Mediaboss Marketing

LeadingSenate Republicans are preparing to launch a coordinated and wide-ranging probe intoRussias alleged meddling in the U.S. elections and its potential cyberthreats to themilitary, digging deep intowhat they view as corrosive interference in the nationsinstitutions.

Such an aggressive approach puts them on a direct collision course with President-elect Donald Trump, who downplays the possibilityRussia had any role in the November elections arguing that a hack of the Democratic National Committee emailsmay have been perpetrated by some guy in his home in New Jersey. The fracture could become more prominentafter Trump is inaugurated and begins settingforeign policy. He has already indicated that the country should get along with Russia since the two nations have many common strategic goals.

But some of Trumps would-be Republican allies on Capitol Hill disagree. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (Ariz.) is readying a probe of possible Russian cyber-incursions into U.S. weapons systems, and he said he has been discussing the issue with Senate Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (N.C.), with whom he will be working closely to investigate Russias suspected interference in the U.S. elections and cyberthreats to the military and other institutions. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has been apprised of the discussions.Burr did not respond to requests for comment.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee ChairmanBob Corker (R-Tenn.)also said he intends to hold hearings next year into alleged Russian hacking. Corker is on Trumps shortlist for secretary of state, according to the Trump transition team.

Trump transition officials could not be reached for comment.

The loudest GOP calls for a Russia probe are coming from McCain and Sen.Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). Both have taken a hard line on Russia and have been highlycritical of Trump, particularly hispraise of President Vladimir Putin.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) says he wants to investigate whether Russia interfered with the 2016 U.S. election, amongst claims that Donald Trump's rhetoric on Russia and Vladimir Putin is too soft. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

Theyll keep doing more here until they pay a price, Graham said of Russia. Heplans to spearhead legislation andhold a series of investigative hearings next year into Russias misadventures throughout the world, includingRussian meddling in the U.S. elections.

[Republican lawmakers move to restrain Trump on Russia]

Im going after Russia in every way you can go after Russia. I think theyre one of the most destabilizing influences on the world stage. I think they did interfere with our elections, and I want Putin personally to pay the price, Graham said in an interview with CNN on Wednesday.

McCain said his Armed Services Committee will launch a probe in the 115th Congress into Russias cyber-capabilities against the U.S. military and weapons systems,because the real threat is cyber, he explained.

But McCain said he expects the investigation will also dovetail with the topic of Russias suspected hacking of the DNC and state-based election systems which include a hack that took place in McCains home state of Arizona.

See, the problem with hacking is that if theyre able to disrupt elections, then its a national security issue, obviously, McCain said Thursday.

He added that the Armed Services Committee was still formulating exactly how to address the issue during hearings. But despite Trumps dismissal, McCain said that theres very little doubt Russia interfered in the U.S. elections, which he called very worthy of examination.

The U.S. government in October officially accused Russia of hacking the DNCs emails during the presidential campaign. The emails were posted on websites such as WikiLeaks and embarrassed the party, notably forcing Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) to resign as DNC chairwoman.

And U.S. military officialsofficials are concerned about Russias capacity to steal military secrets and corrupt operations: Officials already suspect that Russian hackers were behind a major email breach at the Pentagon last year. And the military could be a target for backlash, after an NBC News report widely circulated by Russian media said that U.S. military hackers were ready to launch cyberattacks against Russia in the event of an obvious election hack.

Trump continued to downplay Russian involvement in the electionsin aninterview released this week forTime magazines Person of the Year feature. In the interview,the president-elect disputed the Obama administrations accusation that Russia interfered in the election.

[U.S. government officially accuses Russia of interfering with elections]

I dont believe they interfered, Trump said of Russia. It could be Russia. And it could be China. And it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey. I believe that it could have been Russia and it could have been any one of many other people. Sources or even individuals.

Some Republicans delicately demurred, while still defending Trumps ability to negotiate with Putin.

The Democratic National Committee the intelligence community is of pretty much one mind that Russia was involved in that, was behind that, Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.) said in an MSNBC interview. King is a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and chairman of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on intelligence and counterterrorism.

King added that he was confident Trump will not be taken in by Putin.

Democrats have also taken issue with Trumps desire to pursue more friendly relations with Moscow, as well as his affinity for Putin.

The primary area of discomfort for the Republicans here and the Trump administration, in foreign policy and national security, is over Russia, said Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.), the House Intelligence Committees ranking Democrat. He accused Trump on MSNBC this week of becoming a propaganda piece for the Kremlin, adding: They may be giving him breathing space right now, but I dont expect that to last.

Sincethe election, Republican lawmakers havevoted to reestablish a U.S. hard line against Russias global ventures. TheHouse has passed measure tosanction anyone who supports the Syrian government in its ongoing civil war, a category that primarily includes Russia and Iran. There is also languagein the annual defense policy bill to provide millions of dollars in lethal aid to Ukraine, where the government in Kiev is engaged in open hostilities against Russian-backed separatists.

But many Democrats are impatient with Republicans for not taking faster and more concrete steps against Russia afterthe Obama administrationofficially accused Moscow of meddling in the elections.

Corker expressed early interest in holding hearings on Russia. But months later, those hearings have not been held. Were getting no pressure from anyone we just feel like its something we should do, Corker said in an interview Wednesday, when asked if the president-elect had pressured him not to raise the topic. As a matter of fact, we attempted to set a classified briefing up this week.

Obama administration officials maintain that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and other officials were ready to brief senators about Russias suspected role in the DNC hack on Thursday. Administration officials said that at the last minute, the committee dramatically broadened the scope of the hearing, forcing them to cancel.

A spokeswoman for Corker said the hearing was postponed because State Department officials were unavailable due to previous travel commitments. Sheadded that Corker and Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (Md.), the Senate Foreign Relations Committees ranking Democrat, received a classified briefing on cyberthreats prior to the election.

Corker pledged Wednesday that hearings investigating Russias role in the elections would be forthcoming next year. Were definitely going to look at it, he said.

An aggressive probe of Russias activities may not extend to the House, where leading Republicans say they have already been investigating Russia and will continue their effortsregardless of Trumps stance.

[Russia]s always been a priority for me, and it will remain a priority for me, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said.

Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, stressed that his committee has been looking at Russian cyberthreats to the military for the last two years.

Were going to have to all pay more attention to cyber and to Russian activities to influence things through cyber, Thornberry said.

Democrats, meanwhile, are going to use whatever power they have to ensure that suspected Russian activities in the elections and beyond get attention.

Seven top-ranked Democrats sent a letter to President Obama on Tuesday asking for classified briefings regarding Russian entities hacking of American political organizations, including theDNC hack, emails released by WikiLeaks and fake news.

Regardless of whether you voted for Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, or anyone else, Russias attacks on our election are an attempt to degrade our democracy and should chill every American Democratic, Republican, or Independent to the core, said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.),the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Relations Committee.

Read the rest here:
Republicans ready to launch wide-ranging probe of Russia ...

This post has been updated with a defiant statement from the Trump transition team.

The Washington Postis now reportingthat the CIA has concluded something widely suspected but never flatly stated by the intelligence community: that Russia moved deliberately to help elect Donald Trump as president of the United States not just to undermine the U.S. political process more generally.

The Post's report cites officials whosay they have identified individuals connected to the Russian government who gave WikiLeaks emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee and top Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta. One official described the conclusion that this was intended to help Trump as the consensus view.

The report highlights and exacerbates the increasingly fraught situation in which congressional Republicans find themselves with regard to Russia and Trump. By acknowledging and digging into the increasing evidence that Russia helped or at least attempted to help tip the scales in Trumps favor, they risk raising questions about whether Trump would have won without Russian intervention.

Trump, after all, won by a margin of about 80,000 votes cast across three states, winning each of the decisive states by less than one percentage point.So even a slight influence could have plausibly made the difference, though we'll never be able to prove it one way or another.

