WALLACE: Senator Kennedy, who do you believe was responsible for hacking the DNC & Clinton campaign? Russia or Ukraine?— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 24, 2019
KENNEDY: I don't know. Nor do you.
W: The entire intel community says it was Russia.
K: Right. But it could be Ukraine. Fiona Hill is entitled to her opinion pic.twitter.com/KQAUkWeJIo
Can we start a petition for the senator from the great state of Louisiana to change his name? Because we had a John Kennedy in the Senate once, who became a president, and I think it has become incredibly clear, this John Kennedy is no Jack Kennedy He's making this Trump-apologetic argument after seeing for himself that a Trump rally doesn't bring any rain. (Or at least did not in a recent gubernatorial election in his own state.) And he himself should have been apprised that this is sheer Russian propaganda by way of intelligence briefing, and should know better than to repeat and foster lies, whether they serve himself or his president.
So it is entirely fitting that the same day a sunshine patriot sided with the sitting menace in the White House, 60 Minutes shows a story that means to set the record straight--the Russian fuckery was real, and it was to benefit Trump. And not just Trump.
“It’s not different than Watergate”— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) November 25, 2019
Kelly Ward Burton was executive director of the DCCC when Russian hackers stole millions of dollars worth of internal campaign research. She was shocked when stolen materials was used in a negative adhttps://t.co/qN1s0rbxvP pic.twitter.com/wlseKlcuJv
The GOP was basically the recipient of stolen goods, and how did they respond? Did they acknowledge the act of cyberwarfare that got them their ill-gotten booty? BULLSHIT! Ahem, erm, no they did not. They leaned in. But the Russian hack was real. We do know. It was pretty well-documented, and nobody would refute it except for political expediency and sheer fuckery. The whole "Ukraine was the real election meddlers" thing doesn't even make sense. How? They hacked the DNC and weaponized those emails to make Democrats look bad to tank HRC to let Trump win, because....profit? That is sheer underpants gnome theory, and, well, makes gnome sense.
If Republicans want to still relitigate what happened with the 2016 election I am all about that--I think the Mueller investigation was ended early and Trump gave new fuel to that idea when he kind of congratulated himself for firing Comey (again admitting to obstruction of justice) and for getting Bill Barr. (Cillizza doesn't even note these two entire cray things Trump said in 53 minutes of pure cray.) Look, Trump admits to and covers up his own corruption all the time.
But anyway, straightaway after Barr snaffled the Mueller investigation and issued his four page exoneration, Trump did the Ukraine thing. So, let's be clear, Republicans' permissive parenthood of toddler Trump is clearly keeping him from learning stuff like how not to do extortions. He's doing them. Maybe disavowed longtime associate Lev Parnas even, Lordy, has tapes. And his great good transition team friends like Devin Nunes also seem to be knee-deep in fuckery. (This assuredly means trouble. )
Anyway, it become clearer that Trump's ronin were not just his surrogates, but were also trying to cook up their own lucrative deals, that lots of little fish were trying to assert fake things for Trump's benefit, and for what it's worth, all these Trump surrogates also being all about what financial stuff they could milk out of all this looks like treating the reality of Ukraine being attacked--invaded! by Russia seem like opportunism on their part. Like they wanted to capitalize on human misery.
Do these people have any idea what it might mean to export our democratic values? Like, the validity of elections and the importance of not fostering corruption? Because it seems like a laugh and a half for our Republicans to assert that they stand for any such thing now. We have seen where they stand.
It looks bad because it is bad. It always does.
No comments:
Post a Comment