in ,

Why Both Republicans and Democrats Want Russia to Become the Enemy of Choice

To hate Russia has become dogma on both sides of the political aisle, in part because no politician has really wanted to confront the lesson of the 2016 election.

Authored by Philip Giraldi via The Strategic Culture Foundation:

One of the more interesting aspects of the nauseating impeachment trial in the Senate was the repeated vilification of Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. To hate Russia has become dogma on both sides of the political aisle, in part because no politician has really wanted to confront the lesson of the 2016 election, which was that most Americans think that the federal government is basically incompetent and staffed by career politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell who should return back home and get real jobs. Worse still, it is useless, and much like the one trick pony the only thing it can do is steal money from the taxpayers and waste it on various types of self-gratification that only politicians can appreciate. That means that the United States is engaged is fighting multiple wars against make-believe enemies while the country’s infrastructure rots and a host of officially certified grievance groups control the public space. It sure doesn’t look like Kansas anymore.

The fact that opinion polls in Europe suggest that many Europeans would rather have Vladimir Putin than their own hopelessly corrupt leaders is suggestive. One can buy a whole range of favorable t-shirts featuring Vladimir Putin on Ebay, also suggesting that most Americans find the official Russophobia narrative both mysterious and faintly amusing. They may not really be into the expressed desire of the huddled masses in D.C. to go to war to bring true U.S. style democracy to the un-enlightened.

One also must wonder if the Democrats are reading the tea leaves correctly. If they think that a slogan like “Honest Joe Biden will keep us safe from Moscow” will be a winner in 2020 they might again be missing the bigger picture. Since the focus on Trump’s decidedly erratic behavior will inevitably die down after the impeachment trial is completed, the Democrats will have to come up with something compelling if they really want to win the presidency and it sure won’t be the largely fictionalized Russian threat.

Nevertheless, someone should tell Congressman Adam Schiff, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, to shut up as he is becoming an international embarrassment. His “closing arguments” speeches last week were respectively two-and-a-half hours and ninety minutes long and were inevitably praised by the mainstream media as “magisterial,” “powerful,” and “impressive.” The Washington Post’s resident Zionist extremist Jennifer Rubin labeled it “a grand slam” while legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin called it “dazzling.” Gail Collins of the New York Times dubbed it “a great job” and added that Schiff is now “a rock star.” Daily Beast enthused that the remarks “will go down in history” and progressive activist Ryan Knight called it “a closing statement for the ages.” Hollywood was also on board with actress Debra Messing tweeting “I am in tears. Thank you Chairman Schiff for fighting for our country.”

Actually, a better adjective would have been “scary” and not merely due to its elaboration of the alleged high crimes and misdemeanors committed by President Trump, much of which was undeniably true even if not necessarily impeachable. It was scary because it was a warmongers speech, full of allusions to Russia, to Moscow’s “interference” in 2016, and to the ridiculous proposition that if Trump were to be defeated in 2020 he might not concede and Russia could even intervene militarily in the United States in support of its puppet. Schiff insisted that Trump must be removed now to “assure the integrity” of the 2020 election. He elaborated somewhat ambiguously that “The president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.”

Schiff also unleashed one of the most time honored but completely lame excuses for going to war, claiming that military assistance to Ukraine that had been delayed by Trump was essential for U.S. national security. He said “As one witness put it during our impeachment inquiry, the United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.”

Schiff, a lawyer who has never had to put his life on the line for anything and whose son sports a MOSSAD t-shirt, is one of those sunshine soldiers who finds it quite acceptable if someone else does the dying. Journalist Max Blumenthal observed that “Liberals used to mock Bush supporters when they used this jingoistic line during the war on Iraq. Now they deploy it to justify an imperialist proxy war against a nuclear power.” Aaron Mate at The Nation added that “For all the talk about Russia undermining faith in U.S. elections, how about Russiagaters like Schiff fear-mongering w/ hysterics like this? Let’s assume Ukraine did what Trump wanted: announce a probe of Burisma. Would that delegitimize a 2020 U.S. election? This is a joke.”

Over at Antiwar Daniel Lazare explains how the Wednesday speech was “a fear-mongering, sword-rattling harangue that will not only raise tensions with Russia for no good reason, but sends a chilling message to [Democratic Party] dissidents at home that if they deviate from Russiagate orthodoxy by one iota, they’ll be driven from the fold.”

The orthodoxy that Lazare was writing about includes the established Nancy Pelosi/Chuck Schumer narrative that Russia invaded “poor innocent Ukraine” in 2014, that it interfered in the 2016 election to defeat Hillary Clinton, and that it is currently trying to smear Joe Biden. One might add to that the growing consensus that Russia can and will interfere again in 2020 to help Trump. Absent from the narrative is the part how the U.S. intervened in Ukraine first to remove its government and the fact that there is something very unsavory about Joe Biden’s son taking a high-paying sinecure board position from a notably corrupt Ukrainian oligarch while his father was Vice President and allegedly directing U.S. assistance to a Ukrainian anti-corruption effort.

On Wednesday, Schiff maintained that “Russia is not a threat … to Eastern Europe alone. Ukraine has become the de facto proving ground for just the types of hybrid warfare that the twenty-first century will become defined by: cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, efforts to undermine the legitimacy of state institutions, whether that is voting systems or financial markets. The Kremlin showed boldly in 2016 that with the malign skills it honed in Ukraine, they would not stay in Ukraine. Instead, Russia employed them here to attack our institutions, and they will do so again.” Not surprisingly, if one substitutes the “United States” for “Russia” and “Kremlin” and changes “Ukraine” to Iran or Venezuela, the Schiff comment actually becomes much more credible.

The compulsion on the part of the Democrats to bring down Trump to avoid having to deal with their own failings has brought about a shift in their established foreign policy, placing the neocons and their friends back in charge. For Schiff, who has enthusiastically supported every failed American military effort since 9/11, today’s Russia is the Soviet Union reborn, and don’t you forget it pardner! Newsweek is meanwhile reporting that the U.S. military is reading the tea leaves and is gearing up to fight the Russians. Per Schiff, Trump must be stopped as he is part of a grand Russian conspiracy to overthrow everything the United States stands for. If the Kremlin is not stopped now, it’s first major step, per Schiff, will be to “remake the map of Europe by dint of military force.”

Donald Trump’s erratic rule has certainly dismayed many of his former supporters, but the Democratic Party is offering nothing but another helping of George W. Bush/Barack Obama establishment war against the world. We Americans have had enough of that for the past nineteen years. Trump may indeed deserve to be removed based on his actions, but the argument that it is essential to do so because of Russia lurking is complete nonsense. Pretty scary that the apparent chief promoter of that point of view is someone who actually has power in the government, one Adam Schiff, head of the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!

Report

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Duran.

What do you think?

10
Leave a Reply

avatar
6 Comment threads
4 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
oldandjadedTheodrosInquiring MindEisenhower's 'inferred' warning:The Demons of Demos Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
paul
Guest
paul

No wonder Schiff goes down so well. They do like their pompous windbags in Foggy Bottom. And as pure unadulterated windbaggery goes, this was a tour de force.

Eric Zuesse
Member

The headline’s question isn’t even addressed in the article itself.

oldandjaded
Member

When I posted this
“…the following infantile tropes: China good. US Bad. Orange Man REALLY bad AND stupid. Tulsi good. Bernie good. Putin good, Erdogan bad. Jews evil. Israel bad.
Just imagine how many upvotes you could get if you posted a thread that included ALL of these tropes, hell it would probably crash the Duran.”
a couple days back, I was being satirical, not posting a “how-to” manual…But he’ll get plenty of love, if that sort of thing floats your boat.

Vera Gottlieb
Guest
Vera Gottlieb

How can “leaders” be so utterly ignorant and stupid!!! With their hatred and fanaticism they are bringing the entire world dangerously close to a world-wide conflict. And after the conflict is finished, there won’t be any Republicans or Democrats left.

The Demons of Demos
Guest
The Demons of Demos

That’s exactly how they become ‘leaders’, by appealing to the most common denominator of ignorance among the voting public.

Eisenhower's 'inferred' warning:
Guest
Eisenhower's 'inferred' warning:

To become a ‘legitimate’ leader of either party, one must pander to the military-industrial complex. Pandering implies creating enemies in perpetuity, real or imagined. Of course, when one ‘creates’ an enemy out of thin air, the subject often acts accordingly. Self-fulfilling prophecies and all.

Read It and Weep
Guest
Read It and Weep

Of course that’s the agenda of both parties. Their complicity with the White Helmets pro-jihadi provocations is exactly the same as their complicity with the pro-fascist provocations during Maidan. Read how Obama’s people gave instructions on how to trigger their own agenda in Ukraine by sacrificing a hundred lives at Maidan, much as Obama’s ‘red line’ triggered jihadi false flag chemical attacks in Syria. Trump is no less complicit in furthering the cause. Neither is Canada for that matter……. “Oleh Tiahnybok, who was one of the top Maidan leaders and the far-right Svoboda party leader, and Ruslan Koshulynsky, the deputy… Read more »

Inquiring Mind
Guest
Inquiring Mind

Interesting. Was it McCain that told Tyahnybok to sacrifice a hundred lives? They were particularly chummy.comment image

Theodros
Guest
Theodros

Most Americans deeply believe in the anti-Russian propaganda disseminated by the US media daily. The overwhelming majority of Americans, over 99% of them, including high-ranking politicians and diplomats are alarmingly ignorant about Russia, Ukraine, Syria and about the rest of the world in general. Their only source of information is the state department and US propaganda channels and their American “exceptionalism” ideological delusions which they fanatically believe. This will only make things more dangerous in the coming years!

oldandjaded
Member

The question that starts the article off isn’t valid, the neo-cons (and I see the dems as neo-cons as well, there is nothing left about them, all the SJW BULLSHIT is just that, BULLSHIT and is simply misdirection away from corporate socialist economic policy and military hegemony for profit foreign policy that both sides of the aisle have fully supported at least as far back as Bill Clinton on the Dem side, and well, since Abraham Lincoln on the Republican side. They don’t want Russia “to become” the enemy, Russia always HAS ALWAYS BEEN the “designated enemy” of the neo-cons.

Ambassador Sondland Gets The Axe Hours After Vindman Twins Escorted Out Of White House

Francis Boyle: Wuhan Coronavirus is an Offensive Biological Warfare Weapon