Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ztolkins

(429 posts)
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 12:50 PM Jun 2017

Obama Did What He Had to Do

William Saletan's piece in Slate on Obama's handling of Russia is fair and definitely worth the read.


There’s plenty to second-guess in Obama’s management of this episode. But the idea that he failed because Trump won is wrong. Obama’s job wasn’t to prevent the election of a particular person, even one as awful as Trump. Obama’s job was to preserve the country. That meant protecting the integrity of our elections and public faith in them, which he did, to the extent possible after Russia had already hacked into the Democratic National Committee and spread misinformation. The next task—exposing the full extent of Russia’s interference, punishing it, and deterring future attacks—is up to Trump. If he fails, the responsibility to hold him accountable falls to Congress. And if Congress fails, the job of electing a new, more patriotic legislature falls to voters.

According to the U.S. intelligence community’s Jan. 6 assessment, Vladimir Putin’s long-term goal in directing the interference campaign was to “undermine public faith in the US democratic process.” Obama responded accordingly. “We set out from a first-order principle that required us to defend the integrity of the vote,” Obama’s former chief of staff, Denis McDonough, told the Post. Russia’s hacks and leaks were bad, but corruption of voter rolls and election tallies would be far worse. So the Obama administration focused on alerting state officials, fortifying cyberdefenses, and privately threatening Russia with retaliation.






http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/06/obama_s_response_to_russian_interference_he_did_his_job.html
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
1. Sounds like article implies there was no corruption of voter rolls and vote tallies.
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 01:10 PM
Jun 2017

I believe Obama was right that is/was the most important thing.

lostnfound

(16,184 posts)
4. I don't read it that way
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 05:44 PM
Jun 2017

It says,
"Obama’s former chief of staff, Denis McDonough, told the Post. Russia’s hacks and leaks were bad, but corruption of voter rolls and election tallies would be far worse. So the Obama administration focused on alerting state officials, fortifying cyberdefenses, and privately threatening Russia with retaliation."

Obama thought that was the most important thing, but the article does NOT make any conclusion about whether or not he was successful.

I don't know HOW anyone would know. There are so many different schemes that COULD have been used, marrying to voter

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
5. Your own quote says there was no corruption of rolls and election tallies. I agree, that would
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 06:09 PM
Jun 2017

have been worse, but there is no evidence of it. Could it happen, sure. Did it happen, hundreds looking have found no evidence of it. Apparently, Obama's warning to shore up security worked.

lostnfound

(16,184 posts)
6. No, it doesn't.
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 07:05 PM
Jun 2017

It says he thought that corruption of voter rolls would have been worse, that does not necessarily mean it didn't happen. He may not know whether it did or didn't happen.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
7. Look, you gotta quit reading pointing at each word. It says "no corruption " in about 3 times more
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 11:44 PM
Jun 2017

words than necessary

MBS

(9,688 posts)
2. this part especially:
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 01:41 PM
Jun 2017

Why didn’t Obama raise public alarms about Russian infiltration? Because that might have backfired. “Trump was predicting that the election would be rigged,” says the Post. “Obama officials feared providing fuel to such claims, playing into Russia’s efforts to discredit the outcome.” According to the paper, Obama and his team “worried that any action they took would be perceived as political interference in an already volatile campaign.” Rather than speak up when the CIA first warned him about Putin’s moves, Obama waited for “a high-confidence assessment from U.S. intelligence agencies on Russia’s role and intent.” He asked congressional Republicans to join him in cautioning citizens and state election officials. You can argue that this was politically naïve. But Obama wasn’t playing politics. He was trying to unite the country. . .

. . . Many Republicans saw Obama and Hillary Clinton as greater threats than Putin. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell resisted Obama’s pleas to warn the public about Russian interference, “voicing skepticism that the underlying intelligence truly supported the White House’s claims.” . . .

. . . The Russia investigation was never about Russia. It was, and is, about America. It’s about whether you put your country before a partisan or personal agenda. It’s about understanding that America isn’t just a plot of land. It’s an idea. We elect our leaders, our leaders follow rules, and they represent all of us. Obama was determined to preserve that idea, even at the risk of relinquishing the White House to Trump. The successor who betrayed him—and us—is unworthy of his office.

Skittles

(153,169 posts)
3. I can understand the INITIAL hesitation
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 03:33 PM
Jun 2017

but to fail to disclose after Comey came out with that phony Hillary email story? TOTAL FUCKING BULLSHIT.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Obama Did What He Had to ...