The Left’s New McCarthyism

by Jeffrey T. Kuhner

The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming! This is the latest cry from the liberal media. Having failed to stop President-elect Donald Trump, the left is now claiming he won because the Russians illegally interfered in the 2016 election. In other words, liberals are now peddling the fiction that he owes his victory to Russia’s strongman Vladimir Putin—thereby making Trump a vassal of the Kremlin.
 For decades, progressives have preached the lie that the 1950s was dominated by “McCarthyism,” a supposed reckless witch hunt of communist traitors in government and Hollywood. The left has never forgiven Wisconsin Sen. Joseph McCarthy for launching his crusade. Liberals have repeatedly ridiculed the anti-communist Republican, claiming he espoused ludicrous conspiracy theories of Moscow controlling agents and subverting America from within. (The fact that McCarthy was a patriot and eventually proven right on almost all of his allegations means nothing to the anti-American left—what matters is perpetuating the myth of “McCarthyism”).
 Yet, liberals are now pushing their own version of McCarthyism: a Kremlin-inspired conspiracy to prevent Hillary Clinton from winning the presidency. In a recent article, The Washington Post reports the CIA in a “secret” assessment blames Russia for hacking into the Democratic National Committee’s e-mails, including those of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair John Podesta, which were later published by Wikileaks. According to the CIA, the goal was clear: To tilt the election toward Trump because Putin wanted an ally, not a ferocious nemesis, in the White House. These bogus claims have been picked up by the national media, the Democrats, President Obama and Beltway Republicans, such as John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Many in the Senate are vowing a “complete investigation” into Russia’s supposed “interference” in the 2016 election. In short, the latest establishment narrative is: Trump didn’t win; Putin did.
 Liberals are clinging to the CIA “secret” conspiracy theory because it seeks to de-legitimize Trump. They want to undermine his moral authority and very legitimacy. Having lost the election, they seek to rewrite history—and whitewash their crimes and scandals. By blaming Putin, the media hope to deflect the public’s attention from one salient truth: They abandoned all pretense of objectivity and became a mouthpiece for the Hillary campaign. The 2016 campaign will be known as the year the mainstream media died. Journalists were transformed into Democratic operatives with a byline.  Whatever shred of credibility they had left was destroyed in an orgy of hysteria and rabid anti-Trump invective. Hence, in a pathetic attempt to restore their shattered standing the media want to convince everyone the real reason Hillary lost was because Trump, or rather Putin, stole it.
 This is pernicious nonsense. It is the ultimate “fake news” story. First, there is no evidence—none—for the CIA’s wild conclusions. In fact, the Post’s own story acknowledges that the FBI states there is no definitive evidence Russia was behind the DNC hacks. Second, Julian Assange has repeatedly stressed the Russians had nothing to do with the leaked emails. Third, common sense dictates skepticism: Why would the Russian intelligence services—one of the best in the world—hack into Hillary’s private server without any trace but when it came to the DNC leave fingerprints everywhere?        

 Moreover, there is a larger question—one that refutes the entire CIA-liberal-White House narrative: What would Putin have to fear from a Hillary presidency? The answer is simple: nothing. It was under Hillary’s tenure as secretary of state that Washington pushed the famous “reset button” with Moscow. The result was a resurgent Russia. Putin repeatedly steamrolled both Hillary and Obama—He modernized Russia’s nuclear arsenal, while forcing America to unilaterally reduce its nuclear warheads; he successfully propped up Syria’s Bashar Assad and marginalized U.S. influence in the Middle East; he annexed Crimea; he turned southeastern Ukraine into a Russian protectorate; and he helped Russia’s ally, Iran, cut a deal with the West that gave Tehran’s mullahs $150 billion in financial assistance and a path to the bomb. In short, Hillary Clinton supported or appeased every major Russian advance on the world stage. She wasn’t Putin’s nemesis, but his enabler.
 In fact, of the two major candidates, Putin had every reason to back Hillary (although he certainly will get along with Trump, especially on Syria and Islamic terrorism). Like all gangsters, Putin understands—and values—the importance of blackmail. The dirty little secret is that Moscow owns the Clintons. The Kremlin cut Bill Clinton a $500,000 check for a one-hour speech, while Putin’s allies poured tens of millions into the Clinton Foundation. The payback: Hillary, while secretary of state, approved the sale of vital U.S. uranium to companies with ties to Moscow. Rather than Trump being Putin’s puppet, the very opposite is true: The Kremlin (along with other foreign powers) would be calling the shots in a Clinton administration. He who pays the piper calls the tune. Hillary would be dancing to Putin’s every move or risk complete humiliation and exposure.
 Ultimately, Hillary herself was the reason she lost. Her corruption, arrogance and incompetence made her repulsive to Middle America. Wikileaks simply revealed what the media refused to: Clinton Inc. was a vast criminal network that needed to be swept into the dustbin of history. Liberals shouldn’t blame Putin for Hillary’s defeat. Instead, they have no one to blame but themselves. ♦    
 -Jeffrey T. Kuhner is the host of “The Kuhner Report” weekdays 12-3 pm EST on WRKO AM-680 in Boston.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *