New York Times said today that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “troll farm” helped get Trump elected in 2016 or “interfere in the 2016 presidential election.” Image that, after 78-year-old former Special Counsel Robert Mueller cleared 77-year-old former President Donald Trump with any wrongdoing with the Kremlin, the Times continues to spread its propaganda and disinformation. After all, how many articles did the Times write implicating Trump in some monstrous conspiracy with the Kremlin to win the 2016 presidential election? Do you think the Times would ever admit it fabricated untold numbers of stories to advance its agenda that Trump was an illegitimate president, essentially elected by Putin? No, the Times can’t admit to its own corruption, any more than the Department of Justice or FBI can admit to widespread “deep state” corruption in the administration of justice.
Telling the story of the late 64-year-old Wagner Chief Yevgeny Prigozhin, the Times wants the public to believe he was a true revolutionary, working from inside Russia to topple Putin’s dictatorship. Prigozhin admitted plenty of times he owed his success to Putin for his major catering contracts that enabled him to become a mini-oligarch to form his mercenary army to carry out missions for the Kremlin in Ukraine and Africa. Prigozhin enjoyed the confidence of Putin up until he had a nervous breakdown June 23, reportedly turning his mercenary army against the Russian Defense Ministry, primarily Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu. Prigozhin claimed that Shoigu bombed his troops in Bakhmut, the months-long battle that killed thousands of his soldiers. New York Times never reported about Prigozhin’s “breakdown,” because it interferes with its false narrative.
Once Prigozhin was sucked into the Ukraine War’s fierce propaganda battle, it was just a matter of time before he was vaporized. Prigozhin was glorified as a cryptic Russian revolutionary, secretly trying to liberate Russia by taking Putin out. How convenient for the Times to put a target on Prigozhin’s back, when the entire story was fake as it comes. Prigozhin had a mental breakdown and shot off his mouth to Western microphones, then, after his mental seizure, realized he was gaslighted by the Western press, primarily the New York Times. Prigozhin was not a Russian revolutionary, he was a broken man with a nervous breakdown after months of sustaining mass casualties in the Ukraine War. Times would have the public believe Prigozhin’s real agenda was liberating Russia from Putin. What utter rubbish, leaving Prigozhin with a traitor’s target on his back.
Since the Feb. 24, 2022 Russian invasion, the New York Times supports 80-year-old President Joe Biden’s proxy war using Ukrainian troops to battle the Kremlin. Why the Times wants to toss out decades of diplomacy and détente with Russia is anyone’s guess. If you follow New York Times stories about Putin’s Russia, it’s all about glorifying anyone they can find to play revolutionary. Times glorified 47-year-old Alexi Navalny, now rotting in a Russian penal colony. Times ran many stories about Navalny, promoting him a true revolutionary seeking to end Putin’s dictatorship. Navalny, who was famously poisoned by the FSB, only to return to Moscow and get arrested, serves the equivalent of a life sentence, since he won’t survive much longer. But why the New York Times promoted him as a Russian revolutionary is anyone’s guess. It got Navalny targeted by Putin.
Why does the New York Times promote the Ukraine War, knowing that it ends 75 years of post-WW II diplomacy with Russia? What possible ax to grind does the Times have in promoting the Ukraine war, other than covering-up the worst blunder in U.S. history for any president, going to war against the Kremlin? How does Biden’s proxy war promote global diplomacy and world peace? Talking about recent mishap with Prigozhin, the Times acts like he was working for the U.S. mission to topple Putin. Prigozhin was many things but not a U.S. stooge, used by the CIA as a puppet to advance Biden’s agenda of getting rid of Putin. New York Times says that Prigozhin threatened Putin’s power, hinting at a wide revolutionary movement inside the Kremlin to get rid of Putin. All this rubbish stems from Ukraine’s 37-year-old propaganda minister Kyrlyo Budanov.
Whatever happened in Prigozhin’s death, it’s not up to the New York Times or any other Western paper to foment revolution inside Russia. Turning Prigozhin or Navalny into pro-Western revolutionaries didn’t help their fates, only put targets on their backs. Whatever one says about Putin, he takes Biden’s proxy war against the Kremlin seriously, seeing the U.S. and NATO as meddling in Russia’ internal affairs. When the Times writes untold numbers of articles linking Trump to the Kremlin, what’s Putin supposed to think about U.S. proxy war in Ukraine? Demonizing Putin does nothing to liberate Russia from Putin’s grip, only makes things worse. Biden’s proxy war makes diplomacy, détente and arms control next to impossible. Does the New York Times seek nuclear war with the Russian Federation? What’s the purpose promoting a failed proxy war if doesn’t lead to world peace?
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
