Sen. Rand Paul was blasted by the progressives on social media yesterday for allegedly echoing one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s talking points. The media is running with it and characterizing his comments as supportive of Putin and his invasion.
During a Senate hearing with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Paul raised concerns about the U.S. saying they support Ukraine potentially joining the NATO military alliance. It’s a grave concern for Russian leadership who view it as an existential threat.
Paul asked Blinken: “Knowing full well that Ukraine was unlikely to ever join NATO since it had already been 14 years since they said they were going to become members, why was it so important last fall — before this invasion — to continue agitating for Ukraine’s admission to NATO?”
Blinken responded: “It’s a question of standing up for the basic principle, that we strongly adhere to, that there should be and will be an open-door policy when it comes to NATO membership.”
NATO stands for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, not the World Treaty Organization.
Austin said it again yesterday that Ukraine might eventually join NATO during a Q & A. It’s only meant to irritate Russia. NATO is expanding into Russia’s space, and they fear it.
Paul questioned the decision to push for “something that we knew our adversary (Russia) absolutely hated and said was a red line.”
Do you like Blinken’s answer?
RAND PAUL WENT OFF TRACK WITH BLINKEN
“Now, there is no justification to the invasion. I’m not saying that. But there are reasons for the invasion,” said Paul, who later added he’s “proud of how well the Ukrainians have fought” and is supportive of their cause.
When Blinken noted Russia has, in the recent past, attacked countries that weren’t members of NATO — specifically Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova — Paul countered with: “You could also argue the countries they’ve attacked were part of Russia, or part of the Soviet Union, rather.”
Blinken said he disagreed with that proposition, adding: “It is the fundamental right of these countries to decide their own future and their own destiny.”
“I’m not saying it’s not,” Paul responded. “But I’m saying that the countries that have been attacked, Georgia and Ukraine, were part of the Soviet Union…”
Blinken jumped in: “That does not give Russia the right to attack them…”
“No one’s saying it does,” Paul interjected.
Blinken continued: ” …When everything came to a head, it is abundantly clear, in President Putin’s own words, that this was never about Ukraine being potentially part of NATO, and it was always about his belief that Ukraine does not deserve to be a sovereign, independent country.”
Actually, to be fair, Russia wanted Ukraine to live up to the Minsk 2 agreement their country agreed to.
ATTACKS RAINED ON PAUL
Business Insider portrayed the lily-livered Blinken as “fierce”, and “firing back” while Paul was just a Putin talking point.
Pro-war Twitterati like Aaron Rupar, Alexander Vindman, Charles Booker, and Adam Kinzinger immediately attacked Rand Paul. They claimed he was a Putin talking point who took Putin’s side.
A stunning exchange between @RandPaul & @SecBlinken
Paul implies that Russia is justified in attacking Ukraine because, UKR was once part of the USSR. By that logic Britain is justified in attacking the U.S. and colonial powers their former holdings. What century does he live in? https://t.co/3e36s2JHP9
— Alexander S. Vindman (@AVindman) April 26, 2022
Pedro Gonzalez, the editor of Chronicles Magazine, stuck up for Paul after Business Insider posted their hit piece.
He tweeted: The Business Insider is smearing Rand Paul for correctly pointing out that liberal internationalists provoked the war in Ukraine. Fun fact about the Business Insiders’ owner, Axel Springer SE: it only exists because of CIA money given to promote the swamp’s geopolitical agenda.
The question Paul asked was why is membership in NATO being pressed now when it’s Russia’s red line and we face the potential of WWIII. The answer was it’s our values.
It seems like escalation.