The democratic storyline regarding the Russian “influence” on the 2016 election just won’t die.
Perhaps that has to do with Hillary Clinton’s own air of inevitability heading into the unconventional contest. Clinton, who it was revealed hoped to face off against Donald Trump in November, believing that he would be the simplest of the republicans to best, needed to invent an excuse for her embarrassing defeat. While taking responsibility for the American people’s mistrust of her due to numerous leaks of damning information was out of the question for the corrupt politician, raising the specter of an international boogeyman was certainly not above her shameless demeanor.
So began a long and arduous sputtering and spewing of pseudo-facts and contentious drivel aimed at connecting Donald Trump to Vladimir Putin.
In all honesty, Clinton had been planting the seeds of this insane conspiracy theory during the electoral debates – long before Americans headed to the polls. Perhaps it was her way of preemptively making excuses for her poor performance looming on the horizon. Perhaps Trump’s own willingness to show a diplomatic side when speaking on the subject of the Asiatic superpower was unnerving to the cold and bitter Clinton.
Whatever the case may be, we can all thank the incorrigible and crooked Hillary Clinton for getting us into this whole mess.
Now, amid heightened calls for an investigation into Russia’s influence on the 2016 election, a special prosecutor has been assigned.
“Former FBI Director Robert Mueller III was appointed as special counsel to oversee the FBI investigation of the Russian government’s efforts to influence the 2016 election, the Justice Department said.
“Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced the appointment because Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from any investigation related to the 2016 race. Mr. Rosenstein said in a statement that ‘I determined that it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authority and appoint a Special Counsel to assume responsibility of this matter.’
“He cautioned that his decision wasn’t the result of a ‘finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted.’