CIA briefers told senators in a closed-door briefing it was now "quite clear" that electing Trump was Russia's goal, according to officials. (Victoria Walker/The Washington Post)

While saying that Russia clearly tried to help Trumpdoesn't inherently call into question the legitimacy of Trump's win earlier Friday, the White House made sure to emphasize thatit's not making that case it's not hard to connect the dots. And Trump and his party know it. The Post's report cited Republicans who expressed skepticism about the available evidence when presented with it in September, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

In addition,any GOP effort to dig into the matter risks antagonizingthe president-elect, who has said flatly that he doesnt believe Russia interfered with the election, despite receiving intelligence briefings to the contrary. And he's proved more than willing to go after fellow Republicans who run afoul of him.

On the other hand, if Republicans play down the issue, they risk giving a pass to an antagonistic foreign power that significant majorities of Americans and members of Congress do not trust and which, if the evidence is accurate, wields significant power to wage successful cyberwarfare with the United States.

Already, House Democrats have begun pushing forsomething akin to the 9/11 Commission to look into allegations of Russian meddling. During the campaign, they pushed for hearings on the same issue.

Until this week, they'd beenunable to get much buy-in from congressional Republicans. But Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) voiced support for a probe on Wednesday, and now Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) says he is working with Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) on a wide-ranging Senate probe, as The Posts Karoun Demirjian reportedThursday.

Im going after Russia in every way you can go after Russia, Graham said. I think theyre one of the most destabilizing influences on the world stage. I think they did interfere with our elections, and I want [Russian President Vladimir] Putin personally to pay the price.

But even as these probesstart to materialize, Trump is singing a far different tune. In his interview with Time magazine for his Person of the Year award, Trump suggested that the interference could just as well have come from someone in New Jersey as from the Russian government.

I dont believe they interfered, Trump said. That became a laughing point not a talking point, a laughing point. Any time I do something, they say, Oh, Russia interfered.

Trump added: It could be Russia. And it could be China. And it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey.

Trump also maintained over and over again on the campaign trail that he wanted a better relationship with Russia and praised Putin as a strong leader while minimizing Russias favoritism for his campaign. And he did all of this at a time when Putin was very unpopular in the United States and even as the evidence was pointing in the direction of Russian meddling.

In other words, Trump has shown that he's committed to seeing the best in Russia, and it's unlikely another report from the dishonest media citing anonymous sources is going to change his mind.

And Trump has every reason to continue to dig in. He doesnt want to breathe any life into the story line that he owes his election to Russian interference. Trump, after all, is a winner, and the idea that someone else might have won it for him just won't fly.

Update: A statement from Trump's transition team, as expected, took a defiant tone about The Post's report: These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. Its now time to move on and 'Make America Great Again.'

But for congressional Republicans, the evidence is increasingly getting to the point where they simply cant ignore it, and some of them are feeling compelled to act in a way that Trump isnt likely to embrace.

Compounding the dilemma for these Republicans is that many GOP and Trump voters are disinclined to think Russia meddled in the election. A poll released Friday by Democratic pollster Democracy Corps showed 55 percent of Trump voters and Republicans who didnt vote for Trump say its probably true that stories alleging Russian interference in the election are conspiracy theories pushed by Clinton.

Many Republicans are undoubtedly concerned about this. But as long as Trump is holding fast to the idea that this is all made up in an effort to undermine him, this whole thing could reinforce the long-standing chasm within the GOP, with him and his base pitted against establishment Republicans who will (again) be made to look like theyre trying to take down their outsider president-elect. And you can bet thatll be how Trump pitches it.

It all presents a possibly inauspicious start for the GOP Congress in the Trump era: a potential Trump vs. congressional-Republicans-battle over the same election that surprisingly installed him as president.

Read the original:
The CIA concluded Russia worked to elect Trump ...

During the Obama years, congressional Republicans could rail away at the Affordable Care Act and vote endlessly to repeal it, secure in the knowledge that they would never have to deal with the consequences of repeal actually happening. At the same time, they could claim they wanted to keep the popular parts (protections for people with preexisting conditions) without explaining how that might be accomplished while jettisoning the unpopular parts (the individual mandate).

But now, repeal has suddenly become a reality. President-elect Donald Trumps choice of GOP Rep. Tom Price as Secretary of Health and Human Services underscores that he is dead serious about going forward with repeal-and-maybe-replace. Which means congressional Republicans (who will have to vote on repeal and then later maybe on replace) now have to grapple with the consequences of repeal actually happening and with the challenges of keeping the stuff people like while blithely tossing out the stuff they dont.

Talking Points Memo has a good piece that captures the contortions this is forcing Republicans to put themselves through right now. There are a number of questions they are trying to resolve: How can we keep protections for people with preexisting conditions while scrapping the mandate that keeps the insurance pool from getting too old and sick? How much can be repealed through reconciliation and a simple-majority Senate vote? All of those are difficult problems.

But I wanted to focus for the moment on one particular question: What will Republican legislators from states that have expanded Medicaid do? Note this quote that TPM got from Senator Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican from Trump-friendly West Virginia:

Im from a state that has an expanded Medicaid population that I am very concerned about.I dont want to throw them off into the cold, and I dont think thats a strategy that I want to see. Its too many people. Thats over 200,000 people in my state. So we need a transition. I think well repeal and then well work during the transition period for the replacement vehicle.

Capito knows that repeal would mean 200,000 of her constituents lose health coverage. And it turns out there are many other GOP Senators in a similar situation.

Donald Trump has campaigned to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, once he gets into office. Now that he's won the presidency with a majority Republican House and Senate, that feat might not prove to be too easy. Wonkblog's Max Ehrenfreund explains. (Daron Taylor/The Washington Post)

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 32 states have adopted the Medicaid expansion so far. By my count, next year there will be over 20 Republican senators in those states. (The ones that are expanding Medicaid and have one or two GOP Senators are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.)

The interesting nuance here is that before, GOP governors in those states could expand Medicaid even as GOP Senators in them continued to call for Obamacares repeal (with nothing happening). But now they will have to cast a repeal vote that actually means taking health care away from untold numbers of their own constituents.

And repeal of the Medicaid expansion is now a very real possibility. Congressman Price Trumps pick to head HHS has offered a repeal plan that rolls it back entirely. Price has offered a replace plan, but some experts think it would likely leave most of the 20 million people who would currently lose insurance after repeal without coverage.

Regardless, even if Republicans do fully intend to try to provide a replace plan that does cover most of those currently on the Medicaid expansion, it isnt going to be easy, and its going to require spending money. Thats why Republican Senators in Medicaid expansion states such as Capito above are claiming they are going to transition those people to a new plan after repealing Obamacare, while cautioning that it will take awhile. Others are predicting it could take years.

Republicans are going to have a tough time coalescing around a replacement plan, and it is going to take time, Larry Levitt, a senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, tells me. This is enormously complicated stuff with difficult tradeoffs. Insurance coverage for millions of people is at stake.

There was a time when I would have confidently predicted that Republicans who do vote to toss huge numbers of their constituents off of health coverage, without replacing it, would pay a political price for it. Im no longer sure thats true. Its very possible that Republicans may end up repealing Obamacare while vowing a replacement in time that somehow never ends up materializing, because the details prove too difficult, or consensus proves elusive, or the base doesnt allow it. Alternatively, a replacement that leaves many current Obamacare beneficiaries without coverage is also possible.

Still, youd think some Republican Senators might be as troubled by such an outcome as Capito at least appears to be, and youd think some will genuinely wrestle with the policy complications of replacing Obamacare, and in the process will find out that its a lot harder than expected. In this sense, at least, consequence-free railing about repeal might have been a lot more fun than actual real-world repeal might turn out to be.

Read the original:
The Washington Post: Republicans Suddenly Discover That ...

2016

Down-ticket Republicans lost,' one GOP pollster said. 'They needed some help and got absolutely none.'

By Alex Isenstadt and Katie Glueck

10/20/16 05:09 AM EDT

Donald Trumps rocky performance on the final debate stage in Las Vegas on Wednesday night did little to allay his partys concerns that the GOP is headed for an electoral catastrophe up and down the ticket.

In interviews with over a dozen senior Republican strategists, not one said Trump did anything to change the trajectory of a contest that is growing further out of reach. And many said they were deeply distressed by Trumps refusal to accept the results of the Nov. 8 election, an eyebrow-raising moment already dominating headlines.

