The NSA Chief Says Russia Hacked the 2016 Election. Congress Must Investigate

Important read.  I think that we should all join Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and reach out to our leadership and call for an "a full-fledged congressional investigation that holds public hearings and releases its findings to the citizenry."

In his recent book, The Plot to Hack America [6], national security expert Malcolm Nance wrote, "Russia has perfected political warfare by using cyber assets to personally attack and neutralize political opponents…At some point Russia apparently decided to apply these tactics against the United States and so American democracy itself was hacked."

Angela Valenzuela
c/s

• 
  

Congress: aoc.gov/Wikimedia Commons; Soviet flare: serkorkin/iStock; Soviet background: badvviser/iSto

The NSA Chief Says Russia Hacked the 2016 Election. Congress Must Investigate.

It's up to Capitol Hill to protect American democracy.

By David Corn | Wed Nov. 16, 2016 3:24 PM EST

---

Despite all the news being generated by the change of power underway in Washington, there is one story this week that deserves top priority: Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. On Tuesday, the director of the National Security Agency, Admiral Michael Rogers, was asked about the WikiLeaks release of hacked information during the campaign, and he said [1], "This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect." He added, "This was not something that was done casually. This was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily."

This was a stunning statement that has echoed other remarks from senior US officials. He was saying that Russia directly intervened in the US election to obtain a desired end: presumably to undermine confidence in US elections or to elect Donald Trump—or both. Rogers was clearly accusing Vladimir Putin of meddling with American democracy. This is news worthy of bold and large front-page headlines—and investigation. Presumably intelligence and law enforcement agencies are robustly probing the hacking of political targets attributed to Russia. But there is another inquiry that is necessary: a full-fledged congressional investigation that holds public hearings and releases its findings to the citizenry.

If the FBI, CIA, and other intelligence agencies are digging into the Russian effort to affect US politics, there is no guarantee that what they uncover will be shared with the public. Intelligence investigations often remain secret for the obvious reasons: they involve classified information. And law enforcement investigations—which focus on whether crimes have been committed—are supposed to remain secret until they produce indictments. (And then only information pertinent to the prosecution of a case is released, though the feds might have collected much more.) The investigative activities of these agencies are not designed for public enlightenment or assurance. That's the job of Congress.

When traumatic events and scandals that threaten the nation or its government have occurred—Pearl Harbor, Watergate, the Iran-contra affair, 9/11—Congress has conducted investigations and held hearings. The goal has been to unearth what went wrong and to allow the government and the public to evaluate their leaders and consider safeguards to prevent future calamities and misconduct. That is what is required now. If a foreign government has mucked about and undercut a presidential election, how can Americans be secure about the foundation of the nation and trust their own government? They need to know specifically what intervention occurred, what was investigated (and whether those investigations were conducted well), and what steps are being taken to prevent further intrusions. 

There already is much smoke in the public realm: the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton's campaign. Also, Russian hackers reportedly targeted [2] state election systems in Arizona and Illinois. Coincidentally or not, the Russian deputy foreign minister said [3] after the election that Russian government officials had conferred with members of Trump's campaign squad. (A former senior counterintelligence officer for a Western service sent [4] memos to the FBI claiming that he had found evidence of a Russian intelligence operation to coopt and cultivate Trump.) And the DNC found evidence [5] suggesting its Washington headquarters had been bugged—but there was no indication of who was the culprit. In his recent book, The Plot to Hack America [6], national security expert Malcolm Nance wrote, "Russia has perfected political warfare by using cyber assets to personally attack and neutralize political opponents…At some point Russia apparently decided to apply these tactics against the United States and so American democracy itself was hacked."

Several House Democrats, led by Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, have urged [7] the FBI to investigate links between Trump's team and Russia, and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has done the same [8]. According to various news reports, Russia-related probes have been started by the FBI targeting Americans associated with the Trump campaign. One reportedly was focused on Carter Page [9], a businessman whom the Trump campaign identified as a Trump adviser, and another was focused on Paul Manafort [10], who served for a time as Trump's campaign manager. (Page and Manafort have denied any wrongdoing; Manafort said no investigation was happening.)

Yet there is a huge difference between an FBI inquiry that proceeds behind the scenes (and that may or may not yield public information) and a full-blown congressional inquiry that includes open hearings and ends with a public report. So far, the only Capitol Hill legislator who has publicly called for such an endeavor is Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). On Tuesday, Graham, who was harshly critical of Trump during the campaign, proposed [11] that Congress hold hearings on "Russia's misadventures throughout the world," including the DNC hack. "Were they involved in cyberattacks that had a political component to it in our elections?" Graham said. He pushed Congress to find out.

