of the RNC/trump’s unsavory stuff. How could any objective person have any problems with that?

    • JSpencer

      Thank-you Dorian, exactly what I was about to post. This is not complicated or vague except for those to view everything through a partisan lens. Proofs are wasted on such people.

      • Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

        Thanks, JS. For starters, Putin — if he wanted to be impartial — could have hacked into and posted Trump’s tax returns — a piece of cake for the Russians, considering how they even get into Pentagon files, and hence proceed into more of Trump’s/RNC’s “cookie jars” Plenty of Trump (little) hands to be caught in them,

        • JSpencer

          Exactly. The information was used in a very directed fashion. The clear intent was to disrupt support for Hillary. This is the conclusion of many people in the intelligence field who have been weighing in on it lately.

    • Brownies girl

      DdW writes:

      Russia exposes DNC/Clinton’s unsavory emails but none of the RNC/trump’s unsavory stuff. How could any objective person have any problems with that?

      You know, Dorian, it’s not what the Russians found, at the hacking of the DNC site or the RNC site, that they did or didn’t reveal. All that feels to me like a smoky veil we’re not supposed to see through, to be backed away from — to not look beyond.

      You now have a President-elect who is appointing people with very close ties to the Russians; who, we’re lead to believe, owes millions of $$ to the Russians; who are hard-core (what seems to me) war-like military guys. This is friggin’ scary. Forget the e-mails — I’m thinking the e-mails were always a false lead. I’m starting to think that your President-elect has been bought.
      Lock, stock and barrel. I’m starting to think he’s sold his soul (whatever there is of it!). Why is he so obviously cozying up to Russia!!!!!

      Why is/was Trump (and his supporters) so adamant about stopping recounting of the votes in Michigan? And ALL recounting. What’s he afraid they might find? Why is he fighting so hard against the suit brought by a couple of members of the Electoral College? Has ANY potential Prez had to do this?
      Has there ever before EVER been a fight like this?

      Whatever you all in the US are looking at — it goes way beyond e-mails and hacking. Only time will tell, but that’s my opinion. The US, and we up here in Canada, your friendly neighbour to the north, are in for hard times due to what’s happening south of the 49th, that’s what I think and e-mails are the least of it. Your mileage may differ. All best Dorian — BG

      • Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

        “Russia exposes DNC/Clinton’s unsavory emails but none of the RNC/trump’s unsavory stuff. How could any objective person have any problems with that?”

        I know you understand that the second part of this statement was sarcasm.

        Of course, hacking into and revealing the e-mails is just one of various means to an end used by the Russians

        If the president-elect turns out to be even more nefarious –God Save Us –than he has already proven to be, my hope is that there will be enough decent, patriotic Republicans to put a stop to it.

        Only time will tell, but time is of the essence.

  • dduck

    Ok, DR/Rocky, the fearless leader did select the badenov stuff from Clinton and ignored the really bad stuff from Trump, I get it. Sorta makes sense, they don’t like Clinton and they like to confuse the U.S. Don’t mean we have to like any interference and we should go after them bigely, after all, who do they think they are, United Fruit?
    Anyway, putting the thumb on the opinion writer’s scale is your gig, DR, and this one was amusing (depending on your point of view).
    Trump now has a gigantic thumb (sorry Rubio) and will Twitter us to death.
    🙂

    • JSpencer

      Dd, in a word, bullshit. Dorian is right on the mark.

      • dduck

        Ok, the partisan mark with no sense of humor.

        • JSpencer

          Sorry dd, my bad. Sometimes your writing is a bit hard to decipher. I’m sure it’s just me. 😉

      • Brownies girl

        JS, I may be wrong, but I took it that the DR who dd was referring to in his post was David Robertson, the author of the piece.

        • dduck

          Thanks, BG.

  • Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

    It would be more interesting and perhaps more fair and useful if the author would engage in the discussion that he engenders.

    It is easy to throw a molotov cocktail (figuratively speaking) out there, but a little more difficult to justify or defend it.

    • dduck

      Jeez, it is HIS style. You have your style, I have mine. 🙂

      • Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

        No dduck, this has nothing to do with “style,” but everything to do with throwing some crap out there and then not having the fortitude, the conviction and the guts to defend it or to at least admit that it is crap when it is shown to be crap.

        I have some other words for it but that would break the rules I have just been defending or betray my previous admonition to those who called a spade a spade.

