>Making a big deal over that stuff is hypocritical given US actions abroad over the past hundred years, but that's a separate issue. How is it a "separate issu

>Making a big deal over that stuff is hypocritical given US actions abroad over the past hundred years, but that's a separate issue. How is it a "separate issue"? It seems to me the entirety of the issue. If you park in front of my house every day for a hundred years and block my driveway, you have forfeited the right to cry foul when I park in front of your house and block your driveway. By your actions (which are far, far more important than hollow rhetoric) you have declared that this behavior is completely legitimate. Your habitual and repeated engagement in the proscribed behavior has precluded you from credibly complaining about said behavior. Those who can't wrap their minds around the concept of moral authority and reciprocation simply cry, "whataboutism". Spreading foreign propaganda and influencing foreign elections (both kinetically via invasions and subversively via NGOs, funding and other methods) is not only "something we do" - its been the main thrust of our foreign policy for over a century. This is especially important in this case, because not only is this true as a general principle, but specifically as regards Russia. Our interference with Russian elections (actual interference, not a few twitter posts) is substantial and has been well-documented. >Last winter Yeltsin's approval ratings were in the single digits. There are many reasons for his change in fortune, but a crucial one has remained a secret. For four months, a group of American political consultants clandestinely participated in guiding Yeltsin's campaign. http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,136204,00.html http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,136204,...