Story Continued Below

With Trumps prospects for securing 270 electoral votes growing dimmer by the day, many Republicans have turned their focus to the gritty, unpleasant task of protecting the partys congressional majorities. Trump, they said, did little to buttress the GOP ticket and may have worsened its position by repeating his claim that the election is rigged, something congressional Republicans are sure to be pressed on in the days to come.

Immediately after Trumps remark, several party higher-ups, including South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, took to Twitter to distance themselves from it.

The biggest loser tonight was not Trump; the presidential race is over, said Robert Blizzard, a GOP pollster who is working on a number of congressional races. Instead, down-ticket Republicans lost tonight they needed some help and got absolutely none.

Republicans have been conducting extensive polling to gauge what impact Trumps tanking fortunes are having on House and Senate candidates. While many candidates have taken a hit since the release of the bombshell Access Hollywood tape, party operatives maintain that the bottom hasnt completely fallen out and that a down-ballot landslide isnt necessarily in the cards.

Yet many Republicans were eager to see Trump deliver a steady performance, something that would stabilize his poll numbers at a time when surveys show him losing ground in traditionally conservative states like Arizona, Georgia and Utah.

Steve Schmidt, who guided John McCains 2008 presidential campaign, said Trumps refusal to commit to accepting election results would overshadow any strong moments he had.

Its the one and only headline that matters coming out of the debate, said Schmidt. Its absolutely unprecedented for any presidential candidate in the history of the country.

Not everyone agreed the performance was a complete wreck. To some, it represented a marked improvement on Trumps first two showdowns with Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton one that was badly marred by one particularly damaging moment.

He made a really huge mistake tonight when he would not commit to 100 percent accepting the results of the election whether he wins or loses, said Austin Barbour, a Mississippi-based Republican strategist. For him, that is a big takeaway from tonight. Its a shame for him; he could have walked away, I think, as the winner from tonight, but that line will be one that is played in a big in a bigly way with the press tomorrow.

To some, the performance represented whats gone awry with the Trump campaign. After exhibiting moments of discipline early on, he squandered it later with his remarks on the election, with his refusal to criticize Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, and with his comment that Hillary Clinton is a nasty woman.

That Trump would go so far as to criticize former President Ronald Reagan an almost universally beloved figure in conservative circles on trade policy, left some Republicans aghast. Its hard to understand, said Al Cardenas, a former Florida Republican Party chairman.

This is microcosm of the general election campaign, said Mike DuHaime, a former Republican National Committee political director who helped guide New Jersey Gov. Chris Christies presidential bid. Trump does well at times but can't sustain it for the entire time and makes unnecessary mistakes.

In the short term, it will be up to Trump to limit whatever long-term damage the debate may cause something he failed to do after the first debate at Hofstra University, when he was dragged into a series of back-and-forths over his treatment of a former beauty-pageant contestant.

If Trump hopes to change things around, he can't repeat that act, said Eric Fehrnstrom, a top strategist on Mitt Romneys 2012 bid. He needs to show the kind of discipline that has mostly eluded him so far.

Yet the debate could have longer-term repercussions, potentially increasing the urgency with which down-ballot Republicans begin presenting themselves as a check and balance to a Clinton presidency. In doing so, they would all but concede that Trump is destined to fall short.

Its an option that GOP strategists have been discussing but have yet to put into motion in a widespread fashion.

Trump was already behind, said Bill Kristol, a Trump critic and the editor-in-chief of the conservative publication The Weekly Standard. He didn't help himself tonight; indeed, he hurt himself. He's very likely to lose, and to lose badly. He'll drag the Senate and House down with him unless Senate and House candidates can make the case they're needed to check and balance Hillary.

Read more:
Republicans despondent that Trump threw away final debate ...

The election is just five days away, and something truly frightening is happening, something with far-reaching implications for the immediate future of American politics. Republicans, led by Donald Trump but by no means limited to him, are engaging in kind of termite-level assault on American democracy, one that looks on the surface as though its just aimed at Hillary Clinton, but in fact is undermining our entire system.

