@blatham,
I've no doubt that the Russians meddled.
Do I get a pat on the head?
Meddle:
to interest oneself in what is not one's concern : interfere without right or propriety (Merriam-Webster)
to involve oneself in a matter without right or invitation; interfere officiously and unwantedly (dictionary.com)
interfere in or busy oneself unduly with something that is not one's concern. touch or handle (something) without permission. (google)
to try to change or have an influence on things that are not your responsibility (Cambridge Dictionary)
To intrude into other people's affairs or business; interfere.(Free Dictionary)
to become involved in a situation that you have no right to be involved in, in a way that is annoying (McMillan Dictionary)
I also have no doubt that they have meddled in every presidential election since Calvin Coolidge ran what might have been the most civil campaign in US history and crushed the Democrat challenger John H. Davis.
(Davis is an interesting figure given that he was the Democrat Standard Bearer in 1924. He served as Solicitor General under that paragon of liberty, Woodrow Wilson and in prior private practice as a lawyer was an opponent of anti-lynching legislation and a proponent of states' rights. After being roundly defeated in the contest for the White House, Davis withdrew from public service and made a ton of money representing major American corporations.
He presented oral arguments before the Supreme Court well over 100 times and successfully argued against Harry Truman's seizure of American steel plants in 1952 which "Give 'Em Hell Harry" chose rather than evocation of the Taft-Hartley Act, to prevent an industry-wide labor strike that would have had deleterious effects on his undeclared war on North Korea and China. He unsuccessfully
argued in defense of the "separate but equal" doctrine in Briggs v. Elliott.
Additionally, Davis was implicated in the bizarre
Business Plot by a fascinating retired Marine Major General with a funny name, (Smedley Darlington Butler) who testified Congressongress that uber-rich capitalists were planning a military coup to overthrow FDR and had recruited him to be the front-man in establishing a fascist regime! Butler, a recipient of two Congressional Medals of Honor, fought in military actions around the world including, but not limited to, the Boxer Rebellion in China and the
Banana Wars in Central America, and, of course, WWI, and at the time of his death was the most decorated Marine in US history. After Herbert Hoover, in 1932, ordered the US Army to disperse and remove, from their tent city, the
Bonus Army {thousands of WWI vets who gathered in DC to demand the government pay them bonuses due under a 1924 law}, and hundreds of vets were injured and two killed, General Butler saw and converted to
Red, becoming a vocal supporter of FDR and a strident critic of American bankers and industrialists. At one point he referred to himself as a
"racketeer for Capitalism;" serving as a
"high-class muscle man" for Big Business.
You ever quote the general blatham? Seems like he would be a hero of yours.
Before anyone gets the idea that Davis was a total lackey of US Capitalism, in 1949, Davis testified before Congress as a character witness on behalf of the infamous Red spy, Alger Hiss.)
Sorry for the long ride down side roads, but Davis, Butler, and Hiss are a lot more interesting than Russian Meddling.
Returning to the topic at hand: I also have no doubt that regardless of what comes of the Mueller investigation, the Russians will continue to meddle in US elections for years to come just as the US, no doubt, has meddled and will meddle in foreign elections where there is any chance at all of exerting an influence.
There is, of course, some narrow room within each definition I've cited to allow for the term's use in reference to an act that involves tampering, manipulation and falsification, but an honest reading of all of them will conclude that "meddle" is most appropriately used in reference to minor interference. The McMillan definition appropriately incorporates the condition of "annoying."
It is, therefore, entirely reasonable to accept and acknowledge Russian
meddling without signing on to hyperbolic claims of election rigging, corruption or any suggestions that their meddling resulted in an outcome that was different than it would have been had there been no meddling at all. This, of course, is the implicit or explicit claim of the Resistance, that but for Russian meddling, HRC would be president. It is an absurd and entirely unsubstantiated claim which I am 99.9% certain George W. Bush does not endorse.
The strategy of the Resistance is clear: Equate meddling with manipulation so that any acknowledgment of meddling seems to be an acknowledgment that the Russians (with the aid and assistance of the Trump campaign) stole the election from Clinton, and that the Trump presidency is illegitimate. She wants Americans to believe this and so do you and your confreres. Some no doubt will because a) They have a deranged hatred for Trump or b) They are susceptible to an incessant barrage of propaganda by the MSM and Democrat demagogues.
What is both pathetic and hypocritical is the Resistance's tactic of asserting that anyone who won't go along with its narrative on this has a minimal and cavalier regard for American democracy; that they are carrying water for Vladamir Putin. For a bunch of people who scream
McCarthyism! whenever the words
flag or
patriotism are included in criticism directed their way is beyond ironic. You or others may deploy the
"good for the goose" argument and I would have a hard time arguing against it providing you acknowledged the ploy, but you won't. You will continue to argue that when the Right does something it's unconscionable, but when the Left does the very same thing it's simply hard-ball politics, a little rough, but essentially honest.
Oh if only Calvin Coolidge was still with us.
