The Russian Intelligence report

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by CT Phipps, Apr 28, 2018.

  1. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016

    I've been reading the Minority Report that House Democrats released today, and it's incredibly damning.

    One year later, the Committee's Majority has shattered its commitment by rushing to end its investigation prematurely, even as it continues to investigate President Donald Trump's political opponents, our intelligence agencies, law enforcement, and diplomatic corps, and former members of the Administration of President Barack Obama.

    In so doing, the Majority has not only failed to meet the mandate given to the HPSCI by the Speaker of the House and the Minority Leader, but they have engaged in a systematic effort to muddy the waters, and to deflect attention away from the President, most recklessly in their assault on the central pillars of the rule of law. Their report, as with their overall conduct of the investigation, is unworthy of this Committee, the House of Representatives, and most importantly, the American people, who arc now left to try to discern what is true and what is not.

    The Majority’s report reflects a lack of seriousness and interest in pursuing the truth. By refusing to call in key witnesses, by refusing to request pertinent documents, and by refusing to compel and enforce witness cooperation and answers to key questions, the Majority hobbled the Committee’s ability to conduct a credible investigation that could inspire public confidence. The Majority’s conduct has also undermined Congress’ independent investigative authority.

    Their repeated deferrals to the White House allowed witnesses to refuse cooperation, and permitted the Administration to dictate the terms of their interaction with Congress, or evade congressional oversight altogether, setting a damaging precedent for future non-cooperation by this President and, possibly, by his successors A majority of the report’s findings are misleading and unsupported by the facts and the investigative record.

    They have been crafted to advance a political narrative that exonerates the President, downplays Russia’s preference and support for then-candidate Trump, explains away repeated contacts by Trump associates with Russia-aligned actors, and seeks to shift suspicion towards President Trump’s political opponents and the prior administration. One can find no better example of the Majority’s willingness to contort facts to support its politicized narrative than the report’s Finding #35. The Majority argues that evidence that Trump associates sought after the election to establish secret back channels to communicate with the Russians without the U.S. government finding out – and then lied about it – actually proves there was no collusion with Russia.

    The sophistry of this kind of analysis, and the report as a whole, wither under scrutiny. Even before its public release, the report suffered in the face of public revelations that bear directly on the investigation and contradicted the Majority’s conclusions. Tragically, for a country in need of the truth and an election system in need of greater security, the Majority diverted the investigation in the service of President Trump by launching parallel probes to promote baseless allegations of wrongdoing by the Obama Administration and our law enforcement agencies.

    The Majority’s efforts have cultivated doubt about what occurred during the 2016 elections; cast suspicion on the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Justice (DOJ), including the FBI’s basis for and handling of its counterintelligence investigation into links between Russia and the Trump campaign; and sought to undercut Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation, including by attempting to tarnish the credibility of numerous current and former officials with knowledge pertinent to the Special Counsel’s probe. Despite these setbacks and the constraints of being in the Minority, the Committee’s Democratic Members remain committed to continuing the investigation.

    We have significantly advanced our understanding of key aspects of the investigation, including Russia’s covert activities and the issues of collusion and obstruction of justice. We have assembled to date a significant body of evidence from witness interviews, hearings, classified intelligence, and materials produced to the Committee, which has in turn identified new leads, persons, and entities of interest. Our charge remains clear and unchanged: ensure a full accounting of Russia’s meddling, including the involvement by any U.S. persons; inoculate the public against future foreign influence campaigns; and provide a roadmap for securing future elections.

    These Minority Views are not a substitute for a comprehensive report, which the Minority will present to the American public after completing the necessary investigatory work. Instead, the Minority Views will highlight a small portion of the evidence that has come to our attention, the many important leads which the Majority made a deliberate decision not to pursue, and the reasons to reject the Majority’s attempt to explain away conduct by the Trump campaign that was clearly deceptive and unethical, and may very well have violated U.S. laws.
  2. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008

    I KNEW IT!
  3. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    NEWSWEEK has this exclusive:

    Ukraine’s government stopped cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation after it secured deadly weapons from the Trump administration, according to reports.

    President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort has been ensnared in the ongoing investigation into whether the Trump campaign collaborated with Russians to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Manafort has been accused of money laundering and failing to accurately register as a foreign agent, among other charges. At the heart of the matter is Manafort’s work with pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine.

    In addition to the Mueller probe, anti-corruption investigators in Kiev had been looking into suspicious payments Ukraine’s former President Viktor Yanukovych—a pro-Russian figure who was driven out of the country by pro-Western protesters in 2014—had made to Manafort and a U.S. law firm. Several anti-corruption activists and journalists in Ukraine said they suspected Yanukovych had used stolen taxpayer money to pay Manafort.

    But Ukraine’s chief prosecutor has now halted the investigation, ostensibly to remain on Trump’s good side. The president has frequently called the Mueller investigation a “witch hunt” and has expressed his extreme displeasure with the special counsel's team, and Ukraine’s government is trying to appease Trump in order to secure much needed financial and military aid from Washington, according to a report from The New York Times published Wednesday. The order to freeze cooperation was given shortly after the Trump administration announced that it planned to provide Ukraine’s government with anti-tank missiles known as Javelins.
  4. MutantScalper

    MutantScalper Dark side in da houssah

    Nov 22, 2009
    Btw, did you know that before and during the Iraq war Newsweek was pro-torture? It's true. Not sure if that magazine is to be trusted. Doesn't really relate to this issue but thought I'd mention it.

    Some have speculated that Trump might just quit at some point, that some of the dirt might implicate Ivanka and Trump will quit to defend her or something. Remains to be seen.
  5. GonZo_626

    GonZo_626 Well Shit!

    Jul 29, 2016
  6. MutantScalper

    MutantScalper Dark side in da houssah

    Nov 22, 2009
    Ok looks like Trump isn't going to quit, no real signs of that. He's still signing negative things into laws. Campaigning to get re-elected. Etc.

    The whole campaign finance -thing reminds me of getting Al Capone for tax evasion. Trump, and other POTUS's before him, are responsible for bombing brown babies in third world nations and campaign financing is the 'crime'?