On tape, Nunes targets midterms as Trump buffer
Concern over investigation takes on a different tone.
but, rather, goes the other direction,” said Andrey Kortunov, director general of the Russian International Affairs Council, a Moscow think tank that receives state funding.
Russia is bracing for more U.S. sanctions beyond the ones announced by the State Department on Wednesday. Bipartisan legislation introduced in Congress last week would punish Russia’s energy and financial sectors and sanction Russian sovereign debt.
Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-S.C., a sponsor of the bill, said the punitive measures currently in place “had failed to deter Russia from meddling in the upcoming 20 18 midterm elections.”
The sanctions enacted so far this year, and the threat of more, have already inflicted pain on Russia’s middle class. In early April, just before the first tough round of U.S. sanc- tions in response to Russian “worldwide malign activity” was announced, the ruble stood at roughly 58 to the dol- lar. After its latest dive Thursday, the ruble had fallen to roughly 66 to the dollar - a decline that harms the buying power of Russians inter- ested in traveling abroad or in buying foreign goods.
The higher price of oil, however, has given Russia’s government a large financial cushion to maintain public services and to assist business magnates targeted by U.S. sanctions. And unlike the coordinated transatlantic sanctions enacted in response to Moscow’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region in 2014, America’s European allies - who together trade far more with Russia that the United States does - are not following suit this time with new sanctions of their own.
Republican Rep. Devin Nunes of California, the chair- man of the House Intelligence Committee, appears to have moved from criticizing the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elec- tion to strategizing about how to blunt its impact should it imperil President Donald Trump.
The most promising instrument in this effort, he suggested in remarks last month, is retaininga GOP-controlled Congress.
Even if he had been speaking publicly, the eight-term Republican might not have chosen his words differ- ently. He is an adamantly pro-Trump lawmakerwho in February released a memo- randum accusing the intelli- gence community of conspir- ing against the president. In May, he sought documents from the Justice Department — as part of his investigation into the law enforcement officials leading the Russia inquiry — that senior intel- ligence officials maintained could expose a top source and endanger lives.
But it was in private, at a closed-door fundraiser for a Republican colleague, that Nunes took the new step of tying the investigation to the midterm elections this fall. In comments captured in an audio recording aired Wednesday by “The Rachel Maddow Show,” Nunes laid out in stark terms the rationale for preserving the GOP majority in Congress.
“If Sessions won’t unre- cuse and Mueller won’t clear the president, we’re the only ones, which is really the danger,” Nunes said at an event for Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, referring to Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, and Robert Mueller, the special counsel. Sessions said last year that he would keep his distance from inquiries related to the 2016 election owing to his role in Trump’s campaign — a move that has frustrated the president, leading him to blame his own attorney general for the“Russian Witch Hunt Hoax.”
“I mean, we have to keep all these seats,” Nunes added. “We have to keep the majority. If we do not keep the majority, all of this goes away.”
He seemed to suggest that congressional Republicans formed the last line of defense against potential fallout from the probe into Russian election meddling. He called this a “classic Catch-22 situation,” appearing to confuse a “tough spot” — also his words — with a situation in which contradictory conditions make escape impossible.
The remarks drew immediate rebuke from Democrats. Rep. Ted Lieu, also of California, called on Nunes to resign, saying his comments ran counter to the oath of office he had taken upon entering Congress.
Others observed that the lawmaker’s actions over the past year made his comments unsurprising. “After all,” tweeted University of Texas Law School professor Steve Vladeck, “this has been the only explanation — for quite some time — for his ridiculous behavior on everything from the unmasking scandal” to the “Rosenstein impeachment.”