None of the GOP Senators Deserve Their Jobs

He knew, yet he said nothing, did nothing. He claims to ‘love’ veterans, yet he knew that his buddy Putin was paying to have U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan murdered. He knew … and he didn’t care. And now, the republicans in Congress don’t care, either. Our friend TokyoSand has written a fine piece about this and included two hard-hitting ads. Please take a few moments to read … this should be the final straw for the likes of Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and the other 51 republicans in the Senate, but they have largely only shrugged their shoulders. Thank you, TS, for an excellent post.


Detail of “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” (1989) by Keith Haring

We keep waiting to see when the Republican Senators might stand up for something. Some value they have that they won’t let Trump cross.

And after the horrifying news of this weekend, we find that we’re still waiting.

On Friday, news broke that Russian Intelligence was secretly offering bounties to militants who killed American and allied forces in Afghanistan. Quickly, other media outlets confirmed the story, including Fox News. Then, we learned that American intelligence had known about this for months, and anger spilled over at Trump as he had very clearly not done anything about it.

Of course, Trump claimed he, nor VP Pence, nor his Chief of Staff, had been briefed about it. Which former national security officials said strained credulity. Furthermore, even if they had not been told (which would…

View original post 372 more words

35 thoughts on “None of the GOP Senators Deserve Their Jobs

  1. Aside from another instance of classic hypocrisy (been happening down the centuries)
    Interesting point I noticed Jill from some quarters……
    Hilary Clinton’s e-mails gaff had people calling for her to be imprisoned.
    This link of Donald Trump with Putin is ‘Fake News’
    Sometimes I feel sorry for some of his followers. They are so transparent in their hatred of the Democrat/Liberal side of things they will believe anything, say anything.
    It’s a bit like the Titanic
    ‘Oooh what luck! I’ve just got some ice for my martini’
    ‘If you ask me it’s as well there is water down there in third class. They don’t wash otherwise,’
    Happy ‘Catch-up Thursday’

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Jill, thanks for reblogging this. I posted this comment on TokyoSand’s blogpost. I apologize for its length, but this issue is a prime example why Senators need to do their jobs and not acquiesce to a president, especially a corrupt and deceitful one like the incumbent. Keith

    TokyoSand, great post, says this independent voter. Let me brutally frank. If I was president and my intelligence people did not brief me on this issue, regardless of whether they were 100% certain, I would be ticked off. This is one of those issues that must require a briefing of the president. So, I would believe those who said they did brief the president.
    Now, the president is notorious for not listening, with the smallest of attention spans. So, it could be he does not remember being briefed. But, this is one of those “blow-up in your face” issues, not to mentioning American soldiers being killed, which should be the principal concern.
    As for Pence and Meadows, two comments. Pence has long ago sold his reputation to the devil. He made that bargain when he decided against leaving the campaign when the Trump tapes on bragging on sexual assault of females came out. He would have done the country a great service if he did. So, his agreeing with Trump has little credence.
    Meadows claims he was not briefed, but here is the juice. He was not Chief of Staff when the briefings occurred. Of course, he was not briefed.
    As a former Republican and Democrat, I do not care who is in the White House. But, Senators must do their jobs of governance. If they choose not to follow normal process, take it to the bank, it is political. A prime example is Congressman Devin Nunes, who had to step down as Chair of the House Intelligence Committee as he was briefing the president on what they were looking at. But, just before then, he told the Intelligence leaders the House Committee did not need the annual briefing the agency leaders give to the House. Re-read that last sentence as Nunes said they committee that oversees the intelligence efforts did not want a briefing.
    Sadly, as you point, there are GOP Senators (Johnson, Graham, McConnell, etc.) who are more inclined to do the president’s bidding. That is not governance, that is acquiescence. Keith

    Liked by 2 people

    • Excellent, thoughtful analysis, my friend. I couldn’t have said it better, and I agree fully with all you say. The Senate had their chance to do the right thing in February and they blew it … I lost respect for any and all congressional republicans on that day.


