bearsandgiants;842838719 said:

---

News flash. The cold war ended decades ago. Russia meddles in elections but did not HACK our election. They merely spewed propaganda based on facts, which hurt war hawk hillary and gave us idiot trump. We have been DIRECTLY affecting elections around the world for more than a century, executing democratically elected leaders to further our business interests. We have no leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about russia. Enough.

---

This argument is B.S. Two wrongs do not make a right.

If this whole thing also convinces the U.S. to clean up its own house, then that's good too.

GivemTheAxe;842838723 said:

---

Totally agree with your point #2. If Trump were to lose 7% of his voters that would make a big change in the next election provided that the Dems did not lose any of theirs.

People forget that 25% of the electorate continued to support Nixon even after he was impeached. That shows that a president's hard core voters will not abandon him whatever he does.

---

There was a pre-election poll that showed 60% of voters were unhappy with both candidates- so the simple answer is almost anyone could have beaten either of them and still could.

Go Bernie.

bearsandgiants;842838719 said:

---

News flash. The cold war ended decades ago. Russia meddles in elections but did not HACK our election. They merely spewed propaganda based on facts, which hurt war hawk hillary and gave us idiot trump. We have been DIRECTLY affecting elections around the world for more than a century, executing democratically elected leaders to further our business interests. We have no leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about russia. Enough.

---

You are really behind the curve on this. It isn't about what the Russians did. It is about what Trump and his team have done / are doing. Three people in the Executive Branch investigating the Trump team - Preet Bharara, Sally Yates, and Jim Comey - all fired by Trump.

Democracy is not guaranteed to us or to America. All it takes is one generation to stand down and it can be gone.

An LA Times columnist notes today that HR Clinton said she takes "full responsibility" for the loss to Trump. This reminds me of the line great impressionist/comedian David Fry's observation that when politicians (like Nixon) say that, what they mean is "I take the responsibility but not the blame. There is a difference - those who "take the responsibility' stay on the job, those who 'take the blame' are fired."
If you read "Shattered", you see that HRC should take the blame.

tequila4kapp;842838726 said:

---

I think this is likely another instance of Trump being a businessman who's inclined to fire people for poor performance and who simply is not sophisticated in the ways of Washington to appreciate (or care) how things look.

---

It's being reported that he was mulling this over for a week and called a number of senators (including Schumer) before taking action so this wasn't a typical flying by the seat of his pants move.

I would be willing to accept evidence to the contrary but this firing appears to be based on Trump's reaction to Comey's investigation into Trump's associates and nothing to do with the reasons Trump and his cronies have stated.

dajo9;842838713 said:

---

I'll just point out that Hillary got more votes than either Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump.

This thread has shown me the denizens of this site are even more out of touch with reality than I thought. Lines are being drawn that history will long judge. Which side are you on?

---

Hilary won the popular vote, but she was careless and when caught she played the "dumb blond card". She was a bad choice to run for Prez. She ultimately lost because of DNC nearsightedness. Now those smug insiders of the DNC have lost the unquestioned loyalty of many longstanding democrats who will no longer trust them. The uncoordinated DNC is left tzsuching hind tit while the GoP House continues to thrash about wildly.

dajo9;842838732 said:

---

You are really behind the curve on this. It isn't about what the Russians did. It is about what Trump and his team have done / are doing. Three people in the Executive Branch investigating the Trump team - Preet Bharara, Sally Yates, and Jim Comey - all fired by Trump.

Democracy is not guaranteed to us or to America. All it takes is one generation to stand down and it can be gone.

---

Nice spin. The only thing questionable about the three firings above is the timing of Comey. Yates and Bharara was pretty ordinary.

Comey fired days after asking for more resources for Russia probe. Sounds about right.

dajo9;842838732 said:

---

You are really behind the curve on this. It isn't about what the Russians did. It is about what Trump and his team have done / are doing. Three people in the Executive Branch investigating the Trump team - Preet Bharara, Sally Yates, and Jim Comey - all fired by Trump.