I know, my conservative friends will say that this kind of talk is just fear-mongering and exaggeration. But there is something deeply troubling happening right now, and it goes beyond the ordinary trading of blows in a campaign season. Consider these recent developments:

[The only way Trump can win]

It is important to understand that is not normal. This is not just bare-knuckle politics. Something extraordinary is happening.

The Post's Rosalind Helderman breaks down the latest developments of the controversies involving the FBI less than a week from Election Day. (Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

Lets take the FBI case as just one example. You have a situation where a group of FBI agents is in direct conflict with prosecutors who believe the agents have a weak case in their attempt to find evidence of corruption that can be used against Clinton. The agents, in an atrocious violation of FBI policy against injecting the Bureau into an election, begin leaking dark innuendo to reporters. That convinces the FBI director that he has no choice but to go public with the fact that the Bureau is looking at some emails that might or might not have something to do with Clinton, though no one has actually read them. That news lands like a bombshell, despite its complete lack of substance.

And then it turns out that these agents are basing their investigation on a book called Clinton Cash by Peter Schweizer. Schweizer is the president of the Government Accountability Institute, an organization co-founded and chaired by Steve Bannon. Who is the CEO of the Trump campaign.

While the imagine if the other side was doing this argument can sometimes sound trite, in this case its more than apt. Imagine if a group of FBI agents were leaking damaging information on Donald Trump in violation of longstanding departmental policy, and it turned out that they were basing their innuendo on a book published by the Center for American Progress, which Clinton campaign chair John Podesta founded and used to run. Republicans would be crying bloody murder, and Im pretty sure the entire news media would be backing them up every step of the way.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump believes there's a global conspiracy to stop him from becoming president but it's not the first time he's pushed unfounded theories. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

[Former CIA chief: Trump is Russias useful fool]

Its not that this kind of thing is completely unprecedented. When Bill Clinton was impeached, people talked about the criminalization of politics the idea that Republicans were trying to use the levers of the justice system as a means to prevail in what should be just ordinary political competition. George W. Bushs administration fired a group of U.S. Attorneys because they were unwilling to pursue bogus voter fraud cases against Democrats or were too willing to investigate genuine corruption among Republican officials. There are cases like the absurd prosecution of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman, who has been in jail for years because he reappointed to a state health care board a man who had donated money to a lottery initiative Siegelman favored. And there was this guy named J. Edgar Hoover.

But as he has in so many ways, Donald Trump takes every ugly impulse Republicans have and turns it up to 11, and just about the entire party follows him down. So now they are making it very clear that from literally the day Hillary Clinton is inaugurated, they will wage total war on her. There will be no rule or norm or standard of decency they wont flout if it gets them a step closer to destroying her, no matter what the collateral damage.

Its important to understand that strong institutions are what separate strong democracies from weak ones. In a strong democracy, one party cant come into power and just lock up its opponents. It cant turn the countrys law enforcement agencies into a partisan tool to destroy the other party. It cant say that the courts will function only at its pleasure. We have the worlds most stable system not just because there arent tanks in the streets on election day, but because we have institutions that are strong enough to restrain the venality of individual men and women. And now, Republicans are not even pretending that those institutions should be impartial and transcend partisanship. Theyre saying, if we can use them to destroy our opponents, we will. Something is seriously breaking down.

[Heres how you destroy a democratic republic]

And please, spare me any explanations for this phenomenon that rely on how divided Americans are. Are we divided? Sure. But theres only one party that is so vigorously undermining core democratic institutions in this way. You may not like what Democrats stand for, but they arent engaging in widespread official vote suppression, chanting that should their candidate win her opponent should be tossed in jail, promising to prevent any Republican president from filling vacancies on the Supreme Court, suggesting that theyll try to impeach their opponent as soon as he takes office, cheering when a hostile foreign power hacks into American electronic systems, and trying to use the FBI to win the election.

Only one party is doing all of that. And we should all be very worried about what Republicans will do after November 8, whether they win or lose.

The rest is here:
Republicans are now vowing Total War. And the consequences ...