If there is to be a pre-election wholesale release of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, we can be assured it will happen as the result of Julian Assange’s actions. It almost certainly will not be by the actions of our government wishing to provide us with the maximum amount of information with which to reach an informed decision. As much as I’d like to be able to trust the current Administration and its appointed power brokers, I have some difficulty with that. I do not believe that my government wants me to know the full details of those e-mails, at least not before Hillary’s shot at glory. Post-election might be a different story but by then it may be too late if Hillary has actually won the presidency.
Assange is a threat to Clinton’s aspirations to be our President given that he claims to have, in fact, managed to gather the much-touted e-mails which we’re told will give us an insight into Hillary which we’ve been deprived of to date by the powers that be in their supposed effort to protect Hillary from herself until after Election Day.
Were I a betting man, I’d be laying some significant cash down on Assange doing what he has threatened to do: a Hillary e-mail dump shortly before early November. Of course, we are reminded that Assange is an unsavory character and that, for that reason, we should not pay him any attention nor should we put any trust in whatever he might make available to us.
I suspect that attempt to make us look the other way and ignoring whatever he has promised to show us is having precisely the opposite effect in that we, many of us at any rate, are now anxious to see if he really can deliver the goods as he claims he will. And, if they are released, we will devour those e-mails like we have been starved for a month.
All this is most unfortunate. If I were able to believe what has been provided as the truth about Hillary and her e-mails, I would not be so anxious to see what is really there. Obviously I do not take what she says as the truth. If I were a world leader who might be dealing with a President Hillary, I would be ever suspect of her veracity or lack thereof.
The idea that Assange is being denigrated because Donald Trump seems to think he ‘has the goods’ on Hillary is also further reason for me to desire to see these e-mails before the election this Fall.
I am now forced to make voting decisions based upon the degree of truth which can be ascribed to each candidate. Our liberal mainstream media has tried to shame me into supporting Clinton by ascribing all things evil it can conjure to make Donald Trump appear as unpresidential as possible. We can see that, if we choose, in what has, so far, passed as a debate.
The media’s attempts notwithstanding, I continue to see a distinct difference between these two candidates; Donald Trump is, in my way of seeing things, the better of the two by a big margin. I wish I could find some element of trustworthiness in Hillary Clinton but that has, so far, escaped me. I can not separate truth from carefully constructed willful lies nearly so easily as I can overlook the occasional bombastic remark. The Clinton Foundation is anything but what it portrays itself to be. That trail of occurrences that defy rational explanation that began in Arkansas has not abated. If anything, it is more surreptitious today than it was then.
Hillary Clinton had won the ‘race to the bottom’ on day 1. That race was no contest. Are there things about Trump that I’d prefer were different? Absolutely. Has he cut some corners here and there? Yes. Is he full of self? Certainly. Will I have to be a careful consumer of what he says and does as President? Yes.
Do I want to reconsider my decision? Absolutely not! Hillary Clinton would be a disaster as our President. No world leader will be able to trust her word just as we cannot trust her word. With Donald Trump as President, I believe that what we see is what we will get. Will there be the occasional bombast? Yes. Will it destroy any international relationships? I sincerely doubt that will be the case. Willful deceit will overturn the ship of state long before, and there is a distinct pattern of such deceit on the part of Hillary Clinton. It goes back almost to the point that we first heard her name.