The possibility that a foreign government covertly interfered with US elections to achieve a particular outcome is staggering and raises the most profound concerns about governance within the United States. An investigation into this matter should not be relegated to the secret corners of the FBI or the CIA. The public has the right to know if Putin or anyone else corrupted the political mechanisms of the nation. There already is reason to be suspicious. Without a thorough examination, there will be more cause to question American democracy.

---

Source URL: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/will-congress-investigate-russian-interference-2016-campaign

Links:
[1] https://twitter.com/i/web/status/798647324687929344
[2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-is-investigating-foreign-hacks-of-state-election-systems/2016/08/29/6e758ff4-6e00-11e6-8365-b19e428a975e_story.html
[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/moscow-had-contacts-with-trump-team-during-campaign-russian-diplomat-says/2016/11/10/28fb82fa-a73d-11e6-9bd6-184ab22d218e_story.html
[4] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump
[5] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/dnc-told-fbi-it-may-have-been-bugged
[6] https://www.amazon.com/Plot-Hack-America-Cyberspies-WikiLeaks/dp/1510723323
[7] http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/top-democrats-call-fbi-investigate-trump-ties-russia-over-hacking-n666696
[8] http://www.salon.com/2016/10/31/harry-reid-calls-on-james-comey-to-investigate-explosive-information-about-donald-trumps-ties-to-russia/
[9] https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-s-intel-officials-probe-ties-between-trump-adviser-and-kremlin-175046002.html
[10] http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-making-inquiry-ex-trump-campaign-manager-s-foreign-ties-n675881
[11] http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-gop-sen-lindsey-graham-wants-congress-1479254194-htmlstory.html

Michigan Under Investigation for Foul Play in Flint Water Crisis

Powerful and very tragic story unfolding in Flint, Michigan—months in the making. Children are getting exposed to high levels of lead in their drinking water. Quote from within:

“It took two months for [Gov. Snyder] to apologize, for him to declare a state of emergency, for him to offer bottled water,” Rochelle Riley, a columnist for the Detroit Free Press, told NPR. “You’ve got residents who have been complaining about this water after it started to flow out of their taps slightly brown and tasting funny, and nobody cared.”

The crisis in Flint is exacerbated by its economic situation—40 percent of residents live below the poverty level, according to the U.S. Census—and has hit many of the city’s poorest residents hardest. Meanwhile, residents struggling to make ends meet continue to be billed for contaminated, undrinkable water, according to the Free Press.

Yesterday, Michigan's Governor Snyder asked President Obama for an emergency declaration in order to address this water crisis. This is good and I hope that the President extends all the support these residents need.  And this atop other news out of Porter Ranch in northern Los Angeles where residents have experienced—many falling ill—to an unprecedented gas leak:

Environmental activists such as Erin Brockovich have called it the worst leak in the United States since the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Thousands of residents are getting re-located right now

How shameful and telling that a whole presidential debate took place yesterday evening with no mention of either of these ecological and humanitarian crises taking place right now before us in Flint, Michigan and Porter Ranch, California.

Angela Valenzuela

 

Michigan Under Investigation for Foul Play in Flint Water Crisis

By Rebecca McCray | Takepart.com 5 hours ago TakePart.com

.

View photo

Michigan Under Investigation for Foul Play in Flint Water Crisis

The fallout from the contaminated water crisis in Flint, Michigan, has a hefty new price tag: $41 million. On Thursday night, Gov. Rick Snyder called on the federal government to assist with the cost of emergency services associated with the lead contamination, The Washington Post reported. Then, on Friday, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette announced he had opened an investigation to find out if the state violated any laws leading up to the contamination’s discovery.

“In 21st-century America, no one should have to fear something as basic as turning on the kitchen faucet,” Schuette said in a statement. “The situation in Flint is a human tragedy in which families are struggling with the most basic parts of daily life.”

Two years ago, the state decided to switch Flint’s main water supply from Lake Huron in Detroit to the Flint River in an effort to save money. The state had assumed responsibility of the city’s budget during a financial crisis. Researchers soon discovered that the water from the Flint River was 19 times more corrosive than that from Lake Huron. The corrosive quality eroded iron water mains, turning the water brown, and funneled lead into the water supply from the many lead service lines in the city.

Residents filed a federal class action lawsuit against the city and state in November, accusing the state of placing cost savings over the health of its citizens.

Schuette’s investigation follows a probe started by the U.S. Attorney’s Office earlier this month as Snyder declared a state of emergency. On Thursday, more than 150 Flint residents flooded the lobby of the building where Snyder’s office is housed, demanding his resignation and arrest for what they say is his mishandling of the lead contamination.

“It took two months for [Snyder] to apologize, for him to declare a state of emergency, for him to offer bottled water,” Rochelle Riley, a columnist for the Detroit Free Press, told NPR. “You’ve got residents who have been complaining about this water after it started to flow out of their taps slightly brown and tasting funny, and nobody cared.”

