GOP Leaders Shield Trump from an Expanded Russia Probe

[Frodo]

GOP leaders shield Trump from expanded Russia probe:
Despite calls for expanded investigations, Republicans are content with their existing oversight of alleged Russian misdeeds.

By AUSTIN WRIGHT 12/12/16 06:30 PM EST

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[DrScholl]

Russia stole information from the RNC, so of course they aren't going to investigate anything. Whatever was stolen is being kept for blackmail reasons and Republicans are over a barrel.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If Democrats somehow take the House in 2018, this needs to be treated as the new Benghazi from day 1.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Blah, Hillary's emails are more dangerously disturbing! Why'd the media stop beating that dead horse? Oh, wait...

[Blue3]

[EnglishPete]

Russia stole information from the RNC, so of course they aren't going to investigate anything.

Any evidence for that beyond anonymous leaks to questionable news websites?

[EnglishPete]

GOP leaders shield Trump from expanded Russia probe:
Despite calls for expanded investigations, Republicans are content with their existing oversight of alleged Russian misdeeds.

By AUSTIN WRIGHT 12/12/16 06:30 PM EST

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You mean investigating this

[RINO Tom]

Huh?  I thought I saw on CNN that McConnell broke with Trump on this...?

[Mike67]

This wont matter much because Donald Trump will still be sworn in.

[DrScholl]

Russia stole information from the RNC, so of course they aren't going to investigate anything.

Any evidence for that beyond anonymous leaks to questionable news websites?

The CIA is a credible source.

[Virginiá]

The CIA is a credible source.

If only Trump supporters had such high standards of proof for everyone else.

[Mike67]

Russia stole information from the RNC, so of course they aren't going to investigate anything.

Any evidence for that beyond anonymous leaks to questionable news websites?

The CIA is a credible source.

Boy they were in Iraq in 2003 LOL

[EnglishPete]

Russia stole information from the RNC, so of course they aren't going to investigate anything.

Any evidence for that beyond anonymous leaks to questionable news websites?

The CIA is a credible source.

LOL

Firstly this is not an official published report that provides evidence, its an anonymous source

Secondly disseminating disinformation for propaganda purposes is part of the CIA's job description. They've being doing it around the world to influence politics and elections for decades. What on earth makes you think that they'd draw the line at domestic politics.

Thirdly the US is a highly partisan country. Senior people will be helped by political links to promote their career and their own political agendas. What on earth makes you think the CIA is exempt from this process?

the accusations were published in the Washington post which has a hyper partisan agenda of its own.

Are you seriously suggesting that the washington post report of the leaked CIA source is a more credible source than wikileaks which has a ten year record of unmatched accuracy in its publishing.

I suspect you are just equating 'credible' with 'establishment' as if the two were the same.

[DrScholl]

Russia stole information from the RNC, so of course they aren't going to investigate anything.

Any evidence for that beyond anonymous leaks to questionable news websites?

The CIA is a credible source.

LOL

Firstly this is not an official published report that provides evidence, its an anonymous source

Secondly disseminating disinformation for propaganda purposes is part of the CIA's job description. They've being doing it around the world to influence politics and elections for decades. What on earth makes you think that they'd draw the line at domestic politics.

Thirdly the US is a highly partisan country. Senior people will be helped by political links to promote their career and their own political agendas. What on earth makes you think the CIA is exempt from this process?

the accusations were published in the Washington post which has a hyper partisan agenda of its own.

Are you seriously suggesting that the washington post report of the leaked CIA source is a more credible source than wikileaks which has a ten year record of unmatched accuracy in its publishing.

I suspect you are just equating 'credible' with 'establishment' as if the two were the same.

You wasted your time typing all that. You're trying to convince yourself more than anything else.

[EnglishPete]

Russia stole information from the RNC, so of course they aren't going to investigate anything.

Any evidence for that beyond anonymous leaks to questionable news websites?

The CIA is a credible source.

LOL

Firstly this is not an official published report that provides evidence, its an anonymous source

Secondly disseminating disinformation for propaganda purposes is part of the CIA's job description. They've being doing it around the world to influence politics and elections for decades. What on earth makes you think that they'd draw the line at domestic politics.

Thirdly the US is a highly partisan country. Senior people will be helped by political links to promote their career and their own political agendas. What on earth makes you think the CIA is exempt from this process?

the accusations were published in the Washington post which has a hyper partisan agenda of its own.

Are you seriously suggesting that the washington post report of the leaked CIA source is a more credible source than wikileaks which has a ten year record of unmatched accuracy in its publishing.

I suspect you are just equating 'credible' with 'establishment' as if the two were the same.

You wasted your time typing all that. You're trying to convince yourself more than anything else.

Its all true though isn't it. Clearly it would be a waste of time for me to try and convince you as your mind is made up. However others may be interested so I shall explain a little further.

The CIA has as part of its job the promotion of political propaganda to promote American political and military interests. By itself that's not a criticism of the CIA. Any country that wants to promote its interest internationally will need have the promotion of propaganda as a part of that effort and will need to have part of its security apparatus devoted to this task. The CIA has been influencing elections around the world with this kind of propaganda for its entire history. There is nothing particularly unusual in this. MI6 does this, Mossad does this, the FSB does this, the DGSE does this even private companies do it (e.g. Carlos Slim's blog also called the New York Times). It happens all over and is simply the normal course of events.

Now the most that can be argued is that the FSB played a role in publishing the DNC e-mails. That was alleged months ago. Despite the various 'sexing up in the media and by this source there has been nothing added to that accusations, no evidence that they were involved in the Podesta leak or anything else. In reality this leak probably had less influence on the election than the anti-Trump propaganda sories and leaks published in Carlos Slim's New York times (and you can be sure that the NYT would not have published any of those if he had favoured Trump as a candidate) and I don't see many libs decrying the 'undue foreign influence' of Carlos Slim on US elections.

So why all this hyping up of a nothingburger by a 'CIA source' in Jeff Bezos' Washington Post? Wel the reality is that the CIA's job of promoting propaganda is not and never has been limited to foreign politics. Its also been directed at domestic politics. Senior CIA people are likely to be as influence by political, ideological and career considerations as senior people in other government offices in the highly partisan US.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I don't see why Democrats should double down on a strategy that didn't work in November, regardless of the validity of the claims. It seems like a very esoteric thing, especially when Trump is providing a wealth of more fruitful ways to attack his increasingly reactionary, corrupt and fraudulent administration.

 

[Beet]

This shouldn't be a partisan issue. Patriotism is either for everyone or no one.

[JJC]

The democratic party has officially become unhinged.

[ApatheticAustrian]

i have known that warning against russian authoritarism doesn't help you in elections but the scale of the republican fanboyism for putin's illiberal policies and the speed of the allegiance-switching is mind-boggling.

[The_Doctor]

This is darkly comedic and semi-accurate.

[The_Doctor]

Of course the GOP is narrowing their Russia probe. "Submission to Moscow: The Trump Autobiography" is still a top secret title.