TASS: Kremlin rejects Hillary Clinton’s claim about Putin having ‘personal vendetta’ against her
The former US first lady tells about her presidential campaign and the defeat that she faced at the 2016 presidential election in her book
SOCHI, September 13. /TASS/. Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov has rejected former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s allegation about Russian President Vladimir Putin having a personal vendetta against her.
"No," said Peskov when asked if the personal vendetta mentioned in Clinton’s memoir book dubbed What Happened really existed.
The Russian presidential spokesman pointed out that he had heard about the book. In response to a question as to whether the Russian president had a wish to get acquainted with the memoir, Peskov answered in the negative.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: She compared Putin to Hitler and called Russia a bunch of Nazis a few years back .... Hillary Clinton Compares Russian President Putin And Russia To Hitler And The Nazis (March 5, 2014). This is crossing a Russian "Red Line" .... and while I doubt that Putin has a personal vendetta against her (I am sure that in his mind she no longer exists) .... if her name should ever be brought up to him in a question, I am willing to bet that he will not dignify it with an answer.
More On Kremlin Denials On Hillary Clinton's Claim That Russian President Putin Has A 'Personal Vendetta' Against Her
Kremlin Denies Putin Had 'Personal Vendetta' Against Hillary Clinton -- Sputnik
Exclusive: Hillary Clinton says Trump associates helped Russia meddle in the 2016 election -- USA TODAY
Hillary Clinton 'convinced' of Russian collusion with Donald Trump's aides -- The Independent
5 comments:
Do not be fooled by public displays of affection or otherwise. Putin certainly wanted a president whom he had already corrupted.
HRC was the one.
"HRC was the one." While we cannot "know" for certain, I would tend to agree. She was/is corrupt, has/had numerous shady business deals, had her server hacked because of negligence on the part of herself and her team, and is not a particularly bright individual to boot. There's probably little worse than a combination of evil and incompetence. HRC has these qualities in abundance.
Forbes had this quite right when they pointed out that VP is the most powerful man in the world. A person such as HRC that he can easily manipulate would seem to be the favorite in his mind.
There is another possibility. HRC referring to VP as Hitler and likening him and his countrymen and women to Nazis was extraordinarily reckless. This shows either a person who is mentally unbalanced or has a spectacular disregard for who and what Hitler was and the horrific struggle Russians undertook to defeat him and the Nazis. If this is a case of being mentally unbalanced, it would extend to her entire team. Most likely she and her team are intellectually lazy and do not take the time or the effort to find out the facts of a given situation instead preferring to depend upon ideology. Either this would/should exclude from consideration for any kind of a position that involves adult level decision making. Such people as these should not be allowed to manager their own affairs or operate without close supervision on anything much less lead any type of organization much less a nation.
Then she, her team, and the Democrats compound the recklessness in accusing the Russians of meddling in the US election. Remember Forbes had this right. VP is the most powerful person in the world. As such, HRC or America simply aren't that important in Russia's or VP grand scheme of things. With that said, if one interferes in his business, this can and probably would elicit blowback against that someone or country who did so.
As such, he may just hate HRC enough to want to undermine her. this coupled with candidate Trump speaking sensibly and seeking better relations with Russia may have influenced VP's decision making. Given US actions of going out of the way to antagonize and otherwise try and undermine Russia for no good reason, the Russian response has been surprisingly muted. At least until recently the Russians wanted to end Cold War 2 or at least lessen the tensions. Now I am not so sure. As such, if you thought a fight was unavoidable, the Russians would obviously want HRC. If trying for peace, the saner candidate in DJT might be preferred. Most likely HRC was preferred because the Russians did little to nothing to aid DJT except in the fantasies of HRC. This is one lie of hers that has gotten completely out of control.
Another problem with HRC is her insistence on calling America "exceptional" or some sort of "super power." America is neither of these and most Americans reject this outright as ridiculousness. To the best of my knowledge, DJT never made such references nor has he. His ridiculous subordinate who made such a statement was fired pretty much soon after. Delusions are no way to conduct a nation's foreign or domestic policy. Such things will end badly.
Suggestion: treat Russia and China as the equal powers and in some ways superior powers they are rather than a delusional approach that has America as stronger. While we not agree on everything, good outcomes are possible. Approaches not based on reality generally end badly.
Jim Brown's comment is nonsense, especially given the decades-long US history of interfering in and corrupting the politics of so many other countries on every continent except Antarctica, including Iran in 1953, Guatamala in 1954, Laos in 1961-62, Chile in 1970 and 1973, most of Central American in the 1980's, not to mention all of the regime change wars since 9/11, and this is just a few examples.
If Putin really did have the power to influence US elections, it would be an improvement, I'm sure.
We had every right to change the regime in Iraq.
We had as much right as we did when we changed regimes in Tokyo and Berlin.
So Saddam Hussein lost a war of aggression, signed an armistice and then violated it. I'll state it again. This gave us every right to change the government in Iraq.
"Iraqi cooperation with UN weapons inspection teams was questioned on several occasions during the 1990s. UNSCOM chief weapons inspector Richard Butler withdrew his team from Iraq in November 1998 because of Iraq's lack of cooperation. The team returned in December. Butler prepared a report for the UN Security Council afterwards in which he expressed dissatisfaction with the level of compliance" - wiki
Chile? That would have worked? That would have worked as well as the USSR, The PRC, Cuba, Kampuchea, Somalia, Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique & Nicaragua.
Well, I guess Nicaragua worked. Ortega et al got their haciendas and Ortega himself got his designed sun glasses. So it was worth it!
"Daniel Ortega moves to quash Nicaragua's presidential term limits " - The Guardian
I guess Ortega was a good, devout communist. He believed in 1 vote, 1 time.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, I was wrong.
Comrade Comandante Daniel Ortega, maximum leader of the future socialist state of Nicaragua bought $5,000 sunglasses not $200.
Still $200 was a much bigger deal in the 1980s than it is now.
Nicaragua had an election in 1988 that foreshadowed the whole thing and the $5,000 sun glasses wearing Daniel Ortega gave up power.
http://paradisefrommyporch.blogspot.com/2013/11/on-socialism.html
I posted a link to a blog, but this was in a one of the 3 big magazines in the U.S. at the time it happened. He bought them in NYC. However the facts don't matter. Leftwingers would still eat the corn in his .
Post a Comment