That’s (just) how it is.
I learned this (and wanted to remember it) from a Powerline post this morning.
As a bonus, there is an interesting response to one of Powerline’s resident lefties who predictably tries to re-inflate the Narrative of the Russian connection:
Approach this logically. Why would Russia secretly aid a candidate who in both his campaign and now in practise boosted military spending by 10% and encouraged production of oil that competes with a product contributing half of Russia’s revenue.
And why would they oppose a party and candidate that sought to reduce oil production, cut military spending, allowed Russia to dominate Middle Eastern events, canceled a missile agreement with Eastern European countries and had previously sought a reset with Moscow.
This issue is so obviously artificial and contrived that I’m amazed we’re still talking about it. And of course the irony is that truly Putinesque behavior- spying on political opponents and using the media to create a climate of fear and paranoia – is being conducted by the Democrats.
Very nicely done. This Narrative it’s losing air (to retain that metaphor) due to the facts, but it is interesting to me that I’ve seen so little expended on this argument at a higher level. Especially with this in mind:
As the left has worked to create their Russian boogeyman scenario to undermine the election, the words of President Obama have come back to haunt their farcical effort. As Barack Obama has criticized Trump for not taking a tough enough stance on Russia, his comments just four years ago about being “flexible” with Russia show his pathetic hypocrisy.