Democracy is not guaranteed to us or to America. All it takes is one generation to stand down and it can be gone.

---

The Dem talking point about Yates being fired for investigating Trump is a blatant lie. She was fired for not enforcing the Executive Order. NO president would ever accept the acting head of the DoJ refusing to enforce an Executive Order. She was fired the day (?) after doing so. It is patently absurd to say otherwise. (this is not directed at you). Democrats should tidy up their talking points because the may be right on other things and if so, each instance of overreaching will undermine their legitimacy when/where it will matter.

Obvious and legitimate reasons for firing Comey existed. Dems were calling for his termination a short while ago. He earned the right to be fired. It was the right decision, even if the timing is suspect and even if it is subsequently proven that he was fired for the investigation. This is NOT Archibald Cox, part 2. Cox' firing was 100% unequivocally about stopping the investigation. There wasn't even a pretext involved.

I don't know about Bharara, other than Presidents routinely change out AG's.

The other side of this story that could easily turn out to be the truth is that Rosenstein was approved as the DoJ #2 man two weeks ago. That position is Comey's boss. Sessions had recused himself from the Russia investigation. It WOULD have been highly irregular if Sessions fired Comey, as that would have left a tremendous management gap over the Russia investigation. Perhaps Rosenstein took 2 weeks to review all info relative to Comey's handling of the investigation and the investigation, then made a decision.

tequila4kapp;842838752 said:

---

Democrats should tidy up their talking points because the may be right on other things and if so, each instance of overreaching will undermine their legitimacy when/where it will matter.


I don't know about Bharara, other than Presidents routinely change out AG's.

---

That is exactly right. There are plenty of things to criticize, and most of the stupid crap that Trump does are legitimate subject of criticism. He is clearly a thin-skinned, undisciplined, and egotistical person, but when people talk about choosing sides and about our democracy at being risk, most of us sane people roll our eyes and discount everything else they write. No need to be melodramatic and lose the strength of the argument that will otherwise carry weight just based on the facts. I suspect those who are that melodramatic have failed to really win over people to their argument in day-to-day life because they really don't even believe what they communicate.

As far as Bharara, the only issue was that he was such a star and that Trump had previously indicated that he was safe. Otherwise, nothing different than what Obama did in firing almost all of the US Attorneys early in his presidency.

tequila4kapp;842838752 said:

---

Democrats should tidy up their talking points because the may be right on other things and if so, each instance of overreaching will undermine their legitimacy when/where it will matter.

---

It's quaint that you think misleading talking points actually have consequences now.

tequila4kapp;842838752 said:

---

The Dem talking point about Yates being fired for investigating Trump is a blatant lie. She was fired for not enforcing the Executive Order. NO president would ever accept the acting head of the DoJ refusing to enforce an Executive Order. She was fired the day (?) after doing so. It is patently absurd to say otherwise. (this is not directed at you). Democrats should tidy up their talking points because the may be right on other things and if so, each instance of overreaching will undermine their legitimacy when/where it will matter.

Obvious and legitimate reasons for firing Comey existed. Dems were calling for his termination a short while ago. He earned the right to be fired. It was the right decision, even if the timing is suspect and even if it is subsequently proven that he was fired for the investigation. This is NOT Archibald Cox, part 2. Cox' firing was 100% unequivocally about stopping the investigation. There wasn't even a pretext involved.

I don't know about Bharara, other than Presidents routinely change out AG's.

The other side of this story that could easily turn out to be the truth is that Rosenstein was approved as the DoJ #2 man two weeks ago. That position is Comey's boss. Sessions had recused himself from the Russia investigation. It WOULD have been highly irregular if Sessions fired Comey, as that would have left a tremendous management gap over the Russia investigation. Perhaps Rosenstein took 2 weeks to review all info relative to Comey's handling of the investigation and the investigation, then made a decision.

---

I agree that it's most likely that Yates was fired for not enforcing the EO. There is no real evidence to the contrary, although certainly the fact that she reported on Flynn may have been a factor.

As for firing AGs, it isn't atypical but that doesn't tell the whole story. The way he did it was odd, particularly Bharara who he had previously praised. But that's a fairly typical series of events for Trump as I'll discuss below.

As for Rosenstein, by all accounts he's a solid guy, but there are reports that Trump tried to drum up support from senators last week to fire Comey, received none and then asked Sessions and Rosenstein to write him letters he could rely on. It's entirely possible that Rosenstein had privately been angling for Comey's dismissal for the right reasons but that isn't readily apparent. We all know that more will come out about why Comey was fired (perhaps it's as Politico says because he enraged Trump by not defending him in re the wiretapping claim or by continuing the investigation or perhaps worse as socaliganbear mentions above).

The real issue with Trump's handling of hiring and firing is that it's clearly based on personal loyalty/personal benefit. When someone is helping him or complimenting him, Trump rewards them. When they are no longer helping Trump personally, they're summarily dismissed. Now the White House is pointing out that everyone criticized Comey's handling of the Clinton email investigation and that's true, but notably Trump mostly praised Comey for his actions - except when it appeared that Comey wasn't being as helpful to Trump as he otherwise had been. He blew Comey a kiss for crying out loud and praised him for doing something that "took a lot of guts." It's so disingenuous to now say that he's firing him because of the Clinton mess. Trump kept Flynn past his sell-by date for all the wrong reasons (didn't want to look "weak") and fired him because of the press. That more than anything should make everyone hope that the "fake" media continues to blanket the Trump administration because it increasingly looks like Trump will continue to put Trump over country until pressured by the media to do otherwise.

The irony is that Trump is probably the most PR focused president of all time but he's failing miserably at it and doesn't realize that being, you know, a good president is actually the best way to improve his PR. He would prefer to tell everyone he's doing great and ridicule anyone who challenges his narrative.

Would also love to hear more about the 3 times Comey informed Trump he wasn't under investigation.

The Comey firing. Democrats wanted him gone last year, then changed their mind mid summer, when republicans wanted him fired. Then democrats wanted him fired days before the election. Does a single person on this board, including even the most extreme partisans, doubt Hillary would have fired him if she were elected? She and her team likely would have had him kept in a basement somewhere. I am not defending Trump, but the references to Nixonian and Archibald Cox are not well taken. This is not a Saturday night massacre. Comey was a guy all sides disliked at least some of the time. The partisans here on the board defend him now because they hope he has information to bring down Trump, not because they actually believe he is someone to be trusted in his job. Just remember what you thought either last summer or a week before the election. And we all still pay the guy's pension for as long as he lives.

1979bear;842838771 said:

---

The Comey firing. Democrats wanted him gone last year, then changed their mind mid summer, when republicans wanted him fired. Then democrats wanted him fired days before the election. Does a single person on this board, including even the most extreme partisans, doubt Hillary would have fired him if she were elected? She and her team likely would have had him kept in a basement somewhere. I am not defending Trump, but the references to Nixonian and Archibald Cox are not well taken. This is not a Saturday night massacre. Comey was a guy all sides disliked at least some of the time. The partisans here on the board defend him now because they hope he has information to bring down Trump, not because they actually believe he is someone to be trusted in his job. Just remember what you thought either last summer or a week before the election. And we all still pay the guy's pension for as long as he lives.

---

Missing the point. You don't have to love Comey personally to find the circumstances of his firing highly suspect.

sycasey;842838775 said:

---

Missing the point. You don't have to love Comey personally to find the circumstances of his firing highly suspect.

