What might be important to consider here is that ultimately Democrats (other than Hillary) are not really Russia's biggest enemy. The Republican party always has been Russia's Biggest
enemy always. So, in the long run destroying and completely devastating the Republican party is going to be Putin's Goal here. This might be important to understand that he wants revenge on Reagan's party for destroying the Soviet Union.
So, driving the Republican party to ruin would be Putin's ultimate goal.
Putin has already succeeded in branding the Republican party "Immoral, unethical, Corrupt and capable of being bribed" through Trump. So, in a sense he has already partly succeeded in destroying the Repubican party as an ethical entity for the next 25 to 50 years. Putin's next step (over the next 4 to 8 years) will likely be to completely "END" the Repubican party as a respectable party ongoing.
Putin considers Political correctness and Liberal Democrats a joke. So, the only people he feels will ultimately stand up to him in a military way are the Republicans from his point of view.
Though you and I know our country better than he does in all it's aspects this is Putin's point of view as a racist, not politically correct Russian White Nationalist.
begin quote from:
What Russia's actions say about US political polarization
What Russia's bold attempt to influence the 2016 election says about US political polarization
Story highlights
- Politics of another kind is now influencing Trump's response to Russian election hacking
- Former CIA spy warns national security is now at stake
Washington (CNN)Russia's
alleged role in the 2016 presidential election is turning into a stark
lesson about how America's political dysfunction is becoming a glaring
national security threat.
Debate stirred by new Washington Post reporting
that linked interference in last year's election more directly than
ever before to Russian President Vladimir Putin has revealed how
political considerations for two administrations have allowed Moscow to
avoid paying a significant price for an attempt to manipulate the US
election on an unprecedented scale.
The
Post said the Obama administration felt its hands were tied when
Russian hacking first came to light because it did not want, itself, to
be accused of interfering in an already turbulent campaign, in which
Donald Trump was already claiming the election was rigged against him.
As
President, Trump's claims that the Russian hacking accusations,
validated by US intelligence agencies, and allegations of collusion
between his campaign and Russians are just a big hoax
perpetrated by Democrats upset about losing the election have cast doubt
on whether the White House intends to take any muscular action to
punish the Kremlin or to shore up US electoral defenses.
Trump
used the weekend to deliberately stoke the partisanship around the
alleged Russian interference in the election, apparently seeking to
deflect calls for his own administration to address the issue and
instead focusing attention on the Obama administration's failure to stop
it in the first place.
"Since
the Obama Administration was told way before the 2016 Election that the
Russians were meddling, why no action? Focus on them, not T!" Trump
wrote in a tweet Saturday.
Trump also skewered former President Barack Obama in an interview on "Fox and Friends" broadcast on Sunday.
"It's
an amazing thing. To me -- in other words, the question is, if he had
the information, why didn't he do something about it?" Trump said.
The
comments reflected the President's skill in using a rival's
vulnerability to blur questions about his own conduct or policy stances.
He was seizing on a quote in the Post report that revealed many Obama
administration officials now believe that their own response to Russia
hacking was insufficient.
"I feel like we sort of choked," one former senior Obama aide told the Post.
Michael
Hayden, former head of the CIA and the National Security Agency, said
that while US intelligence agencies treated the situation with
sufficient urgency last year, the policy officials in the White House
did not do enough to meet the threat, even if the political reasons were
understandable.
"I think the Obama
administration was light in its response, it's not that it didn't do
anything ... I think in retrospect even the Obama team thinks they
should have done more," Hayden said on CNN's "Smerconish" on Saturday.
"One
of the reasons they were reluctant to do more was the narrative that
then-candidate Trump had that the election was going to be rigged. ...
Even candidate Trump bears some responsibility here."
Since
Trump became President, he and his aides have repeatedly suggested that
the hacking effort may have been the work of Russia or another nation
or that allegations were blown out of proportion by Democrats. The
President has often not been critical of the alleged Russian cyber
operation unless he has been asked about it. And a response to the issue
has not seemed a priority for his administration at a time when a
special counsel is investigating whether there was any collusion between
Trump campaign aides and Moscow.
Last
week, White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters that he had not
had the chance to sit down with the President to ask him whether he
agreed with his intelligence agencies about Russian interference in the
election.
