Hillary Clinton decided to use her name and allies to smear Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI). Tulsi endorsed Bernie Sanders in 2016. Clinton floated this insane theory that Rep. Gabbard was being groomed by the Russians to mount a third-party run to ensure a Trump victory in 2020. There is zero evidence to support this allegation. She also went after Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, whom some in the Clinton camp think cost Lady Macbeth votes as well. It’s very clear that Hillary still hasn’t moved on from 2016, and the same could be said for her allies in the party. It’s sad. But this descent into madness isn’t outside the mainstream of liberal audiences.
While Rolling Stone suffered a knifing to the kidneys and heart over the University of Virginia rape story that turned out to be a total hoax which led to the magazine being sued and found guilty of libel, its analysis of the Russian agent paranoia that had engulfed the Democratic Party was pretty spot on. In short, the Democratic Party position on this subject is that we’re all Russian agents now. It’s ironic in two ways. First, the so-called intellectual elite, those who think that rural Americans and those without college degrees are trash, falling victim and being susceptible to digesting such tin foil hat garbage is priceless. These condescending and utterly revolting people appear to be so incapable of understanding why they lost in 2016 they’ve resorted to InfoWars-like cuckoo theories over why Trump is where he is at present. Second, remember when Democrats laughed at Mitt Romney about Russia being our biggest geopolitical foe? This was anachronistic, right? Well, post-2016, the Left has their own red scare brewing their minds, driving them insane, and leaving them spewing total insanity to the masses. The Russians were a joke in 2012, and now they’re everywhere. Oh, man—there is not enough popcorn for this show (via Rolling Stone):
Recommended
Hillary Clinton is nuts. She’s also not far from the Democratic Party mainstream, which has been pushing the same line for years.
Less than a week before Clinton’s outburst, the New York Times — once a symbol of stodgy, hyper-cautious reporting — ran a feature called, “What, Exactly, is Tulsi Gabbard Up To?” The piece speculated about the “suspicious activity” surrounding Gabbard’s campaign, using quotes from the neoconservative think-tank, the Alliance For Securing Democracy, to speculate about Gabbard’s Russian support.
[…]
Neoconservative-turned-#Resistance hero David Frum blasted Trump for defending Stein and Gabbard, noting sarcastically, “He was supposed to pretend they were not all on the same team.” Ana Navarro on CNN said, “When both the Russians and Trump support someone, be wary.” An MSNBC panel noted, in apparent seriousness, that Gabbard “never denied being a Russian asset.” CNN media critic Brian Stelter tried to suggest Hillary only seemed wacko thanks to a trick of the red enemy, saying, “It feels like a disinformation situation where the Russians want this kind of disinformation.”
[…]
Everyone is foreign scum these days. Democrats spent three years trying to prove Donald Trump is a Russian pawn. Mitch McConnell is “Moscow Mitch.” Third party candidates are a Russian plot. The Bernie Sanders movement is not just a wasteland of racist and misogynist “Bros,” but — according to intelligence agencies and mainstream pundits alike — the beneficiary of an ambitious Russian plot to “stoke the divide” within the Democratic Party. The Joe Rogan independents attracted to the mild antiwar message of Tulsi Gabbard are likewise traitors and dupes for the Kremlin.
If you’re keeping score, that’s pretty much the whole spectrum of American political thought, excepting MSNBC Democrats. What a coincidence!
[…]
The #Resistance has come up with all sorts of words for such fifth-columnists and deviationists: they are “false-balancers” or “false equivalencers,” “neo-Naderites,” “purity-testers,” “both-sidesists,” “whataboutists,” “horseshoe theorists,” “Russia skeptics” or “Russia denialists,” and “anti-anti-Trumpers.” Such heretics are all ultimately seen as being on “team Putin.”
This witch-hunting insanity isn’t just dangerous, it’s a massive breach from reality.
Granted, Matt Taibbi, who wrote the piece, isn’t complimentary of Trump at all—but he does note that his 2016 win was due to years of brewing anger and distrust over the political establishment. You lost because you suck pretty much—and the Democrats have yet to learn that lesson.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member