nation is facing the most serious internal attacks on the frontal and institutional structures that define a democracy. since the pulitzer s were introduced a century ago. precisely to counteract problematic, authoritarian tendencies throughout the society. that warning was followed by the announcement of that year s pulitzer prize for national reporting which went to the washington post in new york times for quote, relentlessly reporting coverage in the public interest on russian interference in the 2016 election. and it s connections to the trump campaign, the president elect s transition team, and his eventual administration. that choice naturally drew the ire of then president donald trump, who did not stop complaining about the decision, even after he left the white house. it actually lead the pulitzer boards to open two separate independent investigations into the awarding of those prizes. this week, the pulitzer board announced the results of those investigations,
for the most outstanding journalism of the year, and they delivered this warning. on the political fronts, i think, it is clear that the nation is facing the most serious internal attacks on the fundamental values and institutional structures that define a democracy. since the pulitzer s were introduced a century ago. then precisely, to counteract problematic authoritarian tendencies, throughout the society. now that warning was followed by the announcement of that year s pulitzer prize for national reporting, which went to the new york times and the washington post for quote, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest on russian interference in the 2016 election and its connection to the trump campaign, the presidents elects transition team, and his eventual administration. that choice naturally drew the ire of then president donald trump, who did not stop complaining about the decision, even after he left the white house. it actually lead the pulitzer board t
investigating him. they are using the language about following the evidence, wherever it leads, to go to the top of the command chain. those statements are reassuring, but there is a problem here. the doj is behind other investigation, and you mentioned the times reporting about the federal prosecutors are being surprised when cassidy hutchinson testified. i heard the same thing. i heard that from a doj official that there was tremendous surprise that day. there was some frustration, they have asked as you mentioned, for all of the transcript of the january 6th committee. they don t have them but they would like to have them but garland has adopted this very slow, cautious strategy. i think that in the end, the pass would be that line prosecutors and his deputies would recommend an action against trump. either to prosecute or not prosecute. and then it comes down to garland, would he override that recommendation if the team that has carried out this investigation calls for trump
but there is a problem here. the doj is behind other investigation, and you mentioned the kind of reporting that federal prosecutors are being surprised when cassidy hutchinson testified. i heard the same thing. i heard that from a doj official that there was tremendous surprise that day. there was some frustration, they have asked as you mentioned, for all of the transcript of the january 6th committee. they don t have, them but they would like to have, them but garland has adopted this very slow, cautious strategy. i think that in the end, the process would be that these prosecutors and his deputies would recommend an action against trump. either to prosecute or not prosecute. and then it comes down to garland, would he override that recommendation if the team that has carried out this investigation calls for trump s being indicted, will garland defy them or follow them? i think that most people that i know who no garland say that he would go along with that recommendation.
an effort to take a tweet here and an op-ed there and newspaper story here and somehow equate it with the systemic intervention that our intelligence agencies found that russia perpetrated in 2016 through an extensive social media campaign and hacking and dumping operation. the report my colleagues gave you that they produced during investigation calls into question the accuracy of intelligence committee s finding that russia intervened to help one side, to help donald trump at the expense of hillary clinton. no one in intelligence community questions that finding nor does the f.b.i. nor does the senate bipartisan intelligence committee report nor does the minority committee report of this committee. the house republican report is an outlier. let me ask you, dr. hill, about your concern with that russian narrative that it wasn t the russians that engaged in interfering with our election in 2016 and of course this was