Actually, all indications are that indeed Carpatho-Lemko-Ugro-Prjashev Rusins are indeed not only Russian, but a clear mix of several different types of Russians, but that all depends how one defines the word "Russian." The term was first used by the Little Russian brotherhoods under Polish occupation and later inaugurated in Imperial Russia after Southwestern Rus' had been reunited with the North after the Perejaslavl Pact. The impetus behind this identity was spurred on by the Russians of specifically Kiev and the Ukraine, scholars who came to dominate all strata of Imperial Russia and oversaw the linguistic reforms there. Indeed, even modern Literary Russian is their work, having as its principle influence the Middle Ruthenian of the Russian brotherhoods of Little Russia and the Rusin lands.
No, the impetus behind the Rusin awakening began with Dukhnovich and was russophile in origin, both "in the homeland" and "in the diaspora." Along with that came a strong drive to "return to the ancestral faith." This movement in North America has its beginnings with those who followed St. Alexis of Wilkes Barre and went on to found the OCA.
While in Austria during the same period, a programme of "ukrainization" was being implemented, for the "Rusin revival" was seen as seditious and "eventually leading to secessionist pro Tsarist tensions." Imperial Russia did indeed support the Rusin Awakening from its outset, BUT this programme of "Rusin Awakening" WAS ALSO SUPPORTED by the native "old Russian" brotherhoods such as those in Lvov who were eventually suppressed by the Austrian favored "Ukrainian" movement.
All too telling is that people like Ivan Franko in their correspondences and personal interactions referred to themselves as being of "Rusin" and not "Ukrainian" identity. While even Hrushevsky's "History of the Ukraine" was initially penned as "A History of Rus'." One need not even mention that Taras Schevchenko saw himself as being of "Rusin or Little Russian" ethnicity and that he wrote in his personal journals conspicuously in Literary Russian while noteables such as Mazeppa and Hetman Ivan Vygovsky used Literary Russian while the Brotherhoods of Kiev, Ostrogh, and Lvov also used Middle Ruthenian (a parent of Literary Russian) but none of them ever used Kotliarevsky's "mova." Answering the question "why?" will lead one to a new and correct understanding of the topic.
Now, there are those who posit the notion that Peter I is the father of modern Russian terminology "Russia" yet the work of the Russian brotherhoods in Polish occupied Rus' seems to indicate useage of that term or a variant of it beginning with the period following Lublin.
While Byzantine manuscripts always referred to Rus' as "Rosija," the mova word for Russia, from at least the ninth century.
So, yes, Virginia, Carpatho-Lemko-Ugro-Prjashev (All Rusins) are Russians.
