American Weakness and Incompetence Are Vladimir Putin’s Greatest Assets

[EasyAce]

A new report makes clear the profound ineptitude of our response to Russia’s interference in the election.
By David French
http://www.nationalreview.com/node/448931/print
23 June 2017

This morning, the Washington Post published a lengthy account of the Obama White House’s internal
response to Russian efforts to influence the 2016 elections. It’s worth reading for the drama alone — including
details of secrecy measures not seen since the Osama bin Laden raid, anguished internal debates over the
proper American response, and after-the-fact regrets that more was not done to punish Russia and highlight
its efforts during the campaign. Throughout, there is a palpable sense that maybe, just maybe, if the Obama
administration had reacted differently, Hillary Clinton would be president now.

But then, Vladimir Putin has been incredibly fortunate to butt up against the most unworthy of adversaries:
Clinton, Obama, and Donald Trump are the gifts that just kept on giving.

In the long history of foreign-intelligence operations, has greater disruption ever been achieved for less effort?
Russia, a much weaker military and economic power, threw the politics of the world’s most powerful nation into
bitter chaos merely by hacking into poorly protected e-mail accounts and boosting “fake news” into social-media
feeds. Yet spreading gossipy private communications and misinformation in a super-saturated media environment
could hardly cause an electoral crisis. Russia didn’t hack voting machines. It didn’t alter voter rolls. It didn’t
disrupt Election Day. It just made Americans lose their minds.

Does anyone really think that Russia’s actions were more decisive to Trump’s victory than, say, Clinton’s decision
to set up a homebrew e-mail server, her family’s decision to turn their charitable foundation into a gigantic
influence-peddling scheme, her campaign’s missteps, or her decades of scandals and flip-flops? Vladimir Putin
couldn’t possibly undermine the Democratic nominee more than she undermined herself.

As for Obama, where does one begin? The Post story reads like one long summary of his failed foreign policy.
Our enemies act, he anguishes, and they win . . .

. . . No assessment of Russia’s success in this case would be complete without Donald Trump, of course. It’s
hard to imagine a more incompetent, destructive response to reports of Russian interference than Trump’s
combinations of angry denials and joking encouragements. Moreover, Trump for a time surrounded himself with
shady figures with suspect Russian business relationships. And he spent the entire campaign loudly and puzzlingly
praising Putin, the last person who wants America to be made great again.

And that only covers his actions during the race. Since he became president-elect, he and his team have responded
to the “Russia controversy” with a series of falsehoods, misstatements, and missteps that may ultimately derail his
presidency even without any evidence of “collusion.” Panicked and hysterical Democrats looking for scapegoats
have encountered a reflexively angry and dishonest administration that can’t seem to keep its stories straight.
The results are entirely predictable: more confusion, more bitterness, more rancor . . .

. . . Now more than ever, we need honesty, firmness, and stable leadership from Washington, and all we’re getting
is more political decay. Trump reportedly toys with firing special counsel Robert Mueller, Democrats dream of
impeachment, and Twitter is awash in conspiracy theories. If Putin wanted to sow chaos, he got his wish. But he
isn’t a diabolical genius, and his intelligence operatives aren’t supermen. American incompetence is his greatest
asset.