I’m flabbergasted. Peter Baker of The New York Times is acknowledging that yes, the Republican Party is now seemingly the Party of Putin.
As Baker wrote Thursday:
With the help of a populist former Fox News star and America’s richest man, Mr. Putin has gained a platform to justify his actions even as Russian and American journalists languish in his prisons. His favored candidate is poised to win the Republican presidential nomination while Congress weighs abandoning Ukraine to the tender mercies of Russian invaders.
Mr. Putin’s filibuster-style appearance with Tucker Carlson on Elon Musk’s social media platform amid the security aid debate on Capitol Hill driven by Donald J. Trump offers a moment to reflect on the head-spinning transformation of American politics in recent years. A Republican Party that once defined itself through muscular resistance to Russia has turned increasingly toward a form of neo-isolationism with, in some quarters, strains of sympathy for Moscow.
“In some quarters?” That’s awfully mushy, isn’t it? And “strains of sympathy” seems like an awfully weak characterization of the reality.
Have you paid attention to the “debate” about Ukraine aid in the Republican caucus, Peter?
But maybe we should just let Baker be Baker! Oh, wait! He still has some concerns.
Waiting in the wings is Mr. Trump, determined to win back his old office. While Robert S. Mueller’s investigators in 2019 found no criminal conspiracy between Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin’s Russia during the 2016 campaign, the former president’s enigmatic affinity for the Russian ruler remains pronounced and, to many, still baffling.
“Enigmatic affinity?” Perhaps Mr. Baker should spend more time reading his own publication. In 2019, The New York Times found the following:
Donald J. Trump and 18 of his associates had at least 140 contacts with Russian nationals and WikiLeaks, or their intermediaries, during the 2016 campaign and presidential transition, according to a New York Times analysis.
But “no criminal conspiracy” was found—just 140 innocent contacts! Pretty “enigmatic!” Nothing to see here, amirite?
Not that the Senate actually investigated three years ago, or anything.
The nearly 1,000-page report outlines the “breathtaking level of contacts between Trump officials and Russian government operatives that is a very real counterintelligence threat to our elections,” Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the committee’s top Democrat, said in a statement.
Guess you just disregarded those “contacts” before you wrote this piece, Peter. But really, not sure how Trump’s “affinity” to Putin could be “enigmatic” or “baffling” at this point. Trump adores Putin, very probably owes something to Putin, and wants to emulate Putin. Is that really so “enigmatic?” Or “baffling?”
What baffles you, Peter? Is it just impossible for you to wrap your head around the fact that the current Republican presidential frontrunner is almost certainly an abject Putin stooge? And that his party is following him straight down the rabbit hole?
Or Is that just too much for you to comprehend?
Thanks for nothing, and seven years too late.
Editor’s note; This story’s original headline, “Breaking: Peter Baker of The New York Times discovers Republicans are in bed with Putin,” has been changed to better reflect the story’s snarky nature.