House Republicans Straight Up Lying to Protect Trump

By this point, it shouldn’t shock us just how low the Republican Party is willing to stoop to protect an alleged but apparent criminal like President Donald Trump, but this week conservative lawmakers did something that got me to exclaim, “Are you kidding me?” The House Intelligence Committee ended its investigation into Trump and declared that there was “no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians.”

Despite objections from the Democratic members of the Intelligence Committee, House Republicans are effectively declaring “show’s over, there’s nothing to see here” even as Special Counselor Robert Mueller’s investigation plows ahead.

Not only are congressional conservatives indicating that Trump was not involved in any collusion, they went so far as to say that although Russians may have tried to meddle in the election, they certainly weren’t doing it to help Trump win.

Just last month, we heard Rep. Devin Nunes, the controversial head of the House Intelligence Committee, insist that it was actually Hillary Clinton who colluded with Russia and who the Kremlin was trying to aid. This claim flies in the face of the information collected by every U.S. intelligence agency, though.

The fact that the House Intelligence Committee has access to a lot of this information and still decided to reach the opposite conclusion is a combination of bizarre and worrisome. According to the Democrats like Rep. Adam Schiff, his conservative peers are only able to pretend to reach that conclusion after intentionally ignoring all sorts of information that would suggest otherwise.

Schiff vows that he and the liberals will release a minority report to give a better sense of what the intelligence committee has actually learned. In addition to sharing some damning details that the public is not yet aware of, Schiff says the minority report will list all of the interviews that weren’t conducted, leads that weren’t followed and intelligence reports that weren’t looked at so that the House Intelligence Committee could deliberately avoid having to find Trump guilty.

It’s clear that there’s a Republican attempt to counter the dominant narrative about the Trump campaign, and they want to offer partisan citizens something to grab on to so they may continue to pretend nothing is wrong. Trump himself sure has, immediately sending an all-caps tweet saying that he’s been vindicated when news of the report broke.

“By ending its oversight role in the only authorized investigation in the House, the Majority has placed the interests of protecting the President over protecting the country, and history will judge its actions harshly,” said Schiff.

The Republican’s 150-page report still hasn’t gone public yet, but the House Intelligence Committee is expected to release it soon. The report will argue that the collusion investigation began because of misleading research prepared by the Clinton campaign.

Meanwhile, the Senate Intelligence Committee is continuing its investigation. Chairman Richard Burr, a Republican, showed some partisan leaning when he said he has yet to see evidence to suggest collusion yet, but he added that it was premature to say anything conclusively.

Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore

112 comments

Marie W
Marie W2 months ago

Thank you for posting

SEND
John B
John B7 months ago

Thanks Kevin for sharing the info.

SEND
Dot A
Dot A7 months ago

You're a Rock Star Susanne!!! Thanks for the extra effort to provide the disclaimers, the facts that are factual, and the gusto to address serious mistakes in thought, logic, reasoning, and the sad distortions of what is happening in our country, and across the globe. Bravo, Susanne, - We will need more of you, and more of your kind in the following months, if not years. {there are far too many who swallow the horrible lies that are swirling about in an effort to keep the population off balance, confused, and easier to manipulate because of the instability of information that's been created to deceive the masses}

SEND
Karen Swenson
Karen Swenson7 months ago

@Susanne R -- A MILLION STARS to you on your excellent fact finding! I have written some of these same things on other occasions, but all you hear from them is "CRICKETS." And then later on, the same tired old Alternative Facts that are computer chipped and drilled deep in their heads.

SEND
Susanne R
Susanne R7 months ago

I added three separate posts, all of which included sourced information, after my my 5:00 am response to Brian F. and Paul B.. All of them first appeared shaded in gray and all of them showed up when I returned to this page. Now they are all gone. Could Care2 please explain why they have disappeared? Has this happened to anyone else?

SEND
Susanne R
Susanne R7 months ago

Source: Politifact - Winner of the Pulitzer Prize
"In August 2013, Assad’s regime killed more than 1,400 people in a chemical weapons attack on the city of Damascus. Obama wanted to strike Syria in retaliation, but he chose to ask Congress to authorize his use of military force. Obama couldn’t get enough votes to pass his proposal, so he did not order strikes fired in direct retaliation for the chemical attacks. The 2017 chemical weapons attack was much smaller, killing about 80 people. Two days later, without advance notice or requesting congressional approval, Trump launched nearly 60 cruise missiles at a Syrian airfield used to carry out the chemical weapons attacks.
Because the Obama administration spent several days lobbying Congress and the public to support his proposed military action, there are numerous speeches, media interviews, documents and congressional hearings during which his team laid out the strategy. For Trump, in contrast, we have to look at what members of his administration have said to justify the airstrikes after the fact."