  3. Sorry but this is fake news, NY Times had retracted numerous stories in the past due to innuendo or rumour, but can never provide hard facts.

    “All western mass media outlets are now shrieking about the story The New York Times first reported, citing zero evidence and naming zero sources, claiming intelligence says Russia paid out bounties to Taliban-linked fighters in Afghanistan for attacking the occupying forces of the US and its allies in Afghanistan. As of this writing, and probably forevermore, there have still been zero intelligence sources named and zero evidence provided for this claim.”

    “As we discussed yesterday, the only correct response to unsubstantiated claims by anonymous spooks in a post-Iraq invasion world is to assume that they are lying until you’ve been provided with a mountain of hard, independently verifiable evidence to the contrary. The fact that The New York Times instead chose to uncritically parrot these evidence-free claims made by operatives within intelligence agencies with a known track record of lying about exactly these things is nothing short of journalistic malpractice. The fact that western media outlets are now unanimously regurgitating these still 100 percent baseless assertions is nothing short of state propaganda.”

    Spreading propaganda or straight out lies only hurt NY Times’ credibility, peddling this type of yellow journalism without substantiated facts place them on the level of National Inquirer or similar rags.

    Liked by 1 person

    • My understanding is that this has been verified by numerous sources. We all make mistakes, but the NYT has always had the integrity to retract and correct when they do. This story, however, has been independently confirmed and I believe it is true.


      • Hi Jill, this story is ongoing and a full investigation is unfolding. When you say independently confirmed, by who? The state dept, news agencies, who are those numerous sources? Nowadays we must question everything and not accept information on face value. Either way a huge scandal is brewing and this could hurt or help Trump just like his impeachment trial. Get ur popcorn out, enjoy the show.


    • Information Clearinghouse? How about a credible source? ICH’s site contains this disclaimer: “This website does not suggest that it contains the “truth”. The truth is a combination of all information and all facts relating to a topic. It is therefore unachievable (in my opinion) for anyone to say “I know the truth.” If you came to this site in search of “the truth” you will be disappointed. That is also true of CNN, FOX, ABC etc. If you came to gather information you may find it a useful resource.
      Truth is unknowable, according to ICH. So what’s the point of even communicating?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Latest news from the Washington Post:
        Time will tell whether that “intelligence report” is a hoax or not, under review by congressional committee.
        Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe in a separate statement also didn’t mention Russia and said the intelligence community was “still investigating the alleged intelligence referenced in recent media reporting and we will brief the President and Congressional leaders at the appropriate time. This is the analytic process working the way it should.”

        Haspel and Ratcliffe criticized leaks of classified information, which they said made it harder for the intelligence agencies to collect and assess information.

        Chief Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said in a statement that the Defense Department continued to evaluate the intelligence. “To date, DOD has no corroborating evidence to validate the recent allegations found in open-source reports,” he said. “Regardless, we always take the safety and security of our forces . . . most seriously and therefore continuously adopt measures to prevent harm from potential threats.”


        • Jill, one thing we must keep in mind is the president does not have much credibility. The vice president has chosen to agree with most of what the president says or tweets, which is embarassing.

          From Bob Woodward’s book “Fear” and as verified by other sources, the president will strong arm support on his narrative. It takes a lot of courage to go against that maelstorm of furor. That is why those that testified to the House impeachment hearings showed courage.

          There is other context we should not forget and that is the movie called “Charlie Wilson’s War” based on Congressman Charlie Wilson’s efforts to arm and train Afghanis to fire on Russian helicopters in the invasion by the USSR of Afghanistan in a proxy war. It would not be a stretch to see the Russians return the favor.

          I recognize this does not make this true, but it is not hard for me to believe it is true. I do believe a president would be briefed on something of this nature. And, I absolutely believe the president is not being truthful as he has earned that mantle. Keith

          Liked by 1 person

          • Jill, after I posted the second comment, I read a good piece in Reuters. Here is a paragraph that might add some credence.

