Connecting the Dots: The DNC Hack

Connecting the Dots: The DNC Hack

Recently, the news has been atwitter with reports that the Russians hacked the DNC email and gave that information to Wikileaks for distribution. Let's review some fact --some of which you may not be aware of-- and make some conclusions and speculate just a little about what is really going on here. Let's 'connect the dots', as it were.

The facts:
Fact1. The Mainstream Media provided help to the DNC by giving them the questions before some of the debates were to occur.

F2. The DNC provided help to Hillary, but not to Bernie, by giving her the questions ahead of the debate.

F3. The DNC emails were gievn to Wikileaks for distribution.

F4. A few weeks after Wikileaks reported the emails, DNC staffer Seth Rich was murdered in Washington DC, his wallet was not taken. He was killed by person or persons unknown for motives unknown.

F5. Wikileaks has indicated that Seth Rich was the source of the DNC leaks.

F6. The CIA has a 600 million dollar contract with Amazon.

F7. Amazon bought the Washington Post for 250 million dollars.

F8. After Benghazi, Obama said virtually the same thing with regard to the people responsible,

F9. Obama has brought no responsible party's to justice in the 4 years since Benghazi.

F10. Both the Mainstream Media and the DNC had a very high degree of confidence that Hillary would win the general election in November.

F11. Presidents usually win re-election and if Hillary had won in 2016, the DNC would not have had to go through another primary process until 2024.

F12. Ben Rhodes bragged about how reporters don't question news they are given, that reporters are young, inexperienced and easily duped.

Ok, those are quite a few facts, let us assemble them into some conclusions:

Conclusion1. The Mainstream Media's credibility has been badly damaged as it betrayed it's integrity (F1, F3)

C2. The DNC's credibility has been badly damaged as it betrayed the DNC voters and chose Hillary without regard to the wishes of DNC voters. (F2, F3)

C3. The DNC learned who had leaked the emails and murdered Seth Rich (F3, F4, F5)

C4: The same thing will happen to the latest target of Obama as the Benghazi perpetrators, that is to say 'nothing'.

So those are some reasonable conclusions that can be reached, with brings us to a point were we can speculate a little about what has happened since the election:

Speculation1: The DNC was shocked to find that not only had it lost, but that it would need to start running a nation primary in just 3 years (maybe less), not 7 years. What would DNC voters do, when reminded how the DNC had betrayed them in 2016? Perhaps DNC voters would conclude that the RNC was a party that could, at least, be trusted to honor the results of the primary--even when they obviously didn't like them. Would DNC voters flock to the RNC? If so, would the DNC be finished as a major political party? (F10, F11, C2)

S2: Establishment players of both the DNC and the RNC find value in preserving the status quo. If the DNC were finished as a major party, that would change politics in America for 2 generations, with unpredictable results. Would it really be that difficult for major establishment politicians to convince the CIA that the stability of the country were at stake? If so, then major establishment players (such a Diane Feinstein and John McCain) could entreat the CIA to help them preserve the 2-Party duopoly by having them speculate in the following manner:

If both the DNC and the RNC were 'hacked' by some 3rd party, then the DNC could claim that it is no worse that the RNC-- only that the RNC didn't have their information leaked. All it would take is a little speculation by some establishment politicians and a couple reporters and the rest of the Mainstream Media would run with it. Remember the Mainstream Media stands to gain from the narrative as well. (F6, F7, F12, C1, C4)

S3: DNC voters are particularly unhappy, not only were they betrayed, but it was all for nothing. And they really don't want to leave the DNC, but what choice have they?

Sometimes a person is betrayed by a spouse in the most blatant manner possible. This is the case with DNC voters and the DNC. And, just like a person who really doesn't want to leave, all the cheating spouse has to do is tell a lie. It doesn't matter that the lie is obvious and transparently false-- the person wants the lie to be true and will do everything possible to believe it. Just as DNC voters want something to believe, no matter how unfounded. If DNC voters can make themselves believe that somehow the DNC is not any more corrupt than the RNC, then they can stay with it-- and they want to!

And that is what this is all about. It has nothing to do with Russian hacking or Russians influencing the US national elections

This is about preserving the 2-party duopoly in the US and giving DNC voters something, anything to believe so that they can stay with the DNC. That is also why it has taken so long for this to come about, nearly a month after they lost the election the DNC realized that they had blown a hole in the side of their ship and that voters were going to abandon them. The need to make DNC voters think that the RNC ship is similarly weak with corruption so they don't leave.

And it worked. Look around, Democrats are more than happy with the smokescreen that has been thrown up-- just listen to how they speak about it. They want to believe it. They need to believe it.

Nothing will come of the investigations into the 'Russian involvement', but that won't matter. In 4 years (less!) DNC voters will say to themselves 'You know, I think there was more to the Russian hacking than we were told. I think they got the same kind of dirt on the RNC, but just didn't release it.'

'You can fool some of the people all of the time,
And you can fool all of the people some of the time...'

I think we figured out who the 'some of the people' are.