Fiona Hill Had GOPers On The Run For Downplaying Russian Meddling In 2016

WASHINGTON, D.C., UNITED STATES - NOVEMBER 21 2019:Fiona Hill, former official at the National Security Council specialising in the former Soviet Union and Russian and European affairs, at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine attends the Open Hearings on the Impeachment of President Donald Trump of the House Intelligence Committee in Washington.
WASHINGTON, D.C., UNITED STATES - NOVEMBER 21 2019: Fiona Hill, former official at the National Security Council specialising in the former Soviet Union and Russian and European affairs, at the U.S. Embassy in Ukrain... WASHINGTON, D.C., UNITED STATES - NOVEMBER 21 2019: Fiona Hill, former official at the National Security Council specialising in the former Soviet Union and Russian and European affairs, at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine attends the Open Hearings on the Impeachment of President Donald Trump of the House Intelligence Committee in Washington.- PHOTOGRAPH BY Michael Brochstein / Echoes Wire/ Barcroft Media (Photo credit should read Michael Brochstein / Echoes Wire / Barcroft Media via Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The former Russia and Europe director on the White House National Security Council drew Republican fury during her impeachment inquiry testimony Thursday for accusing GOP inquisitors of downplaying Russian election meddling.

In her opening statement and during the course of several hours of testimony, Dr. Fiona Hill said Republicans were playing into Russia’s hands by pushing some of the same Ukraine election meddling conspiracies that Donald Trump pressured Ukraine’s president to investigate.

“Based on questions and statements I have heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that Russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country—and that perhaps, somehow, for some reason, Ukraine did,” she said at the start of the hearing. “This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves.”

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), an outspoken Trump defender during these hearings, took issue with that.

“Not a single Republican member of this committee has said that Russia did not meddle in the 2016 elections,” she said, pointing to a report published last year by House Intelligence Committee Republicans — though it did not conclude, as intelligence agencies did, that Russia meddled to help Trump.

But Stefanik’s denunciation rang a little hollow. Here’s why.

Republicans haven’t challenged Trump’s crazy theory about Crowdstrike, which absolves Russia of meddling in 2016.

On Friday morning in a Fox News interview, Trump revived a conspiracy theory that he’s pushed again and again, asserting that a Democratic servers hacked by Russians actually ended up in Ukrainian hands.

His allies in Congress have stayed silent in the face of this blatantly pro-Russia conspiracy, which asserts among other things that Russia was framed by American investigators and Democrats. In fact, several Republican lawmakers have pushed for answers on it themselves.

In 2016, after realizing they’d been hacked, the Democratic Party hired the cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike to investigate what’d happened. The firm concluded that Russia was responsible and gave evidence of that conclusion to investigators.

The Crowdstrike conspiracy Trump has pushed — and which he pressured the Ukrainian president to investigate — asserts that the evidence Crowdstrike gave to investigators was manufactured, and that the real “server,” which was not physically handed over to the FBI, contains evidence that would absolve Russia of fault.

For some reason, Trump seems to believe Crowdstrike is a “Ukrainian company” that’s “owned by a very wealthy Ukrainian,” as he said Friday. In reality, it’s based in California and was co-founded by two men, both American citizens. One of them, Dmitri Alperovitch, was born in Russia.

White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney has said publicly that this server conspiracy was also one of three reasons the White House held up a nine-figure aid package to Ukraine.

Republicans have pushed several theories equating Ukrainian and Russian activity in 2016.

Aside from the Crowdstrike theory, Republicans in the impeachment inquiry have pushed several assertions about purported Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 elections that they’ve sought to equate to Russian meddling.

The theories grew from a January 2017 Politico article about a Ukrainian-American DNC contractor who reached out to the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, D.C. for information on Paul Manafort. The article also discussed the release of the so-called “black ledger” by a Ukrainian journalist and then-parliamentarian. The record of off-books payments led to the resignation of the Trump campaign’s then-chairman Paul Manafort.

Rudy Giuliani repeatedly publicized these theories on cable TV as he led Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine from outside government, and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) has parroted them in multiple impeachment inquiry hearings.

Asked repeatedly about these theories in her closed-door deposition, Hill expressed her frustration at what she said was Republicans playing into Russia’s hands.

“It does not amount to a large-scale Ukrainian Government effort to subvert our elections which is comparable to anything that the Russians did in 2016,” she said.

“And if we start down this path, not discounting what one individual or a couple of individuals might have done, ahead of our 2020 elections, we are setting ourselves up for the same kind of failures and intelligence failures that we had before.”

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. But Stefanik’s denunciation rang a little hollow. Here’s why.
    Republicans haven’t challenged Trump’s crazy theory about Crowdstrike, which absolves Russia of meddling in 2016.

    and yet, where was the Democratic pushback on Stefanik? Where were the Democrats, demanding to know why Trump was advancing a deranged Russian disinformation campaign theory – who was Trump talking to that he believes this crap? Does he have people in his inner circle who are Russian agents/operatives/dupes? Isn’t it obvious that this represents a massive security risk — that there are so many people telling Trump lies in the White House? And why doesn’t Stefanik show the least bit of concern for this?

  2. Solution:

    Comrades Graham, Johnson and Grassley.

  3. “And if we start down this path, not discounting what one individual or a couple of individuals might have done, ahead of our 2020 elections, we are setting ourselves up for the same kind of failures and intelligence failures that we had before.”

    Uh, yeah, they know that and that’s the whole fucking point. That’s their explicit GOAL. All they need is a few terms, 12-16 years of full control and it’s over, the democracy is done and we’re stuck with permanent minority rules white Christian hegemony led by the progeny of the Confederacy, and THAT won’t end until we start a war. Enlisting Russia/Putin’s help is specifically because they want what Putin has and has set up in Russia. He is the master of it and is providing them with the tools to create it.

  4. “Fiona Hill Had GOPers On The Run…”

    I’m starting to think Republicans have a real problem with strong, smart, self-confident women.

    (Speaker Pelosi: “Indeed.”)

    (Sec. Clinton: “Yep.”)

    (Sens. Warren and Harris: “Amen.”)

  5. Dr. Hill nailed the conspiracy between Russia and GOP leaders.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

194 more replies

Participants

Avatar for playitagainrowlf Avatar for fargo116 Avatar for eggrollian Avatar for cervantes Avatar for inversion Avatar for sniffit Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for gr Avatar for darcy Avatar for thebishop Avatar for esva Avatar for pshah Avatar for nobiru Avatar for jtx Avatar for castor_troy Avatar for khyber900 Avatar for cub_calloway Avatar for maximus Avatar for redhand Avatar for rascal_crone Avatar for paul_lukasiak Avatar for rucleare Avatar for emiliano4 Avatar for kovie

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: