The Mueller Indictment in the 'Russiagate' Scandal Reeks of Hypocrisy

A sane person would not believe for one second that US officials really care about foreign meddling in the US elections. The proof is simple: if the US officials, the FBI, the CIA, the DOJ, the Senate and the Congress do care about electoral interference from foreign nationals, then why are there are no voter ID laws in the US? According to US mainstream media, there are 13 "Russian trolls" who allegedly interfered with the US electoral process by posting memes on Facebook. At the same time, there are 11.3 million illegal immigrants in the US. The numbers speak for themselves.

The so-called "Russian trolls" are accused of spreading propaganda and political memes on Facebook. A "former" British spy, Christopher Steele was paid by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to produce a fake "dossier" on Trump. That "dossier" was then used in a FISA court without the proper disclosures regarding the funding of the dossier. Moreover, the FBI and DOJ used the media stories, planted by Steele, as supporting evidence for their warrant. Let that sink in. A "former" British spy colludes with US media outlets and a political party in order to influence public opinion and to fool a FISA court.

The FBI and DOJ got a surveillance warrant on Trump only because the "former" British spy succeeded in his brilliant disinformation operation. The influence of Christopher Steele on the US elections was orders of magnitude greater than any alleged influence from the memes posted by the 13 so-called "Russian trolls," yet no one cares. There are no indictments, no prosecutions and no investigation into the obvious interference and collusion. In this context, any accusations leveled against the "Russian trolls" sound hypocritical, because they are.

When confronted with fact-based accusations of American interference in foreign elections, some American politicians and pundits try to deflect them, claiming that such accusations are a form of "whataboutism" and therefore merit no further discussion. Actually, it is the only thing that should be thoroughly discussed in the context of the "Russiagate" scandal. It all boils to down to the divergent answers to a crucial question: what is the basis of American exceptionalism?

READ MORE: Trump Questions Sessions Why He Not Investigating Obama Under Russian Probe

There are two competing and incompatible answers to this question. The first answer is that America can claim to be exceptional due to its exceptional moral values, its virtues, expressed in the Constitution and in the way the US government treats its citizens and other countries. The second and much more popular answer, preferred by the deep state and its minions in the media, is that American exceptionalism is based on US military and economic strength, granting its leaders the right to ignore all rules of decency, courtesy and morals.

This view implies that the rights and opinions of all other human beings on Earth do not matter if they disagree with the official stance of the US State Department or the CIA. In this case, the whole concept of American exceptionalism starts to look like the concept of "American supremacy," which is not the best ideology for fostering long-term friendly relations with anyone, including current American allies.

A prime example of such ideology was displayed by The Washington Post's Karen Tumulty, who believes that the Facebook memes are the equivalent of military attack on the US. She criticized Trump's reaction to "Russiagate," asking readers to "imagine how history would have judged Franklin D. Roosevelt in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, if he had taken to the radio airwaves to declare that Tokyo was "laughing their asses off."

READ MORE: Wall Street Analyst Explains Potential Collusion Between Clinton, Obama, FBI

A more even-handed, fair and realistic assessment of the situation was given by the former chief of Russian operations at the CIA, Steven L. Hall, in his interview for The New York Times:

"If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all," said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States "absolutely" has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, "and I hope we keep doing it."

You can't have it both ways. Either election interference is wrong and no one should do it, or it is acceptable and then everyone is entitled to have a go at it. Saying that it is OK when the CIA does it, and then claiming that some memes allegedly posted by some "Russian trolls" constitute the equivalent of a military attack on the US is hypocritical and makes US politicians look like a bunch of whiny bullies, who are used to beating everyone with a baseball bat but can't handle a gentle slap across the face.

It is noteworthy that the instruments of choice, used by the CIA, along with the various organizations sponsored by George Soros or the State Department, are not Facebook memes. Their instruments of choice are political assassinations, clandestine funding of political parties and even mercenary spin-doctors, who lead the political campaigns of candidates who have sworn allegiance to the US deep state.

A sensible way to solve the election interference problem would be a multilateral non-aggression treaty, or maybe even a special UN treaty outlining the red lines that should not be crossed in political campaign funding or social network usage. The problem is that no one can guarantee that George Soros or the CIA will respect such a treaty, even if Donald Trump or any other US president signs it.

The US deep state is accountable to neither the US President, nor to the people of the US. And that is a much bigger problem than some "Russian trolls" posting memes on Facebook.

The views and opinions expressed by Ivan Danilov does not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.