During her bombshell impeachment testimony before members of the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday morning, foreign affairs expert Fiona Hill not only made a strong case for President Donald Trump’s impeachment — she also gave Americans plenty of reason to be concerned about U.S. election security and the 2020 presidential election. Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, during his public testimony earlier this year, made it abundantly clear that the Russian government under President Vladimir Putin interfered in the 2016 U.S. election and will no doubt interfere in the United States’ 2020 election if it can — and Hill, a former National Security Council (NSC) senior director specializing in Russian and European affairs, gave Americans plenty of reasons to be concerned about next year’s election.
Here are some reasons why Hill’s testimony should serve as a dire warning about Russia, Putin and the United States’ 2020 presidential race.
1. Hill testified that the Russian government set out to undermine ‘whoever became president’ in 2016
Critics of Trump have often noted that Trump was Putin’s choice in 2016 and that the Russian government is hoping he will serve a second term — which is true. But as Hill testified on Thursday morning, it isn’t because Putin and his allies love the Republican Party; it is because they want to see Americans at one another’s throats. In 2016, Hill testified, the Russian government set out to undermine “whoever became president,” whether it was Trump or Democrat Hillary Clinton, and make one side see the other side as totally illegitimate.
Hill testified that one of Putin’s aims is to “pit one side of our electorate against another, pit one party against another” — in other words, do everything to encourage Republicans and Democrats to hate one another as much as possible. That was a goal of Putin in 2016, Hill testified — and it is still his goal.
2. Hill stressed that Putin still has an anti-U.S. agenda
During her testimony on Thursday morning, Hill asserted that she was troubled to see that “some of you on this committee appear to believe” the debunked CrowdStrike conspiracy theory — which claims that it was the Ukrainian government, not the Russian government, that interfered in the 2016 election. Hill was obviously referring to Rep. Devin Nunes and other House Republicans who have promoted the CrowdStrike theory, which she denounced as a “fictional narrative being perpetrated by Russian security services.” Ukraine, Hill testified, had nothing to do with interference in the 2016 election, but Russia did — and Putin still has an anti-U.S. agenda.
3. Putin ‘aims to counter’ American goals and undermine U.S. influence in the world: Hill
Putin and others in the Russian government, Hill testified, believe the U.S. has too much influence in the world — and one of the ways to combat that influence is to try creating tension between the U.S. and its allies. One such ally is Ukraine, and Hill testified that it is in Putin’s interest for some Americans to buy into the debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine interfered in the United States’ 2016 election. According to Hill, “The Russians like to put the blame on U.S. allies…. This falls into a long pattern of deflection and Russians trying to put the blame on someone else.”
The lesson for Americans, going into 2020, is that if the Russian government tries to interfere in next year’s election, it will try to blame someone else.
4. Putin seeks to promote bitter political divisions in the U.S.
In 2016, Hill testified, it was evident that Putin “aims to counter” U.S. goals — and that means not only trying to create divisions between the U.S. and its allies around the world, but also, promoting bitter political divisions within the U.S. Those goals of the Russian government, Hill asserted, remain.
Is Donald Trump a supporter of Israel? Sure — he’s also an anti-Semite
On Wednesday, Jared Kushner, who is both a White House senior adviser and President Trump's son-in-law, published an op-ed article in The New York Times defending the president's recent executive order supposedly meant to combat anti-Semitism. The controversial measure will establish that "Title VI of the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against discrimination based on race, color or national origin covers discrimination against Jews" and defines anti-Semitism using the language of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.
We should look closely at Britain’s decision to elect a man so renowned for his untrustworthiness
In previous British elections, to say that trust was the main issue would have meant simply that trust is the trump card – whichever leader or party could secure most trust would win. Now, the emerging question about trust is whether it even matters anymore.
This is at least partly because Brexit has deepened the crisis of trust. The 2019 election was always going to be about Brexit – and not only because some people would vote according to where they stood on the matter. It was also because the emotional turbulence initiated by the 2016 referendum continues to dominate national politics in a more general way.
Memo from a historian: White ladies cooking in plantation museums are a denial of history
Fall is almost gone and winter is coming, as are hundreds of hearth cooking demonstrations at countless historic homes and plantations throughout the nation.
Like an automated clock, historic kitchens become the center stage for historical storytelling at this time of year.
In New England, these stories sit firmly in the mythos of Thanksgiving, focusing on sterilized versions of the 1621 feast between Pilgrims and Wampanoag. In the mid-Atlantic, these stories blend their Amish, German and Dutch roots to talk about Colonial fare in early America.