The crisis in Flint is exacerbated by its economic situation—40 percent of residents live below the poverty level, according to the U.S. Census—and has hit many of the city’s poorest residents hardest. Meanwhile, residents struggling to make ends meet continue to be billed for contaminated, undrinkable water, according to the Free Press. 

Related stories on TakePart:

• Outraged Girl Scouts Send Letters Demanding Action on Flint Water Crisis 

Related Stories

1. Michigan governor asks Obama for federal aid in Flint water crisis Reuters
2. Could Flint water crisis lead to criminal charges? Michigan prosecutor to investigate Christian Science Monitor
3. The Latest: Flint water protest planned at governor's speech Associated Press
4. Gov. Snyder asks Obama for federal aid in Flint water crisis Associated Press
5. Michigan Governor: Sorry About That Lead-Contaminated Water TakePart.com

What an eye-opener to see that the roster for the U.S. presidency includes candidates that are engaged in this "higher-ed" hustle.  Check out the Miami Herald's year-long investigation of the higher education industry.  They serve 300,000 students spread out over 1000 campuses.  They get billions of financial aid state dollars, as well as millions of dollars of state money—enabled by policies that allow for the expansion of such so-called colleges and universities.  What a scam.  And they leave low-income families that are vulnerable to their messages in disarray.  Hear about their damaged lives in this news report here.  This bilking of the federal financial aid purse and to do so at these students' expense is unconscionable.

-Angela

Higher-Ed Hustle: For-profit colleges cast shadow over presidential race

By Michael Vasquez and Patricia Mazzei
mrvasquez@MiamiHerald.com

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign spent the past week touting her new plan to make college affordable — in part by cracking down on “predatory” colleges, and forcing schools to “spend federal dollars on things that benefit students, like teaching and research, not marketing campaigns.”
What Clinton didn’t mention: Her husband, Bill, has been paid more than $16 million as “honorary chancellor” of Laureate Education, the world’s largest for-profit college company. The firm is being sued by several online graduate students for allegedly dishonest practices, and a 2012 U.S Senate report found that more than half of Laureate’s online Walden University revenue went to marketing and profit.
Republicans quickly went on the attack. “Clinton’s College Hypocrisy Tour Rolls On” read the subject line from a Republican National Committee e-mail to reporters.
What the RNC didn’t mention: The GOP field of 2016 presidential hopefuls is filled with candidates who have close ties to for-profit colleges. Marco Rubio listed two for-profit executives (and the industry’s former top Florida lobbyist) as “contributors” to his 2006 book, 100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future. Jeb Bush gave a keynote speech at the for-profit industry’s Washington trade association last year, for which he was paid $51,000.
Republican front-runner Donald Trump is being sued by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman over his now-shuttered “Trump University” business school. Schneiderman has said Trump University used false promotional materials and “was a scam from top to bottom.”

Continue reading here.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/education/article31216595.html#storylink=cpy

Latino leaders lean left for ... Hillary?

On the subject of the Presidential candidates and where Latinos fall into all of this, this is a really good story, analysis. -Angela

Latino leaders lean left for ... Hillary?
By: Gebe Martinez

July 26, 2007 05:35 AM EST /from Politico.com

As New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson began the first-ever
presidential campaign by a Hispanic, Latino leaders faced a
dilemma.

Is it acceptable, they wondered -- especially at a time
when Latinos are feeling attacked on the civil rights
front -- to skip this historic moment and endorse a
candidate besides Richardson for the Democratic nomination?

The answer came swiftly when New York Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton announced early on that she had won the highly
coveted endorsement of Raul Yzaguirre, the former president
of the National Council of La Raza, a long-standing Latino
advocacy group.

She also got the backing of the controversial but
influential mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa, New
Jersey Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez and dozens more.

While the value of endorsements by other politicians is
often questioned -- especially in this presidential
election season, in which big-name backers of Democrats and
Republicans have been accused of drug trafficking, using
prostitutes or being unfaithful in marriage -- they still
matter among the growing, Democratic-leaning Hispanic
electorate.

And so far, Clinton is leading the fierce race for Latino
endorsements. Well-known and well-financed at the start of
her campaign, she aggressively sought Hispanic support
before Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois surged in the polls
and before Richardson's bid became sure-footed.

"One (endorsement request) that was very difficult to turn
down was from my very good friend, Bill Richardson,"
acknowledged Yzaguirre, a co-chairman of Clinton's
campaign. "(Clinton) made it clear she wants to reach the
Latino vote," he said. Former President Bill Clinton was
intellectually tuned in to the Latino electorate,
but "Hillary gets it emotionally and intellectually."

And Latinos want to be wanted. After being largely ignored
in the presidential campaigns of Al Gore and John F. Kerry,
Latinos are getting far more attention than an "En Espanol"
tab on candidates' websites.

The Clinton campaign has drawn notice for its multifaceted
strategy, which includes bringing on the first Hispanic
woman to manage a major presidential campaign, the hiring
of a Latino pollster and community networking in Florida
and Southwestern states where Latinos could be the swing
vote in the general election.

Using the 21-member Congressional Hispanic Caucus as a
yardstick, Clinton has seven members backing her, while
Richardson, the son of an American father and a Mexican
mother, has three.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards has two
endorsements from Latino lawmakers, and Obama and Sen.
Chris Dodd of Connecticut each have one.

In a Gallup/USA Today poll conducted last month, 59 percent
of Hispanic voters surveyed said they supported Clinton
over Obama, Richardson and then Edwards, with the rest of
the field barely registering.

"The (Clinton) campaign clearly is thinking about the
Hispanic vote, and it didn't happen by accident," said
Roberto Suro, director of the Pew Hispanic Center. "It's a
measure of the fact that the campaign has determined that
they need to have some approaches to this population."

But as Richardson inches into the top tier of candidates,
he remains a formidable competitor for the Latino vote. His
list of supporters highlights community activists in key
states, even beyond his home region.

The governor probably will not win the Democratic
nomination, but he will do well enough "to hold serve with
Latino voters," predicted Antonio Gonzalez, president of
the William C. Velasquez Institute, which studies Latino
voter and economic trends.

"If Richardson is perceived as a viable candidate and he
has enough money to get the message out, that's going to
cancel out the Latino endorsements of Hillary," he
maintained.


First, however, Richardson must become better known by
Latinos who do not know his ethnic or political background,
which includes serving as a congressman for 14 years, then
as U.N. ambassador and energy secretary for President
Clinton.

Latino endorsements are not just an introduction of the
candidate to voters. They carry an extra layer of trust
because the leaders and their constituents often have
similar cultural and economic origins.

"They can be useful when the voters are relatively
inexperienced, like first-time voters who maybe are not
that crystallized on their self-interests," Gonzalez said.
That is why, despite personal issues, Villaraigosa's
support for Clinton remains significant.

At the same time, Latinos want to be taken seriously, not
just to have a seat at the power table but also to bring
the campaigns into their neighborhoods, where issues such
as immigration, health care and education are key.

One reason little was spent on the Latino vote by recent
presidential campaigns is that the Hispanic population is
concentrated in California, New York, Texas and other
states that were not major battlegrounds. They will be in
play next year.

And in the wake of the testy immigration debate, civil
rights activists are stepping up citizenship and voter
registration drives even in nontraditional Hispanic states
where the Latino population has shot up. The 2008 Latino
vote is expected to total 9.5 million, an increase of 1.9
million over 2004.

Candidates and their supporters are courting Latinos in
serious and not-so-serious ways.

Dodd speaks Spanish. Richardson inaugurated his campaign in
Los Angeles with a bilingual speech. Supporters of Obama
have launched a Latino website with the message: "Tu voto
tiene swing!" ("Your vote has swing!")

Clinton has a bilingual "social networking" Web page that
includes her confession that she is not a very good cook.

Before choosing a candidate, Democratic Rep. Hilda L. Solis
of California said she wanted to make sure the outreach to
Latinos is "not just tokenism." California, she
emphasized, "is a big prize."

Illinois Democratic Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, who led House
efforts for a broad immigration measure, said it was more
than home-state loyalty that drove him to Obama. "We talked
early about his campaign and I know the issue of
immigration is very dear to him, and it is the pivotal
issue which I looked at," Gutierrez said.

Texas Democratic Rep. Charles Gonzalez signed on with
Edwards long before Richardson came calling.

As a member of the powerful House Energy and Commerce
Committee, Gonzalez said he wanted to help refine Edwards'
cornerstone anti-poverty agenda. "If we get in early enough
to give some guidance on some issues, that's good for
Latinos," he said.

Richardson, whose endorsement list includes longtime
friends like House Intelligence Committee Chairman
Silvestre Reyes of Texas, often reminds Latinos that he
knows them best.

"I know firsthand about the work that you do, not because
I'm reminded every four years about the importance of the
Latino vote. I know because I have been in the trenches,"
he recently told a Hispanic group in Los Angeles.

One thing is clear about endorsements, Latino or otherwise,
said Gonzalez of the Velasquez Institute. The winner will
reward those who jumped on board at the start, not at the
end. "Make no mistake," he said. "This is hardball
Democratic politics."

Gebe Martinez is a longtime journalist in Washington and a
frequent lecturer and commentator on the policy and
politics of Capitol Hill.

TM & © THE POLITICO & POLITICO.COM, a division of
Allbritton Communications Company