            “Four U.S. government sources have confirmed to Reuters weekend media reports that credible U.S. intelligence reports suggested a Russian military intelligence unit offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants to kill U.S. and allied forces.”

            While I don’t care for unnamed sources, this is a very vindictive president. So, I at least understand the need for being unnamed.


            Liked by 1 person

            • Yes, I read that earlier today. Like you, I am not a huge fan of anonymous sources, but in the era of Trump, it is necessary. Look what has happened to all who spoke against him.


          • In my book, he has zero credibility. I don’t believe a word he says, nor that of any of his cronies … or should I call them henchmen? Kayleigh McEnany disgusts me to no end, defending his every word and lying endlessly … I do believe she is even worse than Sarah Huckabee Sanders was! Sigh. Yes, I have no doubt that Russia paid the Taliban to kill U.S. soldiers … today I read there are bank transfers that pretty much prove it. And I know Trump was briefed. But … if he took a stand, as he ought to have … if he had imposed sanctions on Russia back in February when he was first briefed, then he might have lost Putin’s help with November’s election. That, in my mind, is the driving factor in his silence. What he did is no doubt an impeachable offense, but even today, the republicans in the Senate would refuse to acknowledge it as such.


  4. this story about the Russians is false and even intelligence analysts cast doubt on the credibility of the new york times written propaganabut as long as anything is written that perpetuates the hatred in this country, I suppose it’s to be taken as irrefutable fact while sources outside of the corporately owned and controlled mainstream media and those who may gain some value from such sources are continuallly demonized and marginalized as less than credible proponents of nonsensical conspiracy theories.
    She probably just took the word of the times and cnn, organizations who have been proven, more times than I can count, of printing and broadcasting false information.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sorry Scott … where there is so much smoke, there is likely a fire. Intelligence officials say they briefed Trump on the situation not once, but at least twice. Forget which media published the story first … doesn’t matter. What matters is the evidence, and the evidence leaves no doubt. The bigger question is why didn’t Trump act, impose sanctions on Russia, inform We the People? Because he didn’t want to offend Russia and lose their help in the upcoming election? Yes, I’m only speculating on the reasons, but not on the facts.


  5. If Trump and Pence can prove they have not been briefed about it fair enough but they must move on iit now..But if they have been briefed and the document proving it can be brought forward naming each person there I would suggest a trijal on a charge of Treason so each vet and each Republican hears and understands the charge they can finally see what they’ve let them get away with.

    Liked by 5 people

    • It seems that the evidence is overwhelming that they were, in fact, briefed. Proving a negative is darn near impossible. However, if he wasn’t briefed, then heads should roll in the intelligence community for dereliction of duty, for he should have been apprised immediately. And, he should have immediately sought severe sanctions against Russia and should have informed We the People. To have failed to do so is, as you suggest, treason, but no doubt the republicans in Congress would continue to cover his backside. I’m so fed up with the government of this country … I wouldn’t shed a tear if somebody assassinated the whole lot of ’em.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Since I recently read that they were aware of it and briefed during 2019 there will be a very peeved someone in the army who fancies doing just that, I shouldn’t think the vets are going to believe anything after learning that.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yes, the evidence is mounting that there were, in fact, both written and verbal briefings over the past year. So … what’s the defense? There is no justifiable one. But, a couple of my readers are on the “democratic hoax” bandwagon. Sigh. As if I didn’t have enough …

          Liked by 1 person

          • Unusual for the idiots to suggest the military are part of a Democrat Hoax.
            Also they haven’t yet found one Democratic hoax after all these years but still they’d rather believe that than believe they might have been mistaken/

            Liked by 1 person

            • They are grasping at straws, for their argument has no substance. If there are hoaxes within our nation, they are more likely on the part of those who lean to the far right, the bigots and haters. Sigh.

              Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s