---

Agree. And as for the Yates firing, she was fired the day after she informed the White House that Flynn was compromised or subject to being compromised by the Russians. While under ordinary circumstances the firing MIGHT be viewed as unrelated to the Russia investigation, there are more than enough dots to follow to lead to a conclusion that this was no ordinary firing.

A. A number of Trump-connected people being investigated LIE to cover up their contacts with Russia and Putin. Why LIE if there is nothing to cove up.

B. Here is a list of contacts between Trump administration and Russia as known so far:

•Flynn (Former National Security Advisor) - Seems to have a relationship with Putin. Source
•Paul Manafort (Former campaign Advisor) – Seems to have ties to Russia. Source
•Carter Page (Former Trump Advisor) – Has close ties to Putin. Source
•Felix Sater (Trump Associate) – Russian born with ties to Bayrock (Russian Oligarchs) Source
•Jack Kingston (Former Trump Surrogate) – Has a relationship with Russia. Source
•Sergei Millian (Trump Associate)-Millian is a Russian Businessman. Source
•Rick Gates (Former Trump Advisor) – Worked with Manafort pro-Russia Lobbying firm. Source
•Boris Epshteyn(Former Trump Surrogate/advisor)- Russian born, seems to defend Russia. Source
•Roger Stone (Trump Ally) – Has relationship with Assange/positive views on Russia Source
•Wilbur Ross (Trump Commerce Secretary) – Has a relationship with Russia. Source
•Howard Lurber( Trump Economic Advisor) – Major Russia investor. Source
•Mike McSherry(Convention Strategy Lead) –pro-Russia Ukrainian lobby. Source
•Richard Burt (Former Trump Advisor) - Sits on advisory board for Russia’s Alfa Bank. Source
•Tillerson (Secretary of State) - Very close to Putin. Source

C. And let's not forget about Betsy DeVos (Trump's Secretary of Education)
Her brother Eric Prince (a Big Time Trump Donor) had a secret meeting brokered by the Arab Emirates in the Seychelles islands allegedly to establish a back channel with Vladamir Putin.

At some point all of these "coincidences" start painting a clear picture.

1979bear;842838771 said:

---

The Comey firing. Democrats wanted him gone last year, then changed their mind mid summer, when republicans wanted him fired. Then democrats wanted him fired days before the election. Does a single person on this board, including even the most extreme partisans, doubt Hillary would have fired him if she were elected? She and her team likely would have had him kept in a basement somewhere. I am not defending Trump, but the references to Nixonian and Archibald Cox are not well taken. This is not a Saturday night massacre. Comey was a guy all sides disliked at least some of the time. The partisans here on the board defend him now because they hope he has information to bring down Trump, not because they actually believe he is someone to be trusted in his job. Just remember what you thought either last summer or a week before the election. And we all still pay the guy's pension for as long as he lives.

---

Pretty spot on, but this is happening not just on this board. Both sides played hate/love for Comey when it served their purposes. It is so superficial that it is hard to believe. Repubs want us to believe it was all about his handling of HRC matters. Dems want us to believe it is all about Russia/Trump investigation. And it is about 100% both ways. Spin, spin, spin. There becomes little if any believability with government. Those who hate the dealings of big business, how can they abide the antics of big government? And even worse, the media. I just laugh at the self serving arguments by all sides. Folks we are being screwed by both parties and letting them get away with it. Where does reason reside?

Independent counsel anyone? And not just for one side (meaning not just the Russia investigation)

sycasey;842838767 said:

---

It's quaint that you think misleading talking points actually have consequences now.

---

Be dismissive all you want. My opinion is one which ultimately serves to advance the cause of those generally on your side of the isle.

It is stupid, wrong and ultimately damaging to the Dem's position to do things like concoct lies about why Yates was fired. For crying out loud, it was just 2 days ago that her bantering testimony with Senator Cruz over the legislative authority for the Exec Order - and implicitly the justification for her being fired - had made her the darling of The Left. TWO DAYS LATER - when it fits the newly needed narrative - she's suddenly the scorned investigator? Give me a break. At some point the inability to stick with actual facts will undermine Dem's capacity to appropriately criticize / influence / speak authoritatively on Trump.

