Could the US Deep State take out Hillary Clinton and blame Russia?

Alleging that Hillary Clinton has been poisoned by Russia fits neatly in with a full-on US and Western media offensive portraying Russia under Putin as a global threat. The deep forces behind this campaign – the CIA and Pentagon – are the main beneficiaries from conflict with Russia. Clinton is favored by these forces because, of the two presidential candidates, she is the one who is belligerent towards Moscow. In short, she is the US Deep State’s candidate.


Hillary 2.  The double who’s been making public appearances since Hillary’s collapse at the 9/11 memorial.

And the Deep State’s operatives in the mass media consequently row in behind her campaign, working to downplay her trail of corruption, while at the same time maximizing negative coverage of Trump. But what if the political-media orchestration fails to get Clinton elected in November? Recent polls show that Clinton’s lead over Trump is waning to the point where it is neck and neck. Given the high stakes to get their candidate into the White House, the Deep State is faced with a quandary of a tight race that could go either way. So, there is a need to up the dirty tricks. Touting old Cold War tropes about Russian interference in US politics and Trump being a “Kremlin stooge”, the latest desperate bid to escalate fear is the theory that “Putin has poisoned the Democrat candidate”. But hold it a moment. What if Clinton’s health impact needed a little bit of “evidentiary proof” that Russian agents were somehow involved?

This is analogous to how US intelligence agents could set up alleged Russian cyber hackers by leaving seeming telltale digital forensics implicating the Russians. In the scenario of Clinton’s health, the CIA could themselves poison her, or cause damage in some other way to her condition, with medication that at a convenient later stage could be tested in such a way as to implicate Russian involvement, just like the Polonium poisoning of Livitnenko. Think about it. The CIA have the capability, the motive and past record for such devious foul play. It was the CIA that masterminded the assassination of President John F Kennedy out of geopolitical calculations against the Soviet Union. If the organization is capable of taking out a president, then why not take out a presidential candidate?

Blaming Russia on such a dastardly deed would ensure the Deep State’s number-two candidate, Clinton’s running mate and Pentagon-connected Tim Kaine, would most likely get elected on a wave of patriotic fervor.

The new gung-ho US administration would then pave the way for the CIA-Pentagon, military-industrial complex’s desired ramped-up confrontational policy towards Russia. Tens of billions of dollars in military contracts would flow. To skeptics who say this is preposterous, it should be noted that the US shadow government has shown no compunction whatsoever in the past to sacrifice American lives in the furtherance of its own elitist agenda. The assassination of JFK is a case in point. That led to the lucrative Vietnam War in which 50,000 US troops were killed, as well as up to three million Vietnamese.

Another case in point are the 9/11 terror events which saw three New York skyscrapers implode 15 years ago with the loss of some 3,000 lives. That sabotage points to a false flag incident carried out by US secret forces which then provided the pretext for foreign wars of aggression and empire building, notwithstanding thousands of more American troops killed, as well as over a million Iraqis, Afghanis and others.

It is perhaps nefariously fitting that the latest slander against Russia as having something sinister to do with Clinton’s health problems should emerge out of her collapse at a 9/11 commemorative event. But the real twist in this latest psychological operation against Russia is that Clinton’s health impact has nothing to do with alleged poisoning by Russian agents. If anyone is involved it would most likely be the people who form the shadow government of the US.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

By Finian Cunningham

Read more:


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.