The Clinton Campaign and the Obama Administration are presenting the American people a cynical political charade regarding Russia and Vladimir Putin, with most of the media playing the Greek Chorus. What is so remarkable is that in order to accept what Clinton is now saying about Putin and Russia means having to ignore the previous seven years of Clinton’s and Obama’s accommodation of the man and country they now insist is a national security threat.

This list of national security compromising appeasements that Obama and Clinton handed Putin is very long, but here are some highlights:

In 2009, Obama and Clinton abandoned strategic U.S. allies Poland and the Czech Republic by withdrawing newly placed missile defense systems from their respective nations. The ostensible reason for the defenses was to protect our allies from Iranian missiles, but the Czechs and the Poles saw it as a relationship with the U.S. that would provide them with added security against a Russian invasion similar to what had just happened in the nation of Georgia, and what subsequently happened in Ukraine.

In June 2010, the FBI arrested ten Russian spies who had been living in the U.S. for years as a spy ring. These Russian agents had established relations with both Obama officials and Clinton officials. According to press reports, their covert mission was to recruit members of the administration who might be helpful to Russia. Captured spies are usually kept in prison for years, isolated and interrogated. This is to find out who they work for, who they have been in contact with in the U.S., what information about our national security they may have reported back to Moscow, and who was supervising them. Not only was none of this done by Obama and Clinton, the spies were immediately returned to a hero’s welcome in Moscow with all but an apology from Obama for capturing them. The Clinton State Department officials inexplicably boasted to the media about how great a relationship they had with Russia, after handing them the best gift one nation could give another. The word “appeasement” falls so woefully as a description for the Obama – Clinton surrender to Russia.

In the lame-duck period following the 2010 election when Republicans picked up seats in the Senate, Obama and Clinton rammed through the New START Treaty before a more conservative Senate, unlikely to ratify the treaty, could be seated. Many national security experts vigorously warned about the dangers of the New START Treaty and how it provided Russia with a strategic advantage over the United States. Also, the administration acknowledged, however meekly, that Russia was in violation of other treaties it had signed with the U.S. at the time New START was ratified. Russian officials were lobbying heavily for the treaty’s passage, indeed warning that the U.S. Senate should not change any of the language they negotiated with Obama and Clinton, a clear indication that the Russians knew they had gotten the best end of the deal. Clinton boasted once the treaty was ratified and considers it one of her accomplishments; strangely though, so does Putin, who Clinton claims is out to get her.

Then in 2012, in a scene that can only be described as bizarre and chilling, Obama sat with Russian President Dimitry Medvedev and when he thought no one could hear him, the following exchange took place: Obama said, “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it is important for him [Vladimir Putin] to give me space… this is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility”. Medvedev replied, “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir”.

What an ominous forecast. An American president secretly asking for a foreign tyrant’s forgiveness while he lies to his own voters so he can be reelected to then be more accommodating of the tyrant’s interests. It is difficult to imagine how Obama could be “more flexible” than he was over the return of their spies, or the sellout of our Polish and Czech allies, but clearly there was something more that Putin wanted and Obama couldn’t wait to give it to him.

Which brings us back to the new Clinton pose that Russia and Putin are a threat to U.S. national security. Of course, there is no doubt that they are a threat. Republicans have been warning about this for years, but only now that Clinton needs to use Putin as a foil against her opponent, Donald Trump, does she express this concern. The idea being sold to American voters right now that somehow Vladimir Putin is out to get Hillary Clinton is a manufactured political lie so Clinton can talk about how dangerous Trump’s dalliances with Putin are. This is designed to make her look tougher than she is on national security issues and to claim that Trump will sell out the U.S. to the Russians. The reality is that there is practically nothing that Trump could do for Russia that would be worse for the world than what Clinton and Obama have already done.The question is, does Clinton assume that Putin understands that she is demonizing him for political reasons, or has she also sent a message to “Vlad” that after her election she too will be more “flexible”.

Scott Wheeler is an author, producer, former investigative journalist and GOP Trust Executive Director. He is widely recognized for accomplishments in two disciplines: investigative journalism and political communications and management. As a television news correspondent and newspaper and magazine reporter, Wheeler’s work has frequently been recognized for having national and international impact. In 2008, motivated by an interest in restoring Constitutional values, Wheeler created and now heads the National Republican Trust PAC (GOPTrust).

