If Russia serves to simply distract Trump and the GOP for the next 4 years then it's obviously a form of political victory. Obstruction > GOP/Trump getting everything they want.

No one should consider it ideal though, nor get wedded to it as a form of movement building or a healthy political practice. It's a kludge, a blunt instrument. It's fine for what is but we can do better, and frankly Democrats spending tons of time crafting just the most glorious unified message on Russia is imo a wasted opportunity for this moment of deep dissatisfaction with Trump. Find a message that ties Trump to the rest of the GOP, and speaks to the things that give meaning and dignity to people. I admit the Democrats and the left have made Trump a deeply unpopular boogeyman. Now leverage *that* to make progress on more important goals.

At least turn Russia into a typical Trump graft, which is actually what it is; however deep Trump and Kushner and Flynn are in bed with and indebted to the Russians, I am utterly convinced it was some scheme to enrich themselves. At least talk about that rather than prattling on about co-option and national security and framing everything like the Reagan Era Republican Party. Rather than sounding like a poor mans version of Dick Cheney and talking about Trump threatens national security interests, instead say Trump is a typical rich Republican who will do anything to make money and **** people over. Including scheme with other corrupt hustlers like Putin, who robs his people to enrich himself. It's both true and actually speaks to people in a way that flatters our pre-existing frames and links Trump to a deeper, pervasive ideological message. It's the Warren Buffet quote: there's huge class warfare going on and it's the filthy rich like Trump that are playing and winning, and remind people he's backed by a huge infrastructure, but specifically the Republican Party. Talk about that. People like ecriture d'adulte will be so sad, he won't like it one bit, be very upset, warn you they are not happy, but such is life, can't please everyone.

I mean at the risk of going full appeal to authority fallacy, on the one hand I have a former Harvard Law Review editor and one of the most respected con law minds in the game saying flat out that Trump obstructed justice. OTOH I have some concern troll slapdick telling me there's nothing to see here. WAT DEW

DVaut is essentially right on this one. We all would do well to spend our efforts running for local office, go volunteer for a candidate and do some phone banking, or even go join a local labor union or try to work for one. Labor unions, food banks, homeless shelters, prisons. These are where the people are that we need to help. We need to bring them the resources directly because they're going to be looking at a huge walloping from the government that is supposed to be there to help and protect them.

I still don't understand why there aren't ads with cancer kids running every ****ing day with the kid saying "Paul Ryan wants to take my health care away" and shedding a single tear.

KING: Trump supporters are calling for Muslim internment camps
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.3228321

This is pretty good.

Easily wins Trolly's Troll of the Week.

Pulverized. Laughed so hard I almost **** out of my cock.

Ya I literally TODAY posted there is tons of circumstantial evidence and that I agree that he is guilty. So save the dishonest histronics. What I have said is that there is no direct proof of trump colluding with the Russians. That is actual fact. I also said I don't think absent that he is getting impeached. The level of dishonesty from some of the regs here who spend 40 posts a day patting each other on the back is pretty unbelievable lol.

LOL Namath and the rest of the fainting couch tards in this forum.

Sick strawman. I literally said there is proof of the obstruction but it won't matter or be an impeachable offense. But carry on with this idiotic dishonest self-righteous act. I could quote that post from me also but instead I assume even you are intelligent enough to actually read the last 5-6 posts I have posted. Or maybe not based on the actual evidence.

Actually Namath I feel bad for you so here you go. Not even 25 posts before yours. The personal attacks are a sure sign you are over the ledge bud. Especially because they aren't based in reality.

Apparently Donald Trump is the hill that Chris Christie wants to die on:

Is he really expecting a job from Trump or something at this point? I don't get it.

I wish these two people would stop posting on the same account, it's very confusing for the rest of us to know which one is which

(I mean, clearly they can't have been sincerely posted by the same person within minutes of each other, right?)

loling at a mountain of circumstantial evidence and a special counsel who's been on the job for less than a month

ok.gif

The investigation pre-dates the special counsel by a long time so I am not sure how that is relevant?

https://twitter.com/DLin71/status/872560822740025344

It's absolutely infuriating how much opposition there is to this idea in the Democratic party.

For clarity here are my viewpoints:

-There is tons of evidence that there are ties between people in Trump's staff and family and Russia
-There is tons of evidence that the Russians tried to influence, hack, etc the 2016 election to get Trump elected
-There is no direct evidence that Trump or the Trump campaign aided or influencd Russian hacking besides an off-hand Trump remark that occurred after at least some if not most of the hacking occurred. At least not that has been released.
-There is lots of circumstantial evidence wrt to relationships Trump and Trump affilates have with Russia and the fact Russia clearly wanted Trump to win and attempted or succeeded to influence the election.
-The investigation has been ongoing for a long time and no direct evidence of collusion between Trump or Trump's campaign and Russia has been released.
-It is hard to imagine there being direct evidence at this time due to the stakes, the length of the investigation, and also the amount of leaks coming out of the intelligence community at this time.
-Absent direct evidence Trump isn't getting impeached on this issue.
-Trump probably obstructed justice wrt Comey.
-Trump isn't getting impeached by congress over it.

I'd love to hear where I am wrong on any of this since you guys seem to think what I am posting is absurdly wrong and somehow taking up for Trump.

i'm amazed that the appointment of a special counsel has signaled to you that the investigation turned up zero evidence


edit: idk even wtf you're arguing. of course trump could shoot someone in the head on fifth avenue during rush hour and he wouldn't be impeached by this congress. they're a mafia-style crime family, paul ryan admitted it

Wouldn't the seriousness of the obstruction charge be directly related to the seriousness of the Flynn case? I think at least one of Flynn's phone conversations with the Russians was recorded. So if he did something treasonous it would really amp up the obstruction case against Trump IMO. If Flynn did nothing wrong, as Trump contends, then maybe Trump gets a pass on the obstruction. For now, its enough to know that Trump tried to short-circuit the investigation.

I never said it turned up zero-evidence. The special counsel was appointed shortly after Comey was sacked presumably so that the Justice Dept. could be distanced from the investigation. Or that the investigation that was ongoing could be depoliticized to the extent possible. If I am wrong about that then enlighten me because that is my recollection.

It honestly is possible that we are talking past each other. I guess I assumed you guys end wish/goal was Trump's impeachment/resignation. If the goal is just to show that Trump is an incompetant corrupt criminal then obviously the current line possibly helps that goal. I assume/assumed that everyone with a brain was already well aware of this though. My argument is that to get the republican congress to actually act you need damning proof or actual treason or the like. It doesn't appear based on what we know as of now that we have proof of that. There is roughly a 0% chance the current congress impeaches Trump over the obstruction issue. That's why I think it is a complete waste of time and political capital to continue to pursue it. It won't end the Trump regime.

It's relevant because before there was Mueller's investigation, it was really hard to tell which Trump loyalists in the IC would run back to Trump with things they discovered. That would be very very bad because it would compromise the investigations...ALL of them. Therefore, the more crucial the classified intel was, the more likely it would be shared with very few people.

Special Counsel Mueller is a whole new ballgame. He can operate independently and has access to all of the classified intel. He won't be worried about loyalists, or leaks. For all intents and purposes, the real investigation into Trump/Russia AND anything resulting from it, just started 2 to 3 weeks ago.

I think you are making too much of past leaks. That material may have been relatively accessible to regular FBI employees, with the best stuff overseen by Comey/Mueller kept more close to the vest.

Hard to say it's a waste of political capital. Are the Democrats really "spending" any capital to let Trump walk in a field of rakes?