Pushed on Friday, Spicer
said that Trump stood by a comment in January this year when he said: "I
think it was Russia." Spicer also said Trump was concerned about
election interference by "any actor." "
'All a big Dem HOAX'
The Post reported that the
CIA gave top-secret information to the White House last August showing
direct involvement by Putin in ordering an effort to damage or defeat
Democrat Hillary Clinton and to help elect Trump -- though the paper did
not reveal specifics of that information.
The
material was so sensitive that its distribution was limited to Obama
and three senior officials, and was left out of the President's
intelligence briefing, officials told the Post.
Officials
considered how to respond, including whether to launch retaliatory
cyberattacks on Russia. They also pondered releasing intelligence that
would be damaging to Putin or sanctions that would "crater" the Russian
economy, the Post said.
In the end,
the White House opted not to go that far, and imposed sanctions
including the closure of several Russian compounds on the east coast,
and as the Post reported for the first time, the insertion of
cyberweapons inside Russia's critical infrastructure that could be
activated at a future point.
Obama
also personally delivered a warning to Putin at the G-20 summit in
China, and his administration later used the "red phone" channel set up
to avoid inadvertent nuclear exchanges between the US and Russia to
reinforce his concerns.
The
then-President also made a veiled threat of more robust US action to
Putin -- in public -- that was cryptic at the time -- but now appears
understandable in retrospect.
"Frankly we've got more capacity than anybody, both offensively and defensively," Obama told reporters at the G-20 summit.
The
Post said that the administration response was tempered by fears that
Putin would react to harsher measures by escalating the crisis.
But
Obama and other top officials were also wary of giving the impression
to Americans they were trying to influence the US elections themselves.
The
Post also reported that White House officials went to Republican
leaders on Capitol Hill to try to get bipartisan political cover to warn
about the impact of Russian hacking, but they ran into partisan
opposition. GOP leaders argued that talking publicly about the issue
would sap confidence in the electoral system and cast doubt on whether
the intelligence backed up White House claims, the paper said.
"Coming
out of that meeting you now have the administration pulling back ...
again, to avoid the appearances that they were partisan and they were
trying to rig the election," Hayden said on Smerconish.
Obama's
former Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken told CNN Friday that
the Post's assessment of the political pressure facing Obama was
accurate.
"Given everything we were
dealing with, the perception of Russia's main objective, which was to
undermine confidence in the elections -- that was one thing that
motivated us to be careful how we played it in public," Blinken said.
"It
turned out, it was really only later, there was consensus they were
trying to undermine the elections, they were trying to defeat Hillary
Clinton and get Donald Trump," Blinken said. "Now if that picture had
been clearer sooner, maybe we would have done more."
Too little, too late?
That failure to act more aggressively caused some prominent Democrats to engage in rare open criticism of their former leader.
"I
think the Obama administration should have done a lot more when it
became clear that not only was Russia intervening, but it was being
directed at the highest levels of the Kremlin," Adam Schiff, the top
Democrat on the House intelligence committee said on CNN's "State of the
Union" Sunday.
"I think they were
also concerned about not wanting to play into the narrative that Donald
Trump was telling, that the election was going to be rigged."
The
Obama administration finally did make public in-depth details of the
Russian hacking effort in January in a declassified intelligence report
that was released shortly before the inauguration.
Blurred lines
But
Trump aides have repeatedly tried to blur the issue, and some still
seem unwilling in public to even admit the election meddling took place
-- often equating such questions with an attempt to delegitimize Trump's
election.
"I think it's very
important to show no nexus has been proven between what Russia or any
other foreign government tried to do and the actual election result,"
Trump's White House counselor Kellyanne Conway told CNN's Alisyn
Camerota on "New Day" on Friday.
"Really
the only person making that case prominently is Hillary Clinton," she
said. "We know that Donald Trump won fairly and squarely 306 electoral
votes. It had nothing to do with interference."
But
Conway declined to say exactly what Trump was doing to ensure that
election hacking by Russia would not threaten future elections.
It
has been left to senior Republican senators such as John McCain of
Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina to rally support for
measures to punish Russia. The Senate this month passed new sanctions
against Russia, making it difficult for Trump to lift them. The measures
are pending in the the House.
Republican
Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois said Friday that letting political
motivations stall action against Russia would be a mistake for his
party.
"I don't think Vladimir
Putin elected Donald Trump, but I think we also have to recognize the
fact that this happened," Kinzinger said on CNN.
"The
reality is in two or four years it will serve Vladimir Putin's interest
to take down the Republican Party. If we weren't upset about it, we
have no right to complain in the future," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment