Epoch Times Senior Reporter talks about the lates in the Obamagate / Russia Hoax
Joshua Philipp of The Epoch Times joined Dan Ball on OANN’s Real America for an eye-opening discussion about the reemergence of the “Russia Hoax” narrative in the wake of the Epstein scandal. Both commentators argue that establishing a new wave of Russian collusion claims is a calculated diversion from the explosive Epstein revelations, which threaten to ensnare figures across the political spectrum. Over the course of the interview, they dissect how media and political elites are repackaging old narratives to protect powerful individuals and maintain control of the national conversation.
The conversation begins with Ball asking Philipp about the timing of recent headlines suggesting revived interest in alleged Russian interference in U.S. politics. Philipp explains that this resurgence follows a predictable pattern: whenever a new scandal threatens to destabilize the establishment, media outlets pivot back to Russia claims to redirect public attention. With the Epstein files drawing sharp scrutiny toward institutions and officials, resetting the discourse on Russia allows Washington to deflect pressure and recalibrate the narratives shaping public opinion.
They explore how Russian meddling allegations once served as a political weapon against the Trump administration. Philipp notes that despite multiple investigations and public assessments finding no definitive wrongdoing, the narrative persisted for years as a means to fracture public trust. Now, amid the Epstein revelations—including the resurfacing of flight logs, black book names, and allegations of institutional complicity—Philipp argues the Russia story is being resurrected to ensure the Epstein scandal never gains irreversible momentum.
Ball emphasizes the strategic alignment between political actors and mainstream media in orchestrating this rhetorical reset. He points out that as soon as Epstein-related documents started drawing attention, outlets like CNN, MSNBC, and major newspapers quickly began running stories on possible Russian influence in American politics once again—even when the new claims lacked fresh evidence. Together, they frame the repetition of this narrative as symptomatic of a broader crisis in journalistic integrity and political accountability.
Philipp and Ball also note how the revived Russia narrative serves multiple purposes: it buys time for institutions to manage fallout, it creates moral equivalencies that neutralize one scandal by equating it with another, and it enables policymakers to dodge real calls for investigations. With Epstein’s files still sealed, and political figures refusing to address them directly, the Russia tactic becomes the go-to mechanism to shift focus.
The interview then tackles the role of social media in fueling these cycles. Philipp asserts that platforms like X and Facebook amplify the resurgence of Russia-related content, often driven by political operators and influencers with incentives to keep the narrative alive. They highlight specific wave patterns: coordinated hashtags, opinion columns, and pundit panels all synchronizing in a short burst following Epstein updates, before quickly drifting to Russian claims. By doing so, public attention is softly redirected and the Epstein story recedes from headlines.
Ball then questions whether the public is resilient enough to see through these manufactured distractions. Philipp warns that without proactive public skepticism, the cycle will persist. He urges audiences to demand genuine investigative journalism, to press their representatives to focus on Epstein revelations, and to resist getting drawn into recycled, unsubstantiated narratives.
As they wrap up, both hosts agree that the Epstein scandal represents a profound threat to entrenched power structures. The Russia Hoax comeback spells more than deleted memories—it signals ongoing resistance to accountability. If Epstein’s files—detailing powerful connections—ever became fully public, Philipp suggests, the implications could be seismic. That’s why the Russia narrative returns: it’s a buffer, a diversion, and a shield for those who want the Epstein story to remain contained.
By the end, the interview leaves listeners with a stark warning: the reemergence of the Russia Hoax is not just crass opportunism, it’s an intentional strategy to preserve influence. In the era of Epstein, information wars are waged with narratives, and the public’s attention has become the battlefield. Unless demand for the Epstein truth grows louder, the Russia script will continue rerunning, and real accountability will stay off stage.
