Posted on 06/24/2017 1:14:41 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Frustrated Dems say Obama botched Russia response
By Katie Bo Williams - 06/23/17 05:48 PM EDT
The Obama administration is under fresh scrutiny for its response to Russian meddling in the election after new details emerged this week about how the White House weighed its actions against the 2016 political environment.
Then-President Obama was too cautious in the months leading up to the election, frustrated Democratic lawmakers and strategists say.
It was inadequate. I think they could have done a better job informing the American people of the extent of the attack, said Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee who co-chairs the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Snicker, Snicker
The oh so brilliant, intelligent “O”. He bamboozled the milquetoast Romney with the Benghazi Embassy fiasco, and attempted to try the same again - but was found lacking. YUGE blooper on his part.
MAGA!
A new name for Road Kill = Obama
The Obama administration did little or nothing about Russian meddling because they assumed it was a foregone conclusion that Hillary was going to win the election. As the article states, they din’t want to do anything that could possibly taint Hillary’s “big win.”
The End. It's bed for me.
MAGA!
Just seeing that dung beetles name again makes my skin crawl. That was a long 8 years. America was tortured and globally embarrassed. I won’t park next to a car with a 0 sticker. I won’t knowingly do business with anyone who voted for him. Ever. I’m glad to see that these yo yo’s still think he has superior intelligence though. Makes for great entertainment.
There’s no evidence that Russian hacking made Trump win.
The dick-licking NYT merely regurgitated the BS Boobamba spit up.
=======================================================
A HUGE RED FLAG: Presently, Obama is stubbornly refusing to turn over documents having to do w/ his National Security Advisor, Susan Rice's, unmasking candidate Trump's people. Taxpayers demand answers and they want answers NOW.
Questions for Rice:
1. As Obama's National Security Advisor, when did you request the unmasking, and from which govt agency?
2. Who in that govt agency actually did the unmasking? Please provide the written requests you submitted.
3. Once the names were unmasked, did you and Obama still believe there was a threat to US national security from the named US persons?
4. If so, with whom did you share this crucial information, and what actions were taken by you or Obama to protect America and American citizens?
5. If you or Obama failed to act, then you should not have shared the names with anyone else. So how did the names become known?
6. Was any of the info detailed here deliberately withheld on the FISA application? (it's a felony to willfully withhold information when applying for a FISA).
=====================================
(HAT TIP OMEGATOO)
<><> If the information found in the incidental involvement of any US Person was threatening US Security, and America citizens' safety, why did US security agencies wait for Susan Rices request to unmask?
<><> Did Obama issue a secret stand-down order in the face of putative threats to Americans?
<><> Why did Susan Rice appearing on PBS-TV initially deny responsibility for the unmasking?
<><> Why was this threat not unveiled at the time, nor since? Why now?
<><> Alarmingly, the supposed threat identified by Susan Rice was about to be inaugurated as President of the US. Shouldnt Congress have been notified?
<><>Why did Susan Rice keep it a secret? Maybe she and Obama had "other plans?" W/ the Clintons?
The NSA didnt unmask the information initially, plus later investigations found NO collusion between Russia and Trump. Seems to be proof-positive that whatever suspicions Obama/Rice/Brennan may have had to justify the unmasking were absolutely wrong, or more likely non-existent.
==================================================
That all of this did not make headlines earlier appears to enhance self-serving Obama's more recent narrative in the NYT......... to congratulate himself as the person solely responsible for "stopping"g a Russian plot.
Does Susan Rice mind Obama throwing her under the bus?tact and click on Contact the President whee it says Message Type
Affirmative Action strikes again!
LOL!
You mean in reality Hillary was in the lead by 50%?
:))))
It would be interesting to watch the pollsters try to validate the accuracy of their polling methods.
They've got another chance to get their act together. The dems are eating their own now. If 'pubs unite and start enacting stuff the dems hate, the dems won't get their act together for the next election cycle.
If only the Republicans we elected were on our side. Either they never were, or they've had too much swampwater now that they're in DC.
Don't misunderstand my previous comment. I agree that the Russians had no impact on the outcome of the election. I'm just saying that, like a lot of other things, Obama didn't care what was happening as long as he thought Hillary would win.
Yes, good luck with that one!
How far off were they in Georgia?
:-)
Or to put in another way:
Obama and others in his administration did not care how many laws they were breaking as long as they were certain Clinton would win.
Once Donald Trump had won there was a big “ooops”, how do we protect our sorry hides now?
I think it is what’s called,”tell Vladimir I have one more election to win,then I can be more flexible”
If Anything, the Russians wanted HILLIARY to win, since they had EVERYTHING on her to hold over her head!!
Russia tried to get into both parties servers, but RNC security was better. If the Russians had gotten Republican emails, they would have used them, too. As it was, they went with what they had.
Trump had repeatedly claimed that the outcome of the election would be rigged against him, alleging widespread voter fraud and inaccurate polling. He provided no evidence to back up his claims, but critics feared that his rhetoric could undermine public trust in the outcome of the election.
There was plenty of evidence. The fact that the DNC rigged their primary against Bernie Sanders should have made anyone suspicious that they would try something in the general election.
Also, polling WAS inaccurate. Many of us here saw the consistent Democrat over-sampling that produced results that didn't match what we were seeing on the ground. Reuters/Ipsos men went so far as to change their methodology midway through the election to favor Clinton.
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.