May 12, 2020
MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey
The Beast That Won’t Die: “The Russia Hoax” (Again) and What is Really Behind It
Once again Tucker Carlson on his prime time program, Tucker Carlson Tonight [May 11, 2020]—like Beowulf in the classic Anglo-Saxon saga against the monster Grendel—went to battle against the seemingly eternal Russia Hoax and its minions. Indeed, there are parallels between the mythic creature Grendel, "a creature of darkness, exiled from happiness and accursed of God, the destroyer and devourer of our human kind," and the media and political apparatchiks who continue without ceasing to foist upon us what may be the most horrific myth of our history, but also the most destructive perversion of what is left of our constitutional system.
At the very end of this column, I include a portion of Carlson’s opening monologue; I urge you to watch the first twelve minutes. And if you are hardy, then the following segment with former Representative Trey Gowdy who still defends, albeit a bit half-heartedly these days (and with some visible embarrassment), the unsupported narrative that “the Russians interfered with our elections.” Apparently, even supposedly well-thinking “conservatives” cannot let go of this theme, for to do so would be to admit that the Establishment elites not only got it wrong, but did so for nefarious and utterly self-serving reasons.
Over the past three and a half years I have written a dozen columns on the Russia Hoax and its deeper meanings. So, in a lead up to the Youtube of Carlson’s May 11 program, I offer excerpts of two previous essays, which summarize this background. These essays look at “why” this immense hoax was generated in the first place, what are the real reasons behind it, and, finally, what does it mean for us here in the United States.
First, I quote from MY CORNER, April 26, 2019, Did the Russian Really Interfere in Our Elections? If so, how?:
“The one issue that both Democrats and most Republicans seem to agree on, the issue which both say is ‘proven conclusively’ by Mueller is that the Russians ‘attempted to interfere and did interfere’ in our 2016 election.
“Interesting, is it not, that the Republicans who zealously defend the president and attack the obviously political nature of the Mueller Report would accept, as if on faith and without question, the accusations of Russian interference, also contained in the report?
“Turn on Fox and watch, say, Martha MacCallum (e.g., ‘The Story,’ April 24, 2019) declare ‘we all know now without doubt that the Russians tried to interfere’ in our elections, or listen to most any GOP congressman repeat that same narrative with unquestioning certitude.
“But that assertion—is it truly backed up factually? Where is the evidence, other than largely questionable information sourced from our largely discredited intelligence agencies which, as we know, had a determined goal of overthrowing the president by any means possible?
“Almost three years have passed from the first fake news that appeared in the media on the subject of ‘Russian meddling’ and ‘collusion,’ a concerted effort launched to discredit first the Donald Trump candidacy and then sabotage his presidency, including his efforts to stabilize Russian-American relations.
“As proof of Russian actions, the Mueller Report cites the indictments against twenty-five Russian citizens who were cited for attempted ‘interference’ (those Russians are, let us add, quite conveniently out of the country and thus not prosecutable). When those indictments were issued, Russia pointed out the flimsy, unsupported and transparently made-up nature of the charges, and demanded that, first, the Obama administration and then current American authorities, provide conclusive proof. Such requests were summarily rebuffed.
“In order to clarify the cases and evaluate the evidence, the Russian government proposed reestablishing the bilateral expert group on information security that the Obama Administration had terminated, which could have served as a platform for conversation on these matters. The American side was also invited to send Justice Department officials to Russia to attend the proposed public questioning of Russian citizens accused by Mueller. Additionally, Russia offered to publicize the exchanges between the two countries following the publication of the accusations of cyberattacks, exchanges which were conducted through existing channels during the ‘hot period’ between October 2016 and January 2017.
“Our government refused every offer.
“A careful analysis, in fact, fails to show any substantial evidence of Russian cyberattacks and attempts to ‘subvert democracy.’ By various estimates, approximately $160,000—a paltry sum—was spent by the Russians during 2016 on cyber activities in the United States. Does anyone wish to discover and compare the amount the Chinese Communists or the Saudis would have expended during the same period, for their continued influence and power in Washington and inside-the-Beltway?”
