Arjan Dirkse wrote:I think the Russia investigation will go nowhere...kinda like the Clinton e-mail thing, it may prove some people talked to some Russians but so what? I am afraid the dems are running after their own tail here. What is the actual thing dems think Trump is going to be found guilty of (assuming Trump himself is the target of the investigation.)

I think the Clinton email thing was substantially different.

As far as the idea that Trump actually colluded with the Russians - which is what would be needed to impeach him on this - I find it an absurd conspiracy theory on the level of Birtherism.

So you think he was duped into hiring Russophiles like Manafort and Flynn?

And technically, collusion would not be necessary to impeach him. The House could vote to impeach on any number of grounds, including spurious ones if it chose. The impropriety of appointing someone they'd been informed was a foreign agent as National Security Advisor could be enough for them.

OlivierK wrote:So you think he was duped into hiring Russophiles like Manafort and Flynn?

I think he lacks the relevant expertise - fuck, lacks the relevant interest - in politics to even determine who is or is not qualified for a particular post, never mind determine what a conflict of interest might look like or how to determine if someone has one.

OlivierK wrote:And technically, collusion would not be necessary to impeach him. The House could vote to impeach on any number of grounds, including spurious ones if it chose. The impropriety of appointing someone they'd been informed was a foreign agent as National Security Advisor could be enough for them.

I think turning Trump into a martyr for the far-right would be one of the most ill-advised moves imaginable. He needs to be fought on the issues. The level of discourse needs to be raised to a point where Trump can't compete.

These attempts to show collusion between Trump and Putin are - IMHO anyway - doomed to failure and will forever discredit those making them in the eyes of Trump supporters. As the effects of Trump's absurd policies start to sink in - politically speaking, Trumpcare 2.0 should be the gift that keeps on giving, despite the suffering it causes - we're going to want to hammer home relentlessly who is responsible.

"President Cuck". Trump fans outraged that Trump called Islam one of the "great faiths".

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/hes-bee ... at-faiths/

A reminder that it is for environmental reasons above all I think Trump and the Repubs are bone-headed, pig-ignorant, immoral, and dangerous scum who need to be wiped out (at the polls) for the good of the World.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/20/b ... ebook.com/

Animavore wrote:A reminder that it is for environmental reasons above all I think Trump and the Repubs are bone-headed, pig-ignorant, immoral, and dangerous scum who need to be wiped out (at the polls) for the good of the World.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/20/b ... ebook.com/

More than anything else, this is the clincher for me. To be utterly fair, the Dems don't have a track record of doing much better than nothing on environmental issues, but that's still an improvement over policies that will make things worse. It doesn't appear to me that this is just a Trump thing though: more a case of his brazen incompetence and proud ignorance providing the cover for them to do what they've wanted to for some time.

I think we should just all sit back and enjoy the cognitive dissonance from all the Trump cheerleaders who applauded his Muslim ban and Muslim register policies while they see him hobnobbing with quite possibly the most repressive Islamic regime on the planet outside IS so he can conclude a massive arms deal with them, all while still wagging the finger against extremists that obviously don't include them.

Not that arms deals with the Saudis should be regarded as a good thing, or anything like that, but it's going to come as something of a shock to the system to all the people who are convinced that Islam is some sort of monolithic entity that's utterly at odds with the US.

Still, it's not so much reality intervening as realpolitik, and I'm sure he'll be back to the foaming at the mouth stuff before too long.

purplerat wrote:

Arjan Dirkse wrote:I think the Russia investigation will go nowhere...kinda like the Clinton e-mail thing, it may prove some people talked to some Russians but so what? I am afraid the dems are running after their own tail here. What is the actual thing dems think Trump is going to be found guilty of (assuming Trump himself is the target of the investigation.)

I think it's becoming pretty apparent that at a minimum this will be a classic case of the coverup doing Trump in even if the crime is minimal to nonexistent. We're already well down that road regardless of however any investigation into the Russian connection goes.

As for the Dems, I think it's in their best interest to sit back and force the GOP to nail Trump or go down with the ship. All the Dems have to do is keep on reminding everybody which side is which.

This seems to me the most likely scenario.

Much like the Whitewater 'scandal', the original accusation went nowhere but Clinton lied under oath to a grand jury and gave his enemies a chance to impeach him.

Arjan Dirkse wrote:I think the Russia investigation will go nowhere...kinda like the Clinton e-mail thing, it may prove some people talked to some Russians but so what? I am afraid the dems are running after their own tail here. What is the actual thing dems think Trump is going to be found guilty of (assuming Trump himself is the target of the investigation.)

I think the 'Russian election hacking' has become the Democrat's Benghazi.

Nicko wrote:

OlivierK wrote:So you think he was duped into hiring Russophiles like Manafort and Flynn?

I think he lacks the relevant expertise - fuck, lacks the relevant interest - in politics to even determine who is or is not qualified for a particular post, never mind determine what a conflict of interest might look like or how to determine if someone has one.

I'd think if there was any kind of conspiracy by Putin, he'd be smart enough not to include Trump in the loop.

OlivierK wrote:And technically, collusion would not be necessary to impeach him. The House could vote to impeach on any number of grounds, including spurious ones if it chose. The impropriety of appointing someone they'd been informed was a foreign agent as National Security Advisor could be enough for them.

