It's going to be an ironic twist....

[callmeslick]

.....when the crowds in the street start using Trump's rally cry against him and his cronies. We are about a week, at current pace of Russian investigation reveals from mobs in every city chanting, "Lock Him Up" or even better "Lock Them All Up". You can't tell me that the likelihood that Flynn and others are not on tape, and that such recordings are now being evaluated if not circulated within the Intelligence community and the Congress. You can tell by the way questions are being framed by the press that a trap is about to be sprung("sir, did you EVER have ANY conversation regarding......"). If the rough timeline holds up, it is now starting to appear that:
1. In July 2016, Trump associates were offered a 19% share of a massive Russian conglomerate in exchange for lifting of sanctions due to Crimea, 'should Trump win'.

2. Russia works via several methods to assist Trump in winning. Contacting the Trump camp at various points along the way.

3. Trump's National Security Chief, before legally being appointed, contacted Russian envoys to assure them later sanctions around the election meddling
wouldn't stand too long,

4. Russia oddly doesn't respond to diplomatic sanctions for the first time, ever, to my recollection.

5. Trump calls the move by Putin, "smart".

Note, I'm not even getting into the dossier the Russians may or may not have about Trumps persosnal behavior. That is secondary to the above timeline.
That above timeline cannot be prosecuted for LESS than Treason. The Logan act, sure, but that hasn't been used in a courtroom since 1798 or something. Nothing less would suffice. Now, the reluctance of the CIA to give security clearance to Flynn(as far as I know they still haven't relented, but may be wrong) seems a bit more than internecine infighting.

[Nightshade]

.....when the crowds in the street start using Trump's rally cry against him and his cronies. We are about a week, at current pace of Russian investigation reveals from mobs in every city chanting, "Lock Him Up" or even better "Lock Them All Up". You can't tell me that the likelihood that Flynn and others are not on tape, and that such recordings are now being evaluated if not circulated within the Intelligence community and the Congress. You can tell by the way questions are being framed by the press that a trap is about to be sprung("sir, did you EVER have ANY conversation regarding......"). If the rough timeline holds up, it is now starting to appear that:
1. In July 2016, Trump associates were offered a 19% share of a massive Russian conglomerate in exchange for lifting of sanctions due to Crimea, 'should Trump win'.

2. Russia works via several methods to assist Trump in winning. Contacting the Trump camp at various points along the way.

3. Trump's National Security Chief, before legally being appointed, contacted Russian envoys to assure them later sanctions around the election meddling
wouldn't stand too long,

4. Russia oddly doesn't respond to diplomatic sanctions for the first time, ever, to my recollection.

5. Trump calls the move by Putin, "smart".

Note, I'm not even getting into the dossier the Russians may or may not have about Trumps persosnal behavior. That is secondary to the above timeline.
That above timeline cannot be prosecuted for LESS than Treason. The Logan act, sure, but that hasn't been used in a courtroom since 1798 or something. Nothing less would suffice. Now, the reluctance of the CIA to give security clearance to Flynn(as far as I know they still haven't relented, but may be wrong) seems a bit more than internecine infighting.

Should any of that turn out to be true, Trump should be impeached. Like I had said time and time again, the guy is a conman.

Now would democrat voters demand the impeachment of Hillary Clinton if she had won the election and done the same (which she has, essentially before running for president)?

I highly doubt it.

It's 'ends justify the means' and hypocrisy - a way of life for the left.

[Krom]

Now would democrat voters demand the impeachment of Hillary Clinton if she had won the election and done the same (which she has, essentially before running for president)?

I highly doubt it.

It's 'ends justify the means' and hypocrisy - a way of life for the left.

bull★■◆●.

They would go after her just as much, although they probably wouldn't have to because is there really any need to go after Hillary when you can just stand aside and let the angry mob of conservatives burn her at the stake without a trial.

I don't know where you get these crazy ideas that all liberals are incompetent hypocrites and mustache twirling villains at the same time, but your total black and white childish viewpoints are getting ridiculously old. Where do you even get these ideas? The world view you constantly present with your posting is so distorted it might as well be talking about a different universe. I've seen cartoon villains more realistic and convincing than most of the ★■◆● you spew about liberals.

