Tulsi Gabbard to NWO news: They’re fake

…by Jonas E. Alexis

You just can’t make this stuff up. Lachlan Markay and Sam Stein of the Daily Beast have recently published an article arguing incoherently that Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard “is being boosted by Putin’s apologists.” Who are some of those Russian apologists?

Well, one of them is none other than Stephen F. Cohen! Why would Markay and Stein would even suggest that Cohen is a Putin’s apologist? Simple.

Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University, is one of the finest minds when it comes to issues related to Russia and the United States. Why is that?

Cohen is a contrarian. As such, he doesn’t care about what the mass media establishment and puppets of the New World Order say anymore. He is an old man, so he is not worrying about advancing his career for political or financial gain. He’s already tenured, and what seems to matter to him is truth, not a wicked ideology which New World Order agents have perpetuated throughout much of the world.

Cohen is also the author of books such as War with Russia: From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate, Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold War, Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia, and Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution: A Political Biography 1888-1938.

“There is a circumstance in this country,” Cohen said, “where we have had no debate about whether American policy has contributed” to the ideological conflict between the United States and Russia. Why is that? Well, the Powers That Be and the media do not allow people to have a clear thought in their heads. They want to keep the masses under their control. Cohen declared in 2016:

“The orthodox, consensual, political media establishment view is that only Putin is to blame. We are completely innocent. We never did a single thing in the 25 years since the end of the Soviet Union to bring about a cold war. That isn’t true. But if we try to discuss it…then comes the cries, ‘Puppet of the Kremlin, agent of Putin.’”

Cohen again declared: “This guy [Putin] gives more interviews, more speeches, it’s all available in English” and “no one paid any attention to what Putin said.” Absolutely correct.

Cohen continued to drop atomic bombs in the New World Order camp by saying that “The unprecedented allegation that the Kremlin ‘attacked America’ and ‘colluded’ with its president in order to elect him is based on two documents devoid of facts or logic.”[1]

Cohen again declared:

“Amid this daily frenzy, it’s often forgotten that Russiagate’s ‘core narrative,’ as one of its most devout and prominent promoters terms it, was inspired by, and continues to be based on, two documents, both published in January 2017: an ‘Intelligence Community Assessment’ and the anti-Trump ‘dossier’ compiled by a retired UK intelligence officer, Christopher Steele.

“The ‘core narrative’ of both was, of course, that Putin’s Kremlin had intervened in the 2016 presidential election—essentially an ‘attack on America’—in order to damage Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and abet Trump’s.

“At the time, a few critics questioned the authenticity of the ICA and the dossier, but for political and media Russiagaters, they instantly became, and have remained, canons, despite their deficit of facts and logic. Reread today, in light of what is now known, they are examples of the adage ‘rubbish in, rubbish out.’”[2]

Cohen cited one former intelligence officer saying that the so-called dossier was a “deliberate misrepresentation’—the ICA, by using the term ‘Community,’ gave the impression that its findings were the consensus of all ‘17 US intelligence agencies,’ even though it was signed by only three (the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA) and by the overseeing director of national intelligence, James Clapper.”[3]

The ICA, according to Cohen, “provided almost no facts for its ‘assessment,’” Despite the fact that the media and political whores like Megyn Kelly cited the ICA as evidence that Russia hacked the US election. Even Times magazine, which was perpetuating the same narrative, reluctantly agreed that “hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims” was missing. The ICA finally admitted at the end of their so-called assessment that there was indeed no factual evidence to support its claims. They said:

“Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact.”[4]

The Daily Beast refers to Cohen as a “prominent Kremlin sympathizer.” And if you support Cohen, or if Cohen happens to support some of your views, then by definition you are a Kremlin sympathizer! Where did these people get this kind of reasoning? Listen to this:

“Gabbard is one of her party’s more Russia-friendly voices in an era of deep Democratic suspicion of the country over its efforts to tip the 2016 election in favor of President Donald Trump. Her financial support from prominent pro-Russian voices in the U.S. is a small portion of the total she’s raised. But it still illustrates the degree to which she deviates from her party’s mainstream on such a contentious and high-profile issue.

“Data on Gabbard’s financial supporters only covers the first three months of the year. In that time, her campaign received just over $1,000 from Cohen, arguably the nation’s leading intellectual apologist for Russian president Vladimir Putin.”[5]

In other words, as the Neocon magazine National Review puts it, Gabbard is now “accepting donations from ‘Russophiles.’”[6] It is just plain baloney. But it gets worse. Here is another interesting “logic” from the Daily Beast:

“Though she has not courted their support, some prominent figures in the white nationalist community have flocked in Gabbard’s direction. David Duke, the former KKK leader, has heaped praise on her. And on several occasions, Richard Spencer, the avowed white supremacist, has tweeted favorably about her, including once again this week.”[7]

One needn’t be an intellectual or a thinker to realize that this formulation is ultimately dumb. What these people end up saying is that if you believe that the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, etc., have been a complete disaster for the United States and much of the world, and if David Duke supports you for saying that, then you must be a supporter of the KKK or something equally weird. How stupid can we get?

It is no wonder that Gabbard calls the Daily Beast article “Fake news. What I am focused on is what is in the best interest of the American people, what is in the best interest of our national security, keeping the American people safe.”[8]

Well said, Mrs. Gabbard.

• [1] Stephen F. Cohen, “Russiagate’s ‘Core Narrative’ Has Always Lacked Actual Evidence,” The Nation, June 20, 2018.
• [2] Ibid.
• [3] Ibid.
• [4] Ibid.
• [5] Lachlan Markay and Sam Stein, “Tulsi Gabbard’s Campaign Is Being Boosted by Putin Apologists,” Daily Beast, May 17, 2019.
• [6] Jim Geraghty, “Should We Be Worried About Candidates Accepting Donations from ‘Russophiles’?,” National Review, May 17, 2019.
• [7] Markay and Stein, “Tulsi Gabbard’s Campaign Is Being Boosted by Putin Apologists,” Daily Beast, May 17, 2019
• [8] David Beavers, “Gabbard calls unflattering report ‘fake news,’” Politico, May 19, 2019.

Jonas E. Alexis, Senior Editor

Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the book, Kevin MacDonald’s Metaphysical Failure: A Philosophical, Historical, and Moral Critique of Evolutionary Psychology, Sociobiology, and Identity Politics. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.

• Read the Latest Posts from Jonas >>>
• Read Jonas’ Archives (2004-2015) >>>