Unfortunately, according to Newsweek Magazine, "Nine civilians, including four children, were killed in the United States missile attack on a military airbase in Homs province in the early hours of Friday morning, the Syrian state news agency has said. The report from SANA cited civil sources as stating that two missiles struck the al-Shairat airbase,

SEND
Susanne R
Susanne R7 months ago

Regarding "Trump has already imposed far more sanctions on Russia attacked an airbase after Obama's failed "red line", far more than Obama did in his entire term."
Source: The Independent (quoting the Wall Street Journal)
Title: 'Why would anybody have sanctions if somebody's doing some really great things?' says Mr Trump -- Katie Forster -- January 2017

"Sanctions placed on Russia by Barack Obama could be lifted if the country works with the US on battling terrorists and other goals, Donald Trump has suggested.
The President-elect told the Wall Street Journal he would keep sanctions against Russia intact “at least for a period of time”, as scrutiny over his relationship with the Kremlin intensifies. “If you get along and if Russia is really helping us, why would anybody have sanctions if somebody's doing some really great things?” he said during the hour-long interview. The Obama administration imposed sanctions against Russia, including the ejection of 35 suspected Russian spies from the US, late last month in response to alleged cyber attacks from Moscow. This followed successive moves by Mr Obama and the EU to punish Russia for continued fighting in eastern Ukraine, which erupted in 2014. Consecutive rounds of sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezing, have been imposed on Russia over the conflict and its annexation of the Crimean Peninsula, with the most r

SEND
Susanne R
Susanne R7 months ago

Brian & Paul -- Regarding the oft repeated "Hillary sold uranium rumor":
Source: FactCheck.org® A Project of The Annenberg Public Policy Center
A False ‘Corruption’ Claim - By Lori Robertson - Posted on October 25, 2016
"A few days after the Times story, Schweizer made the false claim on “Fox News Sunday” that Clinton, as secretary of state, had “veto power” and “could have stopped” the sale. We found that only the president had that power.
As we explained in our story at the time, Clinton was one of nine government officials to make up the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, which is required by law to investigate all U.S. transactions that involve a company owned or controlled by a foreign government. Committee members include the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, the attorney general, and representatives from two White House offices — the United States Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
The committee can’t actually stop a sale from going through — it can only approve a sale. The president is the only one who can stop a sale, if the committee or any one member “recommends suspension or prohibition of the transaction,&

SEND
Susanne R
Susanne R7 months ago

Brian F. and Paul B. -- It's after 5:00 a.m., but I couldn't go to sleep without acknowledging the remarks you addressed to me. I will respond to your comments and alternative facts later today, but in the meantime, I leave you with a quote from my old National Forensic League handbook. It was the first and most important rule of debate: "A. Evidence defined: Debaters are responsible for the validity of all evidence they introduce in the debate. Evidence includes, but is not limited to: facts, statistics, or examples attributable to a specific, identifiable, authoritative source used to support a claim. Unattributed ideas are the opinion of the student competitor and are not evidence." Unless you're able to back up your claims with credible evidence, don't share them. They can be construed as "unsubstantiated" or "hearsay" or even "lies." I've got my work cut out for me, but I will do the research. But to be honest, the ridiculous accusations you've made against President Obama and Secretary Clinton will not be hard to refute. They border on lunacy.

SEND
Karen Swenson
Karen Swenson7 months ago

@Paul B--Talk about living in La La land--you have got to be the president. Gee how could you have left out Hillary's Pizza Gate, where she was accused of running a child sex ring. How about all the Murders she was supposed to have committed. Oh, and when they were in office, remember Bill O'Riley, Pervert, reported she and Bill had sex ornaments decorated on the Christmas Trees right there in the White house! Isn't it just something that she has been investigated numerous times, by Republican appointed hacks and NO ONE could find anything to Lock her up over. After everything she has been through, Putin would be toast, and you and Brian would be troll crumbs!

SEND