CNN has aired a segment in which pundit Fareed Zakaria tells the network’s audience that the US president has “been unwilling to confront Putin in any way on any issue” and asks “will Venezuela be the moment when Trump finally ends his appeasement?”
The segment is a near-verbatim reading of Zakaria’s Washington Post columnfrom a couple of days prior, so that’s two massive prongs through which this false and pernicious narrative is being driven into mainstream consciousness claiming that the Trump administration has been far too dovish toward Moscow, rather than dangerously hawkish as is actually the case.
Zakaria begins his segment by describing the Trump administration’s (completely illegitimate) efforts to oust Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, then describing Russian efforts to counter this agenda as an attempt to “taunt the United States.” He then spends the rest of the segment asking if Trump will be brave and patriotic enough to further escalate tensions against a nuclear superpower. Zakaria concludes by implying that if Trump fails to increase world-threatening nuclear tensions to effect yet another US regime change intervention in yet another oil-rich country, it will be because he is a Kremlin agent.
“The big question for Washington is: Will it allow Moscow to make a mockery of another U.S. red line?” Zakaria said.
“The United States and Russia have taken opposing, incompatible stands on this issue. And as with Syria, there is a danger that, if Washington does not back its words with deeds, a year from now, we will be watching the consolidation of the Maduro regime, supported with Russian arms and money.”
Yes Fareed, there is a real “danger” that if the Trump administration you liberal pundits claim to oppose doesn’t act like the reckless madman you claim he is and tempt hot war with a nuclear superpower in order to effect regime change in a sovereign nation, that regime change agenda will fail. Very, very dangerous to not flirt with nuclear war over US resource control agendas.
“The administration has been tough on Russian involvement in Venezuela,” said Zakaria.
“Trump himself has even declared, ‘Russia has to get out.’ But that is an unusual statement from Trump, who has almost never criticized Putin and often sided with Russia on matters big and small.”
Zakaria goes on to cite the Obama administration’s ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul, who claimed in a Washington Post article that, contrary to the Trump administration’s claims of being hawkish toward Russia, “Even on small issues of little relevance to American national interests, Trump sides with Putin.”
“I have never alleged collusion or conspiracy between Russia and Trump, writing merely that we should wait to see what evidence special counsel Robert S. Mueller III presented,” Zakaria concludes, trying to shelter himself from the ridicule that is being directed at the debunked Russiagate conspiracy while simultaneously promoting it.
“But the real puzzle remains: Why has Trump been unwilling to confront Putin in any way on any issue? And will Venezuela be the moment when Trump finally ends his appeasement?”