Jeff Blankfort speaks with Parry about his most recent articles, “The Politics Behind Russia-gate” and “When Disinformation is Truth,” in which he lays into the liberal media for abandoning journalistic professionalism and ethics to hop upon the neocon bandwagon in going after Russia for interfering in the US election without waiting for or presenting evidence that it actually occurred.
Using MSNBC's Rachel Maddow as an example, he points out that her McCarthy-style Russia bashing has been terrific for the network's ratings, while warning that using this as a device to get Trump impeached could lead not just to an escalation of the new Cold War but the launching of a hot one which would be the war that would end all wars and the world as we know it.
Parry recounts how before he and his colleague Brian Barger broke the stories about Iran-Contra and the drug trafficking associated with it back in the 1980s, they assembled the evidence to back up what they wrote. By contrast, liberals in the media like Maddow or the New Yorker editor David Remnick, accept the intelligence agencies general conclusions about Russian interference in the presidential election without presenting or demanding facts despite the DNI's James Clapper's admission that there was no evidence showing collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians.
Kagan also points out that while none of the experts in the US gave Trump a chance to win the White House, it was unlikely that Putin and the Russians would be any more knowledgeable on the subject and that while Putin may have quietly preferred a Trump victory, the last thing he needed was to be seen as pushing for it.
He concludes that it is preferable for those who supported Clinton to blame Putin and the Russians for Trump's victory than examine what the Democrats did wrong by the nature of her campaign as well as making her the candidate in the first place.