Frustrated Dems say Obama botched Russia response

The Hill ^ | 06/23/17 | Katie Bo Williams

[TigerLikesRooster]

I guess things are not panning out exactly as Dems hoped if they go so far as to vent their frustration on Obama.

[clearcarbon]

"Frustrated Dems say Obama botched Russia response "

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

[V K Lee]

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!

[V K Lee]

A new name for Road Kill = Obama

[GreenHornet]

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.”

[V K Lee]

AND, they will write a book all about his escapades entitled "The Story of O".
Oops, sorry that has already been done,
more than once, just
different endings.

The End. It's bed for me.

MAGA!

[albie]

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.

[TakebackGOP]

There’s no evidence that Russian hacking made Trump win.

[clearcarbon]

"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"

Maybe the source of "interference" was in the polls. A Russian variation of freep-a-poll that was very convincing.

[Liz]

The NYT suck-up piece is proof-positive of this vacuous nincompoop's idiocy. The paper trail is voluminous....it's just that the prostrate NYT failed to ask the right questions (IF they asked any, at all).....questions taught in first year journalism class.

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 Rice’s 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. Shouldn’t Congress have been notified?

<><>Why did Susan Rice keep it a secret? Maybe she and Obama had "other plans?" W/ the Clintons?

The NSA didn’t 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”

[Cowboy Bob]

Affirmative Action strikes again!

LOL!

[ScaniaBoy]

Maybe the source of "interference" was in the polls. A Russian variation of freep-a-poll that was very convincing.

You mean in reality Hillary was in the lead by 50%?

:))))

[clearcarbon]

It would be interesting to watch the pollsters try to validate the accuracy of their polling methods.

[grania]

If only Republicans were representing their voting fodder instead of the interests who've bought and paid for (or blackmailed) them. They could've pushed back against this bogus Russian stuff. They could pass every law that needs to be passed to save the nation. They could figure out who all the leakers are, then lock them up and throw away the key.

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.

[GreenHornet]

There’s no evidence that Russian hacking made Trump win.

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.

[ScaniaBoy]

Yes, good luck with that one!

How far off were they in Georgia?

:-)

[ScaniaBoy]

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?

[ballplayer]

I think it is what’s called,”tell Vladimir I have one more election to win,then I can be more flexible”

[Ann Archy]

If Anything, the Russians wanted HILLIARY to win, since they had EVERYTHING on her to hold over her head!!

[Political Junkie Too]

...it was not until January that it issued a separate declassified intelligence report that assessed Moscow was attempting to tip the election in Trump’s favor...

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