Putin's Crime Isn't Trump's Crime
January 7 2017 By Abiodun Giwa

The issue of the United States' intelligence report on Putin's reported role in the last US presidential election was one of the major news headlines on Friday. The MSNBC's headline reads, "Russia Tried to Help Trump by Hurting Clinton".
By Saturday morning, the MSNBC's new headline reads, "Maddow:Trump Lies About Intelligence on Russia."
The issue continues as the lead story on the New York Times and the BBC online from Friday through Saturday.
The killing of five people and the wounding of many at the FT Lauderdale airport on Friday afternoon was not fatal enough for the New York Times, the BBC and the MSNBC to change their lead stories. (Every editor has right to determine own lead story).
Russia's Vladmir Putin's crime for his intrusion in the U.S election, through confirmed involvement in the hacking of the Democratic Party's computers, based on U.S Intelligence report is strong, but people are saying that there is nowhere in all the published reports that has shown Trump has been part, either directly or indirectly, of Russia's conspiracy, said to have derailed Hillary Clinton's presidential ambition.
Put more succintly, there is nowhere in all the news reports that shows or indicates that Trump approves Putin's actions against Clinton before the election. All that Trump has been saying is that he does not share the opinion that whatever Russia may have done could have affected or influenced his victory against Clinton. Trump did not see any of the intelligence reports other than as published by newspapers until Friday or when shown on Friday, and he said though the hacking report may be strong, but it is still not convincing enough for him that Putin handed him the election victory.
Of course, some of us expected Trump to be on the side of the intelligence community's report saying the hacking of the opposing party's computers by Russia influenced the election in favor of Trump, but he has decided against such decision, probably because like all other observers and players in the election, many observers agree that he may have believed that there are many factors that have contributed to the election outcome.
The story should have been "Putin Worked to Stop Clinton", based on what Clinton herself said, based on the intelligence reports on Russia's role and Clinton's earlier explanation that Putin was against her winning the election, because of a beef Putin had against her for a comment she had made about an issue in Russia earlier before the election, which no one knew until she said it showed that there was indeed a beef between the two and that might hadcaused Putin's aggression against and contributed like other factors that caused her failure. Yet, her failure as already analysed before cannot be attributed to just one cause. Many people ahev have said many times that Clinton's baggages are many. Baggages at home and war from outside the country cannot be said to be a light matter.
It is because of the effect of too many negative issues on candidates that candidates with such baggages are generally not advised to stand for election. It is Clinton herself as a candidate and her aprty that can explain their reasons for believing that she is a candidate to win elections against the contrary. It is one of the reasons that made the reports about Bernie sanders' expereince and the party's choice of Clinton against her sacrosanct.
Yes, there were negative reports by Wikileaks against Clinton, if those publications did not come from Wikileaks or it came from another source and with no hacking involved, it would still have affected Clinton along with the curse of her own private email use as secretary of state. Hadn't she and husband said that James Comey's act two weeks to the election was contributory to her loss in the election? Is Comey not part of intelligence community that has issued reports, which naturally is capable of helping Comey to see himself as not part of the cause of the election outcome?
People are wondering that If the losers in the election had confirmed that there was more than one factor that caused her loss as a candidate's in the election, why should some news outlets continue to link her loss one unjust factor, and now being reported as if the winner of the election has conspired with outsiders to rig the election?
If Putin has committed a crime against the U.S as reported, though Russia has said it is not her act and Wikileaks also has said it Russia is not its source, does it mean that Trump should share his crime or Trump be made part of Putin's crime? If Putin has committed espionage as a crime against the U.S, is there any proof that Trump approved his act against the country to convince the public that Russia factor handed him the victory?
People who still have their heads on their necks and their position are not informed by political considerations, have said that Russia has not just begun espionage or getting involved in the the U.S election, but that the latest acts of reports by Wikileaks from hacking materials underttaking by Russia, which most news sources in the Us reprodeced anyway, has only reached a level enough to raise eye brows.
Although, it is agreed that the U.S. should not allow any country, Russia or any country for that matter, interfere or influence election in the country and do everything possible to discourage it, it is also expected that as major political dramatis personae in the last election are gearing to attend the inauguration of the winner later this month, let there mouthpieces or their accept the election defeat and allow the winner to settle down to governance in the interest of the country.
