Heather “Digby” Parton writes about the Devil being lost in the details that are emerging at a furious rate in the Trump/Russia scandal.
FRIDAY, MAR 3, 2017 05:10 AM PST
This is the first time I’ve had to read one of Heather “Digby” Parton's paragraphs 10 times to try to figure out what, exactly, she meant. I wonder if it took as long to write it as it took me to try, unsuccessfully, to discern what she was actually saying between the lines which I added above.
My hunch is that she thinks Ryan personally, and other Republicans, are guilty as hell, but is parsing her words.
I agree. Ryan doth protest too much:
One of those discomfited was House Speaker Paul Ryan who was quoted in the article saying, “Vladimir Putin is an aggressor who does not share our interests,” and accusing the Russian leader of “conducting state-sponsored cyberattacks” on our political system.
Guilty as hell. Unfortunately merely pointing out the obvious doesn’t prove the obvious: "it’s difficult to believe that Russians would have which House races to target without some help from people with expertise in the 2016 map."
She concludes in the next paragraph with this (emphasis mine):
The Republican congressional leadership must be thanking their lucky stars daily that the Trump administration is such a scandal-ridden Dumpster fire. If things ever calm down in the White House, somebody might just turn their attention to the question of what Paul Ryan knew, and when he knew it.
Indeed. Internal inconsistency notwithstanding in the convoluted language in the paragraph that took me 10 minutes to read and reread, I think as I’m sure our friend over at Salon also thinks:
* I don’t think anyone believes it’s likely that Paul Ryan personally colluded with the Russians in this operation. The fact that many Republicans, some affiliated with the NRCC and a group closely affiliated with Ryan, eagerly used it to win their campaigns is not surprising. But it is highly unlikely that Republican strategists or party officials with strong knowledge of the House campaigns didn’t collude with the hackers at some point, because it’s difficult to believe that Russians would have (known) which House races to target without some help from people with expertise in the 2016 map.
Friday, Mar 3, 2017 · 2:56:57 PM +00:00 · HalBrown
Just a thought about the Republicans calling all of this a “witch hunt.” I should be amazed how such terms are shown around when a somber non-hysterical response would be, dare I say, more credible and dignified. I’m not. For example Trump should say: “I am deeply disturbed by these allegations; but I understand, trust, and endorse the efforts of our intelligence to get to objectively look at the evidence. I believe that ultimately the charges will be proven false.”