Oh and you say Trump is a conman, yet you still voted for him. So who is the bigger fool, the conman without a clue how to run a country, or the fool that votes for him knowing all of that? It isn't like there weren't something close to 25 other choices on the ballot who weren't unprofessional con artists, even if some of them were clearly idiots running on batshit insane platforms.

[Tunnelcat]

Oh slick, you missed the newest one that Russia may be about to offer Edward Snowden as a "gift" to Trump as a favor in order to get him to lift those cumbersome sanctions Obama put in place. So much for asylum.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rus ... al-n718921

[Top Gun]

I don't know where you get these crazy ideas that all liberals are incompetent hypocrites and mustache twirling villains at the same time, but your total black and white childish viewpoints are getting ridiculously old. Where do you even get these ideas? The world view you constantly present with your posting is so distorted it might as well be talking about a different universe. I've seen cartoon villains more realistic and convincing than most of the ★■◆● you spew about liberals.

Well he is from Texas. I'd say that covers most of it.

[sigma]

I'm just delighted. UN completely discredited itself, and you will continue to discuss Russia.

[callmeslick]

Oh slick, you missed the newest one that Russia may be about to offer Edward Snowden as a "gift" to Trump as a favor in order to get him to lift those cumbersome sanctions Obama put in place. So much for asylum.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rus ... al-n718921

I caught that.....sort of awkward timing for Trump et al.

[sigma]

Slick, you when the last time you treated your family to a delicious juicy grilled steak BBQ with vegetables? Go and do it.

[callmeslick]

Slick, you when the last time you treated your family to a delicious juicy grilled steak BBQ with vegetables? Go and do it.

this week, the day before the snowstorm(Weds)....and I was the chef. We don't lack for food at Chez Slick.....

[callmeslick]

well, the Trump administration has issues with security. Chief with ties to Russia, resigns in disgrace. Public discussion of security at a country club dining room, with picture taking of the nuclear football and public ID of the man who was carrying it. Questions as to who vetted the damned country club employees free to overhear anything at Mar a Lago. Etc, etc. This has now FAR outstripped anything around security that EVER went amiss under Obama in 8 years. Benghazi? E-Mail servers? Where is the demand for investigations?

[Tunnelcat]

My husband has a college buddy who's a diehard Trump fan. He calls my husband just to gloat about some Trump crap or another he's seen on Fox News. I swear he calls just to piss my husband off. So far, nothing Trump has done, or not done, has made him waver. But the one thing that will get him to drop Trump like a hot potato is if Trump screws up on national security. That seems to be his ultimate breaking point. Well, this friend is now starting to waver, just a little bit, with this latest crop of national security charades going on in the Trump White House and at Mara Lago.

Oh, and with Flynn out, one of the proposed replacement considerations is STILL General Petraeus (aka "Dangerous Dave" or "Peaches" --- XOXO), the very same general who resigned after classified documents were found on his girlfriend's computer, a girlfriend he was having an extramarital affair with behind his wife's back. Now will someone please tell me why this man even deserves consideration for any national security job AT ALL, and if so, why is what he did somehow considered a lesser crime than Hillary using a personal server for government business? A server that was never verified as being hacked either. The fact that Trump is even considering this man for the job tells me that Trump, or his advisors, or the Republicans, are unprincipled idiots.

[sigma]

I'm tired of repeating that any American President is a puppet on wires. It does not matter who the American President. USA is country of the shadow economy.

[Tunnelcat]

We already know that sigma. The plutocrats and elites have always controlled the president. It's just that Americans have the "freedom" to complain about what our president does with his power and not get thrown in prison while doing that complaining.......at least for now, so far.

[Ferno]

Oh and you say Trump is a conman, yet you still voted for him. So who is the bigger fool, the conman without a clue how to run a country, or the fool that votes for him knowing all of that? It isn't like there weren't something close to 25 other choices on the ballot who weren't unprofessional con artists, even if some of them were clearly idiots running on batshit insane platforms.

But the jobs, the jobs!