At least, the intelligence reports say that voters tallies and the voting machines were not affected by hacking, accepting that the reports say that voters' intelligence have been reduced to mean it is capable of manipulation by outsiders.
By Saturday morning, the MSNBC's new headline reads, "Maddow:Trump Lies About Intelligence on Russia."
The issue continues as the lead story on the New York Times and the BBC online from Friday through Saturday.
The killing of five people and the wounding of many at the FT Lauderdale airport on Friday afternoon was not fatal enough for the New York Times, the BBC and the MSNBC to change their lead stories. (Every editor has right to determine own lead story).
Russia's Vladmir Putin's crime for his intrusion in the U.S election, through confirmed involvement in the hacking of the Democratic Party's computers, based on U.S Intelligence report is strong, but people are saying that there is nowhere in all the published reports that has shown Trump has been part, either directly or indirectly, of Russia's conspiracy, said to have derailed Hillary Clinton's presidential ambition.
Put more succintly, there is nowhere in all the news reports that shows or indicates that Trump approves Putin's actions against Clinton before the election. All that Trump has been saying is that he does not share the opinion that whatever Russia may have done could have affected or influenced his victory against Clinton. Trump did not see any of the intelligence reports other than as published by newspapers until Friday or when shown on Friday, and he said though the hacking report may be strong, but it is still not convincing enough for him that Putin handed him the election victory.
Of course, some of us expected Trump to be on the side of the intelligence community's report saying the hacking of the opposing party's computers by Russia influenced the election in favor of Trump, but he has decided against such decision, probably because like all other observers and players in the election, many observers agree that he may have believed that there are many factors that have contributed to the election outcome.
The story should have been "Putin Worked to Stop Clinton", based on what Clinton herself said, based on the intelligence reports on Russia's role and Clinton's earlier explanation that Putin was against her winning the election, because of a beef Putin had against her for a comment she had made about an issue in Russia earlier before the election, which no one knew until she said it showed that there was indeed a beef between the two and that might hadcaused Putin's aggression against and contributed like other factors that caused her failure. Yet, her failure as already analysed before cannot be attributed to just one cause. Many people ahev have said many times that Clinton's baggages are many. Baggages at home and war from outside the country cannot be said to be a light matter.
It is because of the effect of too many negative issues on candidates that candidates with such baggages are generally not advised to stand for election. It is Clinton herself as a candidate and her aprty that can explain their reasons for believing that she is a candidate to win elections against the contrary. It is one of the reasons that made the reports about Bernie sanders' expereince and the party's choice of Clinton against her sacrosanct.
Yes, there were negative reports by Wikileaks against Clinton, if those publications did not come from Wikileaks or it came from another source and with no hacking involved, it would still have affected Clinton along with the curse of her own private email use as secretary of state. Hadn't she and husband said that James Comey's act two weeks to the election was contributory to her loss in the election? Is Comey not part of intelligence community that has issued reports, which naturally is capable of helping Comey to see himself as not part of the cause of the election outcome?
People are wondering that If the losers in the election had confirmed that there was more than one factor that caused her loss as a candidate's in the election, why should some news outlets continue to link her loss one unjust factor, and now being reported as if the winner of the election has conspired with outsiders to rig the election?
If Putin has committed a crime against the U.S as reported, though Russia has said it is not her act and Wikileaks also has said it Russia is not its source, does it mean that Trump should share his crime or Trump be made part of Putin's crime? If Putin has committed espionage as a crime against the U.S, is there any proof that Trump approved his act against the country to convince the public that Russia factor handed him the victory?
People who still have their heads on their necks and their position are not informed by political considerations, have said that Russia has not just begun espionage or getting involved in the the U.S election, but that the latest acts of reports by Wikileaks from hacking materials underttaking by Russia, which most news sources in the Us reprodeced anyway, has only reached a level enough to raise eye brows.
Although, it is agreed that the U.S. should not allow any country, Russia or any country for that matter, interfere or influence election in the country and do everything possible to discourage it, it is also expected that as major political dramatis personae in the last election are gearing to attend the inauguration of the winner later this month, let there mouthpieces or their accept the election defeat and allow the winner to settle down to governance in the interest of the country.
At least, the intelligence reports say that voters tallies and the voting machines were not affected by hacking, accepting that the reports say that voters' intelligence have been reduced to mean it is capable of manipulation by outsiders.