Intel Officials Informed White House Of Russia-Taliban Plot In Early 2019

[established_1781]

Dear Parents of American Soldiers,

Donald Trump knew for nearly a year that Russia was paying terrorists to hunt and kill your children. He did more than nothing, he advocated for Russian interests on the world stage while allowing this to continue.

What happens now is up to you.

casualty.pdf

[not_so_fluffy]

Trump has decades worth of forks sticking out of him. He doesn’t seem to care. He just puts on an extra layer of spackle orange bronzer and denies the existence of forks.

[coimmigrant]

@dommyluc

roasted on the bonfire of history.

The Bonfire of the Vanities

As in “Officials said they didn’t consider the intelligence assessments in 2019 to be particularly urgent, given Russian meddling in Afghanistan isn’t a new occurrence.” Meddling, paying bounties, what’s in a name.

@valgalky23

I never do that

Now is not the time to talk about gun control bounty hunters. We send our thoughts and prayers to the families of the victims.

[alyoshakaramazov1]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/505145-gop-senator-congress-must-find-out-what-trump-knew-of-russian-bounties-and

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) says Congress needs to get to the bottom of what President Trump was told about Russia offering bounties to Taliban militants to kill coalition troops in Afghanistan, calling for a “proportional response” from the U.S.

“I’ve been hearing from military families in Nebraska constantly for the last 36 hours, and they’re livid,” he said. “This is a story about the targeting of American men and women in uniform. This is about putting crosshairs on the backs of people who are fighting for our freedom. This is not about short-term politics.”

“Who knew what when inside the administration? Did the commander in chief know? If not, why the heck not? What’s going on in that process?” he said.

Sasse said the second question is “What is our plan to impose proportional response on our enemies in this battle?”

He said such a response “would mean Taliban and GRU agents in body bags.”

[cervantes]

@alyoshakaramazov1

Sasse said the second question is “What is our plan to impose proportional response on our enemies in this battle?” He said such a response “would mean Taliban and GRU agents in body bags.”

I liked most of what he said but this last bit is irresponsible.

Assuming it’s quoted accurately.

[possum]

Has the motherfucker resigned yet? Asking for Tena…

[inversion]

Dan Coats was the DNI until August,2019.

[zenicetus]

@noonm

Probably more Republicans would have voted to convict, but likely not enough to remove.

The fate of the GOP is tied to the fate of Trump and they know it. Trying to jump ship now would just mean they sink sooner.

This is Trump’s only real success story. By doing what no other President has done in pandering only to the hardcore base of the party, he locked in support of every vulnerable Republican up for reelection. They need his base to turn out and vote for them, and the base will punish insubordination.

A jenius move in one respect, even if it was just by instinct and not design. But it means Trump will pay for it in November when the larger voter population outside his base kicks him out of office. And kicks the R’s out of control of the Senate too, with any luck.

[zenicetus]

@cervantes

I liked most of what he said but this last bit is irresponsible.

Assuming it’s quoted accurately.

I think it’s understandable. Sen. Sasse is a politician, and he knows that military families and his Republican base would rather hear about Taliban and GRU agents paying a direct price, instead of the WH just adding another meaningless layer of sanctions on Russian oligarchs.

[rucleare]

Bolton declined to comment Monday when asked by the AP if he’d briefed Trump about the matter in 2019.

For the love of Satan, would y’all puhleez stop asking John Bolton to comment on any-goddamn-thing? He’s a treasonous coward, and that’s all we needed to know from him.

[herringbone]

@hulaman

As far as the Russians, when they were in Afghanistan we supported their enemies (who later became our enemies).

I’m all for laying out US malfeasance, but there are a few considerations before we get too deep into the whataboutism:

1. The bounty-for-GI’s scheme was specifically designed to derail withdrawal negotiations between the US and the Taliban. I don’t think we ever sought to increase Russian casualties in an effort to keep the Russians in Afghanistan.
2. It’s one thing to arm combatants, but it’s something else entirely to offer a reward to kill individuals (I know, I know, this has a “no fighting in the war room” vibe, but I think it’s salient).
3. As always, as US citizens, we have the right to hold our own government accountable for its failure to respond when foreign actors work against our interests, regardless of what US governments of the past have or have not done.

[cervantes]

@zenicetus

I think it’s understandable. Sen. Sasse is a politician, and he knows that military families and his Republican base would rather hear about Taliban and GRU agents paying a direct price

I still think it’s irresponsible and dangerous. Pandering of the worst sort.

So, in that sense, “understandable,” sure.

But if he has relevant facts to share, he should share them so we can all judge, after looking at the facts, not before.

If he has no relevant facts to share, he should discover some. After all, his party controls the chamber in which he serves.

[hulaman]

You could also say those were the Soviets and not the, supposedly, democratic Russians. I’m not trying to give Russia a pass, but is anyone really surprised by this? The story is Trump ignoring the intel and doing nothing except continue his obsequiousness towards Putin.

[cd]

only if the repubes allow it, somehow I don’t think that is coming

that the dotard made it past day 1 after the russian bounty story hit without sinking says he’s here to stay until at least the election

repubes will continue to enable this destruction of this country because… whatever

[established_1781]

[bunnyvelour]

SUCH an amazing actor. I remember where I was when I read the news he’d died. Sitting at the counter of the local breakfast place, having pancakes. Yes, the pancakes were very memorable, but the sad news was more so.

[zenicetus]

@cervantes

I still think it’s irresponsible and dangerous. Pandering of the worst sort.

So, in that sense, “understandable,” sure.

But if he has relevant facts to share, he should share them so we can all judge, after looking at the facts, not before.

If he has no relevant facts to share, he should discover some. After all, his party controls the chamber in which he serves.

The facts are already out there, confirmed by sharing the info with allies. It’s not premature to discuss the response, considering how long this has been bubbling under the surface with no action by the President.

Given that reality, what would your response be if you were a Senator? Increased sanctions? A sternly worded letter from the UN? Or direct military retaliation within an active theater of war?

BTW, I’m not saying military retaliation is the best option. We should be out of that hell hole in Afghanistan and only return with decapitating force if there is another 9/11. But it’s not pandering in my opinion, to advocate a military response while we’re still there.

[castor_troy]

In normal times, you’d do what we do best. Covert attacks on their interests somewhere, with a friendly note that, although we have no idea how a bunch of their folks ended up dead in Syria, something might happen to others if we had a hint that any of our troops in Afghanistan were under threat that could be traced back to russia.

[cervantes]

@zenicetus

The facts are already out there […] Given that reality, what would your response be if you were a Senator?

Immediate hearings, open and closed, to:

1. Discuss “the facts [that] are already out there,” and to discover facts that are not.

2. Give Trump and company a chance to defend themselves, while also giving them notice that they will be held accountable for what they have and have not done.

Only then can one derive any punitive action to be taken, whether the targets to be punished are Russian, or Afghan, or Trumpian.

Apparently, the alternative is to immediately start a shooting war with the Russians:

Sasse said the second question is “What is our plan to impose proportional response on our enemies in this battle?” He said such a response “would mean Taliban and GRU agents in body bags.”

To do that on the strength of a few newspaper articles is passing insane.

 

@zenicetus

BTW, I’m not saying military retaliation is the best option.

I know, but Sasse appears to be.

[chuck_voellinger]

Yup. I doubt that itll matter unless its a direct attack on US forces.