I think turning Trump into a martyr for the far-right would be one of the most ill-advised moves imaginable. He needs to be fought on the issues. The level of discourse needs to be raised to a point where Trump can't compete.

Making fun of Trump's appearance and other irrelevancies, while it feels good, is really no better than rightwingers making fun of Michelle Obama. It's not going to convince anyone to change their minds. It really is going to give a certain patina of veracity to claims that Trump is being treated unfairly.

These attempts to show collusion between Trump and Putin are - IMHO anyway - doomed to failure and will forever discredit those making them in the eyes of Trump supporters. As the effects of Trump's absurd policies start to sink in - politically speaking, Trumpcare 2.0 should be the gift that keeps on giving, despite the suffering it causes - we're going to want to hammer home relentlessly who is responsible.

Yes, showing how Trump doesn't live up to his promises is going to be the best way to disenchant people who may have supported him based on campaign promises.

OlivierK wrote:So you think he was duped into hiring Russophiles like Manafort and Flynn?

And technically, collusion would not be necessary to impeach him. The House could vote to impeach on any number of grounds, including spurious ones if it chose. The impropriety of appointing someone they'd been informed was a foreign agent as National Security Advisor could be enough for them.

That might be the biggest fish they'll catch. Howver will it lead to impeachment? Do you think Republicans will attack their own and thereby admit they backed the wrong man?

I don't think stuffing your cabinet with Russophiles should be an impeachable offense. It might just show bad judgment, but I don't see why it should be sanctioned. Unless it can be shown there is some kind of heinous Russian plot to harm the US which Trump is involved in, which strikes me as absurd.

A picture can say more than a thousand words (or 2 in this instance):

Sure the Russia thing may be absolutely nothing. It could be one massive conspiracy theory.

But the fact that I am seeing people on the far left and far right engage in mind-boggling antics of dismissing a news source because it cited an "anonymous" source is concerning. The fact that those on the far left are hesitant to criticize Putin or Russia, but are quick to criticize the US is troubling.

We have serious allegations that Russia was involved with trying to influence our election campaign.
We have our national security advisor lying under oath about collaboration with the Russians.
We have our Vice President lying about our collaboration with the Russians.
We have our Attorney General lying about our collaboration with the Russians.
We have a President who fired the FBI director for dubious reasons in which the President not only contradicted his team, but he contradicted himself twice.
We have a President who then threatened his former FBI director with tweets and told Lester Holt that he fired Comey with the thought of Russia and the investigation in mind. Even if this entire thing is just one massive conspiracy theory or the most minor thing in the world that is obstruction of justice.
We have a memo from Comey stating that Trump "hoped" Comey would cease the investigation of Michael Flynn who Trump fired ONLY after the media brought to light his deals with Russia and Turkey.

One top of that Trump's bragging to the Russian's about how firing Comey took a lot of pressure off his back is troubling.

Even if Trump is innocent, even if the Russia thing is non-existent, his actions are screaming suspicious. His actions are begging for proper investigation. His whining that he is under investigation and is getting a special council is concerning. If it was nothing, if all of this was just political theater by the Democratic Party all Trump and his administration would have to do is ignore it. But they keep adding to it. Trump's tweets and the ineptitude of the White House staff do not create confidence of innocence.

Pulsar wrote:Trump 'exhausted' three days into first trip abroad as president

How long until he stumbles while getting into a car?

If Trump's exhausted, just imagine how worn out Hillary would be by now.

willhud9 wrote:Sure the Russia thing may be absolutely nothing. It could be one massive conspiracy theory.

But the fact that I am seeing people on the far left and far right engage in mind-boggling antics of dismissing a news source because it cited an "anonymous" source is concerning.

Being skeptical of someone who makes anonymous and unsubstantiated accusations isn't necessarily a bad thing. Persons who can't be held responsible for what they say have no stake in restricting themselves to the truth. Journalists who publish rumors might get a scoop on other journalists by rushing stories out, but I don't think the public is always well served when we aren't allowed to judge for ourselves whether the source is unbiased or reliable.

The fact that those on the far left are hesitant to criticize Putin or Russia, but are quick to criticize the US is troubling.

I personally have no problem criticizing Putin or Russia, just as people have no hesitation to criticize Trump and the US.

My own preference is to have relevant and reasonable criticisms.

For one thing, as a citizen of the US, the policies of the US reflect on me and as a voter there is some (small) stake in my government listening to my concerns. Much more so than my critique of government in Russia, or India, or Australia will have.

I find it much more realistic to concern myself with a situation I am more knowledgeable about, and one where my opinion one way or the other should make a difference.

OlivierK wrote:

purplerat wrote:I think it's becoming pretty apparent that at a minimum this will be a classic case of the coverup doing Trump in even if the crime is minimal to nonexistent.

Trump has gutted the State Department. If that turns out to have been at Russia's behest (it's certainly in their interest), then I'd hardly call that "minimal to nonexistent".

While that would be a really bad thing, exactly what crime would it constitute? I don't believe there is anything, legally at least, which says POTUS can't pack the State Department with officials friendly to a foreign country, even one considered an adversary.

On the other hand, firing members of the Justice Department because they are investigating the administration would clearly be obstruction of justice. If nothing the latter is far easier to prove and convict on.