        • dduck

          Here’s a challenge, carefully choose words that convey your conviction/accusation, but do so being civil to both poster and commenters. “Hot blood doth tangle the tongue.” Unknown
          “The brain may devise laws for the blood, but a hot temper leaps o’er a cold decree.” Shakespeare

    • KP

      Dorian, that didn’t work out too well for Ron Chusid when he wrote about Hillary, and he was sometimes correct :- )

      • Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

        To Ron Chusid’s credit — although he offended many in the way he did it — he never let a comment go unanswered.

        • KP

          I appreciated that as well about Dr. Chusid. I think he would say _the way_ people responded to him was suspect.

          His answering anyway didn’t serve him well. My point was that at this blog, if certain commenters disagree with an author he is treated the way the flying Monkeys on Wizard of Oz treated The Scarecrow.

          Recall, Ron was the darling of the blog when I discussed the ACA at length with him ( for months), years ago. Then he wrote about Hillary …. the rest is history.

          I see we have drifted off topic of DR’s post and that is frowned upon, so I apologize for being part of it and will stop now.

          • Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

            The Moderate Voice has rules — probably more strict than most blogs, especially when it comes to civility.

            Civility is, in my opinion, the single, most important rule that drives all of the other dozen or so rules in the TMV “Commenter Rules.”
            i.e. “ Civil discussion, civil teaching, presenting ideas and opinions and life stories in a civil manner.”

            I believe — I could be wrong — that it is one of the reasons our blog has so many faithful readers (and commenters).

            I have lost my cool at times and have been “moderated,” either reminded of the rules or have had my comments deleted.

            I do not believe any “moderation” here has to do with political or other opinions expressed, but rather just with keeping it an interesting, useful, pleasant, informative and, above all, civil blog.

            These are my words and TMV “management” may disagree with them. That’s OK.

          • KP

            I completely agree with you. As you know, I needed and wanted to apologize here before and done so.

            EDIT: I want to be clear, I didn’t think Ron was moderated for political reasons.

    • JSpencer

      “It is easy to throw a molotov cocktail (figuratively speaking) out there, but a little more difficult to justify or defend it.”

      Might be worth the effort though. When it comes to credibility, DR has nothing to lose.

  • Shannon Lee

    I guess this is what the Drudge Report is like.

    • KP

      That’s humorous as I have never seen or read the Drudge Report. I don’t even know what it looks like.

      • Shannon Lee

        oh i must admit to going there a couple of times over the past years…. just to have a peak.

  • Slamfu

    How could the publication of data about Clinton harm Clinton if the the data didn’t show Clinton doing something wrong?

    You’re kidding me right? It’s called letting the accusation do the work of truth. Ask people why they don’t trust Clinton for specifics. They can never tell you any. They quote debunked rumors about the Clinton Foundation and Benghazi. Libel is a tactic almost as old as carrot and stick. Throw out totally made up BS and around half the people who hear it will take it at face value. It is the tactic of those who are playing you to your detriment. Defend them if you will, but it marks you a fool.

    If the data did show that Clinton did something wrong, then who’s fault is that?

    This is the one that really kills me. Basically the worst thing that Clinton would have been guilty of is leaving classified data unsecured on a private server, creating a potential security breach. An act for which her detractors think is disqualifying for the job of President.

    So what is Trump’s suggestion, seriously: He actually encourages Russian agents to perform a security breach, go through said classified documents and feel free to make them public. But Clinton is the one who’s out of line, who’s not worthy of trust, while Trump who openly encourages a foreign power to commit espionage gets a pass. We are living in WTF world these days.

    Also, getting worked up over whether or not the Russian help is what tipped the scales is to miss the far larger point, that the Russians have a reason to want Trump President, they worked to make it happen, and now their favorites is our leader. That we might have, almost certainly do in fact, a Putin puppet in the Oval Office should keep you up at nights.

  • Davebo

    Hackers couldn’t expose Clinton’s misdeeds if there were no misdeeds to begin with. There would be no photo of Clinton with her hand in the cookie jar if Clinton hadn’t stuck her hand in the cookie jar.

    This would have been truly insightful had the Russians actually exposed any misdeeds by Clinton, the DNC or anyone else and if Clinton did indeed have her hand in the cookie jar whatever that’s supposed to mean.

    However, since none of that occurred, except to those who believe Clinton and Podesta ran a child prostitution ring from a pizza parlor the entire premise of this posting is, like most of your offerings, meaningless.

    Unless of course you are one of those who believe the child prostitution story.

  • epiphyte

    Well I’m going to be a little contrary here and say that Putin could not have swayed the election if the system was not already terminally ill. The Russians didn’t corrupt our government with money, or make it dependent on patronage – the political equivalent of the AIDS virus. Our politicians did that to themselves. Now we are reaping what they sowed.