Both things can be true:
* There are some rotten things at the FBI that should be fixed.
* Russians interfered with our elections in 2016, and will keep attempting to do so.
I don't get why he's so in the tank for Russia.
* There are some rotten things at the FBI that should be fixed.
* Russians interfered with our elections in 2016, and will keep attempting to do so.
I don't get why he's so in the tank for Russia.
If I recall correctly he was also defending Wikileaks against the charge that it timed its releases to hurt Hillary Clinton. Even if you agree with Wikileaks' general agenda, it's obvious they were timing things for maximum impact.
It's the same with Russian interference. It's actually their job to interfere, and it would be easy for him to acknowledge that and still maintain his criticism of targets.
The Republican minority report from the House intelligence committee also agrees Russia meddled in the 2016 election.
We should be concerned if it did happened regardless of political ideology.
It'd be much easier to focus efforts on simply discrediting how much it really mattered. Most reports said the Russians spent around $20M on ads which considering both sides campaigns had about a billion each, not to mention the invaluable endless free media coverage over two years most presidential elections take... you can draw your own conclusions.
It's about sowing doubt and creating a world where there are no 'facts', because then those who lie are on a level playing field with those who deal with the truth.
As an aside, I have absolutely no idea why Trump is being impeached. Every time I open Google News all the top headlines are "Impeach Trump!". But I never see anything about why exactly he is being impeached. Granted, I haven't really read any of these articles, more than just skimming, but I'd expect at least something in the title or summary that I see in Google News. Very bizarre thing going on. When Clinton was impeached it was very clear it was related to Monica Lewinsky and lying under oath. But regarding Trump, I mostly just see articles about who wants him impeached. Nothing about why. Anyone know the particular reason Trump is being impeached? What law he violated?
UPDATE: I googled it, and someone claims he pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden's son. Perhaps impeachable, but not obviously so. I guess that's why the reason is not more widely promoted, since on the face of it does not sound particularly egregious, compared to what other presidents have done.
No.
You could read the articles of impeachment themselves if you want to inform yourself: https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/politics/impeach...
"It is absolutely illegal for anyone to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with any election in the United States."
"he asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to look into a discredited conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine and not Russia that interfered in the 2016 presidential election by hacking the Democratic National Committee."
And the document further continues the narrative that Trump is having outside powers interfere with the US election,
"These actions were consistent with President Trump’s previous invitations of foreign interference in United States elections."
So, it is definitely related to the overall narrative of Trump colluding with foreign powers to have them interfere.
Also weird, dems been pushing to impeach Trump for quite awhile, but this is a recent event. It looks like the Dems have been on an impeachment hunt in search of a reason. Which also makes this allegation weird. Searching for reasons to impeach also sounds contrary to law and order, which is the reason given for impeaching Trump in this document.
None of this to say I like the guy or even believe the allegations to be false. However, the impeachment does not seem to be carefully following due process, which is much more undermining of rule by law than whatever Trump may have done.
And the obstruction charge is quite verifiable as well.
This is very thorough, and not credibly rebutted anywhehere: https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/CRPT-116hrpt34...
A bunch of testimonies sounds convincing, but that depends on whom the people are and what they exactly observed. E.g. why would the ambassador to the UK know what Trump said to Ukraine? I personally am still not getting a solid feeling from all this.
You'd really want to go read and review some of this. There are some decent summaries like
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/10/case-impe...
This is no 'conviction'. He has been impeached, and that's forever, as with Clinton. More likely than not, he will not be removed from office.
No one really knows what the political consequences are, but the people running the investigation felt compelled to act since what he was doing represents a clear and present threat to free and fair elections.
However, as the article says, the Dems are rushing the impeachment process, which as you say will most likely not remove Trump from office (nor imprison). So, I really don't understand what is the point of this whole thing. How does Trump's behavior present a threat to free and fair elections, and how does this impeachment stop the threat?
Trump may find out Biden's son is doing illegal activities, or that Russia wasn't as meddlesome as supposed, and while that may influence the election, it is unclear to me how learning such information is in itself a bad thing for our system of government, i.e. a threat to free and fair elections.
And the very implication of the articles of impeachment, that Trump could gain something of value from Ukraine, has the implication that what Trump is seeking may actually be correct. In which case, Trump's requests certainly should be followed through by the Ukraine minister.
This whole thing makes less and less sense the more I dig into it, and I understand even more why all the news articles are so light on details.
No. : "New York Times Forced To Retract Longstanding '17 Intel Agencies' Lie About Russian Hacking":
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-30/new-york-times-for...
Ann Coulter addresses details and history of the "17 intelligence agencies" claims in her book "Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind":
https://www.amazon.com/Resistance-Futile-Trump-Hating-Left-C...
The sole sources of the claims were found to be only John Brennan and James Clapper.
This line implies two totally different things and has been used by politicians and biased medias to mislead the public.
One thing is Russians interfered the elections in 2016 by buying ads and spreading misinformation, which did happen.
The other thing is Russians interfered the elections in 2016 by working with the Trump campaign. There is no evidence for this even after FBI violated many protocols in their investigation.
One example of media spreading misinformation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdIkgWdAq3Q
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-russia-govern...
Here's another one about something much smaller and more local than the election:
https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-trolls-senate-intelli...
They were trying to get Americans to fight in the streets, and organized a protest and counter protest!
There are many reasons and they are nicely documented at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...
From 2017, we influenced the French election: http://www.theamericanmirror.com/obama-meddles-french-electi...
American involvement in other other countries's leadership is so prevalent that there is a Wikipedia page for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...
There certainly have been plenty of instances of the US doing very bad things globally (your second link is very much legit), but I guess the stated goal of spreading democracy is better than whatever straight up authoritarian states like Russia are peddling, even if it can be frustrating when things fail to live up to the ideal.
I think you can certainly argue for less US involvement abroad and still view Russia's actions in a very, very poor light.
1. On social media, the IRA (Russia's Internet Research Agency) posed as Americans on Twitter and Facebook, and was ordered to amplify and provoke political and social discord in the United States. They organized political rallies (including "Blue Lives Matter") and fake Facebook groups, complete with convenient memes, unwittingly shared by people like Donald Trump Jr., Kellyanne Conway, Michael Flynn, etc.
2. The GRU hacked into email accounts owned by volunteers and employees of the Clinton campaign. They also hacked into the DNC and DCCC and released the stolen emails and documents to Wikileaks.
3. There were 140 contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian government officials around the 2016 election.
I suggest you read the Mueller report if you're actually curious about this.