Accusing people of working for Russia has a very ugly history in US politics.

[redgreenandblue]

Last edited Wed Oct 23, 2019, 11:36 AM - Edit history (1)

And one that is intimately tied to the history of institutional racism, opposition to organized labor and assaults on academia and a free press. I am very disappointed to see Democrats embrace such rhetoric.

On edit: I intentionally posted this in the primaries forum.

[comradebillyboy]

1. If the nesting dolls fit...

[Mike Nelson]

2. I would only add...

... I don't believe Hillary accused Tulsi of working for Russia. However, others have... I don't know if it's true... but I do this it's very likely Russia will assist in promoting a candidate to drain votes from the Democratic nominee.

[MrsCoffee]

3. Right, because that is exactly what Democrats are embracing.

Democrats are not using racism, opposing organized labor or assaulting academia and free press. They aren’t tossing out accusations randomly at political opponents. To pretend that’s what is going on is ridiculous.

You can’t use that defense when our elections and democracy are under attack. If someone is openly sympathetic to those attacking us, and openly hostile to those trying to protect our democracy, they should expect to be called out and held accountable.

[LAS14]

19. Hillary didn't accuse anyone of working for the Russians. See posts 4 and 18. nt

[hlthe2b]

4. In the words of counterintelligence expert Malcolm Nance

There is a difference between an "asset" and a "useful idiot". One can become a useful pawn (I won't use the term "idiot') based on favorable acts and/or policy positions for an adversary without being paid or "working for" that adversary.

Link to tweet

I won't apologize for seeing Gabbard as fitting into that latter category (useful pawn, not a working "asset" ). She has provided the evidence herself.

[zaj]

5. Are you joking? We have the Manchirian Candidate in the oval office...

... and Putin is running our foreign policy right now.

And this is the biggest concern you can focus on today?

Our single biggest problem is that not enough people are being widely accused as being (knowing or not) Russian assets..

[Anon-C]

6. I agree. I am sure you and many others here would be disheartened.

I again implore you and them to rationally view the greater context that exists in fact. Gabbard and others on the left have and are benefiting from Russian and other govs money and active Cy-war measures.

Are the people criticizing the candidates receiving this support because they are reactionary, regressive and inclined to Russophobia? You all know that is not the case.

Any attempt to frame this issue of calling out Gabbard without that context is beyond disingenuousness.

[ancianita]

7. It's unfair, because Russia knows how to influence people without their knowing it. So to attack

people for their "intent" is counterproductive. No one wakes up and thinks "I'll be a tool of some mafia today."

Yet, once they are shown Russian political patterns, laundering machinations, and the facts of Russia's historical intent, their presence in less organized areas of this society, and THEN they still remain a tool, then they have chosen.

Dupes are everywhere. Russian dupes aren't special that way.

[hlthe2b]

8. BTW, I think it "ugly"to defend mass murderers and genocidal authoritarians

as she clearly has done. (Not to mention defense of Trump's Muslim ban and a whole litany of "other ugly" )

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/tulsi-gabbards-syria-record-shows-why-she-cant-be-president/2019/08/01/f804c790-b497-11e9-8949-5f36ff92706e_story.html

https://www.thenation.com/article/tulsi-gabbard-president-foreign-islam/

[ritapria]

9. Joe McCarthy was a drunken Republican Senator From Wisconsin

A darling of The Right Wing ...Even Ike was afraid of him ...The Donald Trump of his Time …. Of Course Trump is a far more dangerous .. figure …. He received a fake degree from the Electoral College and has been engaging in gross malpractice to a nation held hostage to his every mad caprice ………….

[DanTex]

10. So we're supposed to ignore Trump's collusion with Russia because of McCarthyism? Really?

We have a president who, at the very very least, won due to considerable assistance from the Russian government. In office, he has threatened to sell out Ukraine, a country Russia is invading, in order to get dirt on his opponents. And in Syria, he has let the previously allied Kurds be slaughtered, a move that clearly benefits Russia's interests.

We should just pretend this isn't happening?

[Baltimike]

11. Just like accusing liars of lying or traitors of treason

there *always* seems to be a moratorium on what the right wing is pulling.