And not for nothing, but some people on this board are quick to complain about Trump's looseness with facts lap the same stuff up when it comes from their preferred talking heads.

Sally Yates was fired for doing her job. She was doing two things against the Trump Administration - refusing to defend an unlawful EO, which the court ordered was unlawful and which the Administration subsequently withdrew, and investigating the Trump team.

My statement stands, everybody in the Executive Branch who has tried to investigate the Trump team has been fired for one reason or another.

People who keep bringing up Democrats dislike for Comey are missing the point. I'm no fan of Comey. I believe he should have been fired months ago and investigated for violations of the Hatch Act. The victim here isn't Comey - it's the #TrumpRussia investigation. Which has been thwarted in the House and there are conflicting reports about what was going on in the Senate. Comey was offering the only sign of progress into a true investigation on this matter, because Congress has been derelict in its duties. Now the person leading the FBI investigation into Russian agents in the White House has been fired. It is the investigation we are defending. To say it is an about-face on Comey by Democrats is just a Trump talking point.

Personalities aside, the only issues that really matter are 1) do you believe a real investigation of #TrumpRussia should take place and 2) through what means.

I ask Republicans how far down this road do we have to go? Trump firing his investigators; Trump pardoning members of his team; Trump imprisoning his political opponents. At which point will you get off the train?

1979bear;842838771 said:

---

The partisans here on the board defend him now because they hope he has information to bring down Trump, not because they actually believe he is someone to be trusted in his job. Just remember what you thought either last summer or a week before the election. And we all still pay the guy's pension for as long as he lives.

---

No one is defending Comey! Well, hardly anyone. I still think he was a hack who, perhaps unwittingly, interfered with the election by choosing to disclose (what turned out to be) misleading information about the Clinton investigation while not disclosing (what may very well turn out to be misleading) information about the Trump/Russia investigation that was also ongoing. And he further botched the Huma Abedin disclosure not once but twice.

None of that is why he was fired though. We all know this was done because Trump considered it best for himself, not best for the country. I would happily come back and give a mea culpa if credible evidence is ever brought forth to indicate that Trump did this for the good of the country. I'm not concerned that will ever happen.

dajo9;842838732 said:

---

Democracy is not guaranteed to us or to America. All it takes is one generation to stand down and it can be gone.

---

Right now I'd say the Baby Boomers are running neck-and-neck with the secessionists for "worst American generation." Still time to pull out of this tailspin, but it's running out fast.

OdontoBear66;842838779 said:

---

Independent counsel anyone? And not just for one side (meaning not just the Russia investigation)

---

I am fine with that. Hillary has already been investigated more than 9/11. Don't think you'll find anything there in a legitimate independent investigation. Let's go with Odonto's suggestion.

tequila4kapp;842838781 said:

---

Be dismissive all you want. My opinion is one which ultimately serves to advance the cause of those generally on your side of the isle.

---

I was joking, of course. The fact that Trump is president goes to show that "truth" hasn't meant a whole lot in politics lately, even if you and I personally believe it should.

68great;842838777 said:

---

Agree. And as for the Yates firing, she was fired the day after she informed the White House that Flynn was compromised or subject to being compromised by the Russians. While under ordinary circumstances the firing MIGHT be viewed as unrelated to the Russia investigation, there are more than enough dots to follow to lead to a conclusion that this was no ordinary firing.

A. A number of Trump-connected people being investigated LIE to cover up their contacts with Russia and Putin. Why LIE if there is nothing to cove up.

B. Here is a list of contacts between Trump administration and Russia as known so far:

•Flynn (Former National Security Advisor) - Seems to have a relationship with Putin. Source
•Paul Manafort (Former campaign Advisor) – Seems to have ties to Russia. Source
•Carter Page (Former Trump Advisor) – Has close ties to Putin. Source
•Felix Sater (Trump Associate) – Russian born with ties to Bayrock (Russian Oligarchs) Source
•Jack Kingston (Former Trump Surrogate) – Has a relationship with Russia. Source
•Sergei Millian (Trump Associate)-Millian is a Russian Businessman. Source
•Rick Gates (Former Trump Advisor) – Worked with Manafort pro-Russia Lobbying firm. Source
•Boris Epshteyn(Former Trump Surrogate/advisor)- Russian born, seems to defend Russia. Source
•Roger Stone (Trump Ally) – Has relationship with Assange/positive views on Russia Source
•Wilbur Ross (Trump Commerce Secretary) – Has a relationship with Russia. Source
•Howard Lurber( Trump Economic Advisor) – Major Russia investor. Source
•Mike McSherry(Convention Strategy Lead) –pro-Russia Ukrainian lobby. Source
•Richard Burt (Former Trump Advisor) - Sits on advisory board for Russia’s Alfa Bank. Source
•Tillerson (Secretary of State) - Very close to Putin. Source

---

As near as I can tell she was fired on Jan 30. The Ex Order was published Jan 27. She met with the WH to inform them of Flynn's lying to Pence on Jan 26 and Jan 27. It is possible Trump fired her for the Flynn conversation. I find it substantially more probable she was fired for publicly disobeying and publicly opposing Trump's Ex Order.

sycasey;842838786 said:

---

I was joking, of course. The fact that Trump is president goes to show that "truth" hasn't meant a whole lot in politics lately, even if you and I personally believe it should.

---

My mistake and my apologies for not realizing it was a joke and responding as I did.

dajo9;842838782 said:

---

Sally Yates was fired for doing her job. She was doing two things against the Trump Administration - refusing to defend an unlawful EO, which the court ordered was unlawful and which the Administration subsequently withdrew, and investigating the Trump team.

My statement stands, everybody in the Executive Branch who has tried to investigate the Trump team has been fired for one reason or another.

People who keep bringing up Democrats dislike for Comey are missing the point. I'm no fan of Comey. I believe he should have been fired months ago and investigated for violations of the Hatch Act. The victim here isn't Comey - it's the #TrumpRussia investigation. Which has been thwarted in the House and there are conflicting reports about what was going on in the Senate. Comey was offering the only sign of progress into a true investigation on this matter, because Congress has been derelict in its duties. Now the person leading the FBI investigation into Russian agents in the White House has been fired. It is the investigation we are defending. To say it is an about-face on Comey by Democrats is just a Trump talking point.

Personalities aside, the only issues that really matter are 1) do you believe a real investigation of #TrumpRussia should take place and 2) through what means.

I ask Republicans how far down this road do we have to go? Trump firing his investigators; Trump pardoning members of his team; Trump imprisoning his political opponents. At which point will you get off the train?

---

+1 Well stated and right on.

Given a choice I'd choose removing Trump "yesterday". He's incompetent, he's a "silver spoon" who was gifted vast resources and then failed at business, and he can't govern. Otherwise, he's an arrogant asz-kissing bastard...not that there's anything wrong with that.

tequila4kapp;842838787 said:

---

It is possible Trump fired her for the Flynn conversation. I find it substantially more probable she was fired for publicly disobeying and publicly opposing Trump's Ex Order.

---

In all seriousness, wouldn't you say that the timing of the Comey firing lends more credence to the former interpretation (Yates fired for investigating Flynn)? It's not proven, of course. But these coincidences can add up.

I agree that it could end up being both.

At this point there is zero evidence anyone from Trump's camp conspired or coordinated with Russia. Clapper said as much Monday (again). To the best of my knowledge nobody has offered facts indicating otherwise or even said there is evidence to that fact. So this part of the equation to me looks like some smoke but no fire. Could turn out to be something. Could turn out to be Democrat partisans seeing what they want to see and using it for political purposes. TBD.

On the other hand we know Trump is thin skinned, hyper sensitive to criticism and unwilling to tolerate insubordination. This looks like the obvious answer at this point.

dajo9;842838785 said:

---

I am fine with that. Hillary has already been investigated more than 9/11. Don't think you'll find anything there in a legitimate independent investigation. Let's go with Odonto's suggestion.

---

Most agree with the independent investigation. I agreed with you a month ago. It's the other partisan B. S. you spew that hurts your credibility.

sycasey;842838786 said:

---

I was joking, of course. The fact that Trump is president goes to show that "truth" hasn't meant a whole lot in politics lately, even if you and I personally believe it should.

---

Truth has never been that meaningful in politics. The main difference now is that the White House staff is engaging in some North Korea like propaganda that argue for alternative facts that go against clear facts. That only works in countries like North Korea where we don't have access to the media. However, with both far-left Democrats and far-right Republicans reading and listening only to things that they agree with and running away in fear against any counter viewpoints, I doubt we even need to censor media. We have done that ourselves.

dajo9;842838782 said:

---

Sally Yates was fired for doing her job. She was doing two things against the Trump Administration - refusing to defend an unlawful EO, which the court ordered was unlawful and which the Administration subsequently withdrew, and investigating the Trump team.

My statement stands, everybody in the Executive Branch who has tried to investigate the Trump team has been fired for one reason or another.

People who keep bringing up Democrats dislike for Comey are missing the point. I'm no fan of Comey. I believe he should have been fired months ago and investigated for violations of the Hatch Act. The victim here isn't Comey - it's the #TrumpRussia investigation. Which has been thwarted in the House and there are conflicting reports about what was going on in the Senate. Comey was offering the only sign of progress into a true investigation on this matter, because Congress has been derelict in its duties. Now the person leading the FBI investigation into Russian agents in the White House has been fired. It is the investigation we are defending. To say it is an about-face on Comey by Democrats is just a Trump talking point.

Personalities aside, the only issues that really matter are 1) do you believe a real investigation of #TrumpRussia should take place and 2) through what means.

I ask Republicans how far down this road do we have to go? Trump firing his investigators; Trump pardoning members of his team; Trump imprisoning his political opponents. At which point will you get off the train?

---

An independent special prosecutor is the only answer. Any House or Senate committee will simply stay polarized and get nothing done except a lot of name calling. This is exactly what Putin wants -- to neutralize his foreign enemies.
The problem of Russian meddling in the US electoral process is too great to ignore.

oski003;842838796 said:

---

Most agree with the independent investigation. I agreed with you a month ago. It's the other partisan B. S. you spew that hurts your credibility.

---

NO, he is worried that our democracy is at risk. It survived FDR, but firing the FBI director is sign that our democracy is hanging by a thread.

tequila4kapp;842838793 said:

---

Could turn out to be Democrat partisans seeing what they want to see and using it for political purposes.

---

I'd add to this "exacerbated by Trump being thin-skinned and hyper-sensitive and making the situation worse."

If he's innocent, he's playing right into his political enemies' hands.

68great;842838799 said:

---

An independent special prosecutor is the only answer. Any House or Senate committee will simply stay polarized and get nothing done except a lot of name calling. This is exactly what Putin wants -- to neutralize his foreign enemies.
The problem of Russian meddling in the US electoral process is too great to ignore.

---

I agree with the necessity of an independent special prosecutor. That should always be the case when the White House is being investigated. However, stop giving Putin more weight than he actually has. We did this to ourselves. And we meddle in other electoral process all the time. Our meddling (and Russia's meddling) in the election and the coup led to the issue in Ukraine in the first place.

Oh boy, it seems ages ago when Devin Nunes embarrassed himself like a 3-yo trying to lie to his parents.