The issue is not really about the Russian hacks, Vladimir Putin, the election or our intelligence agencies. It’s about determining what a man’s word is worth. This is an issue about the president-elect and his word.
During the campaign, from the primaries to the end of the presidential campaign, Donald Trump was called on the carpet for saying one thing and then claiming another. “I did not say that,” or “I was misinterpreted,” to the ultimate claim that we could not take his word “literally.”
Well, the man is about to become president, and in his latest demonstration of what his word is worth, the fact emerges that in 2010 he denounced Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as traitors worthy of being shot.
Today, in 2017, he loves Assange and WikiLeaks and uses them as references of the truth.
Yes, his followers, with their blind faith, will bring reference President Obama and Hillary Clinton to justify Trump, but in the end we are left with the question: What is this man’s word worth?
Mario Bacallao, Miami