Senior Senate Democrat Calls for Congressional Probe of Russian Meddling in US Election

Still, the Ds aren’t mounting a fierce push, and the Rs seem uninterested.

mikolajn, adamkaz/iStock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The future top Democrat in the Senate has called for a congressional investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who will succeed the retiring Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) as the Senate minority leader in the Congress that convenes in January, has signed on to the demand for a congressional inquiry into the Russian hacking of political targets—including the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign—during the 2016 campaign. “Foreign interference in our elections is a serious issue, and deserves a vigorous investigation,” Schumer tells Mother Jones.

Two weeks ago, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the senior Democrat on the House oversight committee, sent a letter to Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), the committee’s chairman, asking that Chaffetz launch an investigation of Russian intervention in the election. This request came two days after the chief of the National Security Agency, Admiral Michael Rogers, said a “nation-state”—meaning Russia—had messed in the 2016 elections “to achieve a specific effect.” Rogers was referring to the hacking of Democratic targets and the release of the pilfered information via WikiLeaks. Cummings noted in his letter that Chaffetz had told him that he was “open to considering such an investigation.” But Chaffetz has yet to respond to Cummings, according to a Cummings spokesperson. And a spokeswoman for Chaffetz did not respond to a request for comment.

Talking to reporters earlier this month, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the top House Democrat, said Democrats would demand such a probe: “Something is not right with this picture and I think the American people deserve an investigation into how a foreign government had an impact on our election.” And Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who was harshly critical of Trump during the campaign, proposed that Congress hold hearings on “Russia’s misadventures throughout the world,” including the DNC hack. “Were they involved in cyberattacks that had a political component to it in our elections?” Graham recently asked.

In August, Harry Reid demanded the FBI investigate “Russian government tampering in our presidential election” and connections between Donald Trump’s campaign and Moscow. (In October, he claimed the FBI possessed “explosive information about close ties and coordination between Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian government.) A congressional inquiry would differ from an FBI criminal or counterintelligence investigation in that it could result in public hearings and a public report. An FBI investigation would not necessarily yield any public information, unless it led to an indictment. Any CIA and NSA investigation of Russian hacking would likely remain secret.

Though Democrats have urged a congressional investigation of Moscow’s involvement in the 2016 election, this call has hardly been full-throated. Pelosi has not repeatedly demanded a probe, and Schumer has not yet signaled this as a top priority. The Obama administration issued a statement in October declaring that the “U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.” But President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have not said much about the Russian operation or directly voiced support for a public investigation. In October, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, “There are a range of responses that are available to the president, and he will consider a response that is proportional.” He added that the president’s decision might never be acknowledged or disclosed.

So with the exception of Cummings’ effort, there has been no fierce push for an investigation that would dig into the covert Russian campaign to affect US politics and that would inform the public about what happened, what investigations were conducted by law enforcement and intelligence agencies, and what has been done to prevent further meddling in order to ensure the security of US elections.

Yet more than 150 academic experts on cybersecurity, national defense, authoritarian regimes, and free and fair elections have signed a letter requesting a congressional investigation. The letter noted:

We represent a wide range of viewpoints on most issues, but on one point we agree: our polarized political climate must not prevent our elected representatives from doing what is right. In this case, what is right is simple: our country needs a thorough, public Congressional investigation into the role that foreign powers played in the months leading up to November. As representatives of the American people, Congress is best positioned to conduct an objective investigation…With concerns rising on both sides of the political aisle about myriad practices that challenge free and fair elections, a public investigation promises to provide the transparency needed to calm Americans’ fears and restore faith in our political process. As voting American citizens, we know that nothing could be more important for our country.

In his letter to Chaffetz, Cummings wrote, “Elections are the bedrock of our nation’s democracy. Any attempt by a foreign power to undermine them is a direct attack on our core democratic values, and it should chill every Member of Congress and American—red or blue—to the core.” But few legislators are acting as if they are indeed chilled to the core. And Democrats, who were the victims of the hacking attributed to Vladimir Putin’s regime, are generally not in an uproar about the matter. With Republican leaders showing little interest in scrutinizing Russian interference in an election that handed the GOP the White House and both houses of Congress, Democrats might have to be more vociferous in their demand for an investigation to have any chance of delivering to the public an explanation of what happened to US democracy in 2016.

UPDATE: On Sunday, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said there ought to be a congressional inquiry into Russian hacking related to the election. On Meet the Press, Rubio noted, “If a foreign government has been involved in injecting chaos into our democratic process, the American people deserve to know that.” He added, “And it’s something that we should not allow to stand without informing the American people of that reality. Let me just say this. I’ve never said it’s the Russian government, although I believe it was the work of a foreign government. I will say this. If you look at what happened during our election and the sort of things that were interjected into the election process, they are very similar to the sort of active measures that you’ve seen the Russians use in the past in places like Eastern Europe, to interfere with the elections of other countries. And what we mean by ‘interfere’ is they try to undermine the credibility of the election. They try to undermine individual leaders. And they try to create chaos in the political discourse. And the fundamental argument behind it is they want people to—they want to delegitimize the process.” When host Chuck Todd asked Rubio if this was “worthy of congressional scrutiny,” the senator replied, “Absolutely.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate