The poster isn’t wrong, though. Whether or not the claims are true, the claimant should sort their own problems out first.
I'd like to encourage you to read a little more to try and gain a deeper perspective on how issues are framed.
The point is precisely about framing, this isn’t a moderated debate between equal parties we’re talking about. The material incentives of the speaker are essential in understanding their motivation.
US proxies can speak the truth (in the strictest sense) and still mislead through the manipulation of context and framing. And said speech can further the interests of extracting profits from the global south.
I just don't understand your suggestion the US "sort their own problems out first".
If this were a court, do you think the judge should drop the whole SolarWinds case against Russia because of Obama's actions in the Middle-East/Africa?
With guns pointed at us the US makes claims, usually to undermine any efforts to resist the threat.
Obama's decisions in Africa do not justify anyone hacking SolarWinds.
Most parents won't allow their children to get away with passing the blame like this, let alone a court of law.
Hypocrisy is merely a symptom.