Devin Nunes: Why Didn’t Mueller Indict Russians for Targeting Republicans?

The answer is obvious: Russians targeting Republicans didn’t fit the narrative they used to frame Trump.

Indicting Russians for hacking the DNC and other Democrats without mentioning the evidence of them targeting Republicans isn’t a a criminal prosecution but an act of political propaganda against the President! According to Devin Nunes, the Mueller indictments are exactly that, and their release on the eve of Donald Trump’s meeting with Vladimir Putin were designed to make it difficult for him to negotiate.

The Washington Examiner reports, “Devin Nunes: Mueller indictment looks ‘ridiculous’ because it omitted Republicans targeted by Russia.

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?

  • Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Eagle Rising updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Young Autistic Boy Screams for Help as Bullies Nail Wooden Plank to His Head

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said special counsel Robert Mueller’s recent indictment of 12 Russian officials on charges of hacking Democrats’ computers during the 2016 campaign looks “ridiculous” because it left out Republicans who were also targeted.

During an interview Sunday on Fox News, Nunes accused the media of largely ignoring the findings of his committee’s months-old report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, which he asserted was more comprehensive than Mueller’s indictment. However, he also claimed the redactions in his panel’s report prevented the presentation of the full picture and urged President Trump to declassify it.

“This entire report that you have in front of you, all you had to do was get to page 4, and you only had to read chapter 2 and you would have had nearly everything that’s in the indictment,” Nunes said, […]. “There’s more in this report than what’s in the indictment. And this is what’s very frustrating.”

A grand jury returned Mueller’s indictment Friday, after which it was announced by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The charges said 12 Russian officials “engaged in a sustained effort” to break into computers owned by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and Hillary Clinton’s campaign in the lead-up to the 2016 election.

Read the full report.

CNS News adds,

Nunes also questioned the timing of the DOJ indictment: “You (DOJ) knew about this a year-and-a-half ago. You for sure knew it because you got our report. So you for sure knew it by March and April of this year.

“And then it looks like all you did, all the Mueller (team) did was validate our report, indict some Russians, and leave out, I think, some very pertinent…evidence that the American public should see, which is why we continue to have to fight.

“This report has been mocked by the media, has been mocked by the Democrats, and still is mostly redacted by the Department of Justice and the intelligence agencies.”

Read the entire CNS News story.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

About the author

Joe Scudder

Joe Scudder

Joe Scudder is the "nom de plume" (or "nom de guerre") of a fifty-ish-year-old writer and stroke survivor. He lives in St Louis with his wife and still-at-home children. He has been a freelance writer and occasional political activist since the early nineties. He describes his politics as Tolkienesque.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Send this to a friend