“…the tragedy of Russia’s past is so enormous that things could never have been different…. I was trying to figure out how people turn away from democracy: we thought Russia was just going to be democratic because what else would it be? We didn’t realize that people can choose not to have democracy, they can have reasons to turn away from freedom. The corrupt Yeltsin regime brought social and political anarchy, leading many to want someone stronger. Russians didn’t reckon with the past state terror, instead people wanted to go back to an imaginary past that was simpler [implying that Vladimir Putin took advantage of these sentiments, going back to time of the tsars and when the Orthodox Church was supreme]. When Putin says he’s protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine, he means he is protecting them from the many terrible things that come from the progressive West… homosexuals marching in from Brussels.”
This is the view now prevailing in the West, shared by the post-November 2016 “farther Left” and the Russophobic Neocon Right. It is the view that is telegraphed continually by most pundits on “conservative” Fox News (e.g., Brian Kilmeade) to its millions of viewers (with the exception of Tucker Carlson who has featured on several occasions the more rational perspective of Princeton Professor Stephen Cohen). It is spewed forth by semi-literate congressmen like Adam Kinzinger and Dan Crenshaw, and even tacitly accepted by those who should know better (e.g., former Congressman Trey Gowdy). It is grounded in an essentially Progressivist vision of global egalitarianism and premised on a dangerously faulty ideological reading of history.
I continued with the January 1, 2019, MY CORNER:
“As Professor Paul Gottfried has written in The American Thinker, November 17, 2017:
“It is rather the attempt to view him [Putin] and his regime as an extension of the Soviet Communist one. This is a glaring misreading of the cultural and political changes in Russia since the 1990s. There isn’t much evidence that Putin was ever anything but a Russian nationalist, who worked for the Soviet rulers of the Russian empire before they fell from power. Identifying Putin as a left-over Soviet Communist is misleading, and perhaps like characterizing Mussolini in 1930 as a Marxist, because he was a socialist before the Great War. This linkage between Putin and Soviet Communism seems especially popular among geriatric Cold Warriors who may already be nostalgic for the Cold War. It also plays well among a GOP base that like to imagine that they’re still confronting the ‘evil empire’ that President Reagan famously denounced.” [“Misreading Putin,” The American Thinker, November 25, 2017
“But, as Gottfried, Buchanan and Cohen have noted, much has changed since the days of the ‘Evil Empire.’ And now the ‘united front’ attack on post-Communist Russia centers on the Russian ‘sins,’ its multiple failures in ‘human rights’ and ‘equality.’ It is a position shared by Neoconservative writers like homosexual activist James Kirchick and Max Boot, as well as hard-core Leftists:
“This Russian despot, complains Kirchik, has banned the presentation of homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle in Russian schools and has openly associated gay marriage with Western decadence. Putin has also gone out of his way to advance the of the Russian Orthodox faith and attack current Western notions of secularism. At the same time he is refurbishing Orthodox monasteries and churches throughout Russia and boasts that in the last three years atheism has declined in his country by 50%. In June, 2015 Putin announced his intention of ‘ what is left of the Russian royal family in their ancestral residence.” [Gottfried, The American Thinker]
“The times have changed—and changed dramatically and radically since the Gipper told thrilled Berliners: ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.’ Now Vladimir Putin embraces Orthodoxy, attends Christmas Midnight Mass in the village of Turginovo
“This, then, is the world…turned upside down.
“Although the administration of President Trump must always assert American interests first as primary in how we approach world affairs, and certainly this may well portend competition and differences with post-Communist Russia, it is past time that our nation re-examine its relations with Putin and Moscow. As opposed to the ‘two faces’ of the xenophobic Russophobic common front, it is to the benefit of our country and those who hold to the traditional vision of our old republic to seek cooperation and alliance with a new ‘old’ Russia which defends the traditions and beliefs we also hold and which helped create our nation.”
With these thoughts and meditations in mind, I pass on Tucker Carlson’s latest sword thrust at the Russian Hoax Grendel. Assuredly, it will require many more such slashings; indeed, it will require a virtual counter-revolution, a rallying of those old “pitchfork brigades” which Buchanan summoned back in 1992. Either that—either the “normals” I have spoken about previously awaken and fight back with every ounce of strength, intelligence and grace that God may give us—or what we have inherited over the past twenty centuries, our Christian civilization, is finished.
To paraphrase the Duke of Wellington at the Battle of Waterloo, “I trust God will have mercy on us, for our enemies won’t!”