[Uncle Joe]

12. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread redgreenandblue.

[LanternWaste]

13. I get it... you're shamed by the Democratic reponse to Trump and Russia

I get it... you're shamed by the Democratic reponse to Trump's being a useful idiot to and an asset of Russian interest.

It is however, accurate.

Unless of course, you're talking about the Democratic reponse to someone else entirely and Russia, in which case... space provided free of charge below to insert distinction lacking relevant difference.

[kcr]

14. Well, it's disappointing to see disingenuous false equivalance

used to bash Dems and defend the GOP posted on DU. Guess not everyone gets what they want in life.

[beastie boy]

15. Case in point: Trump. Very ugly, and it is making history.

But I understand this is not what you are talking about, forgive the sarcasm. I can only guess that you are referring to Tulsi Gabbard and are trying to apply historical context to accusations against her. If I am correct in my assumption, let me say that she was not accused of working for Russia. She was accused of accepting Russia's assistance in her presidential campaign. So far, we only have one historical example of this happening, hence my sarcasm in the header.

If, on the other hand, your post is a general comment on a series of historical precedents, and especially if you include accusations of being a member of the Communist Party into the definition of "working for Russia", I totally agree with you.

On edit: I still have no clue what any Democrats have to do with any of it.

[Nitram]

16. RG&B we are living at a point in history when the president of the United States and many in his

administration are known to have "worked for Russia" for political and financial gain. It is not a hypothetical, it is not an insult - it is a fact. No one should be accused without evidence, but we know the Russia is now actively recruiting and influencing Americans to help them further both their disinformation campaigns and their attempts to cast doubt on the integrity of our democracy and our voting system. This has nothing to do with an attack on organized labor, academia, or the free press. This is not McCarthyism. If you feel someone has been falsely maligned, then please present your evidence.

[ismnotwasm]

17. McCarthyism was directed towards any thought

To have Communist ties. And you’re right. It was ugly and ruined many lives. Ronald Reagan participated in it.

Russia is a known actor in disrupting our election process. It’s a probable fact, that with money and memes, they successfully promoted certain candidates over others. It easily researchable.

So what’s your point?

[LAS14]

18. Hillary should have avoided the word "asset,"

even though it was probably the most accurate word available. It's too sophisticated for most of her audience to understand that an "asset" doesn't have to be a spy or a traitor. We shouldn't be wasting time attacking Gabbard's intentions, just her policies and the threat of a 3rd party candidate. An asset is just very useful for whatever reasons. The link below is very helpful.

Following its established playbook, Russia has increasingly interfered in the politics of traditional opponents throughout the West in the hopes of undermining democracy and stability from within. Donald Trump was a political novice with a longstanding public admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin and a penchant for advancing conspiracy theories. He espoused isolationist policies and had potentially compromising financial relationships with Kremlin-aligned oligarchs. He also had few apparent scruples and was running against a woman Putin considers among his main adversaries. Trump was simply an ideal candidate for the Kremlin to back. There is also reason to suspect that Russia began cultivating Trump as an asset long before his campaign for president, a common tactic the Kremlin pursues with people it suspects may be useful in the future.


https://themoscowproject.org/collusion-chapter/chapter-3/

Edit: And here is another place to see the definition of "asset."

Russia's success in attacking our democracy is not tied to their ability to recruit Gabbard (or anyone else) to parrot Russian talking points. Rather, their success comes with their ability to influence and manipulate, through amplification, certain messages and candidates that create division. As we saw in 2016, Russia was able to aid Donald Trump by using tailored and manipulated social media campaigns, without even the knowledge or direction of the Trump campaign itself. After all, Russia's goal in 2016 was the delegitimization of our elections; they did not need to coordinate with Trump to make that happen. That's the disturbing parallel with Gabbard: Russia can seek to support her, without her knowledge.


https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard-being-used-russians-former-us-double-agent-evidence-clear-opinion-1466750

[Claritie Pixie]

20. Sorry you're disappointed. Your post is yet another vague attack on Dems.

If you don't understand Russian active measures and the objective they support, I can't help you.