I think that Trump is becoming so emboldened that soon he will fire Mueller.

Maybe be, but if so it will set off a shit storm like we have not seen since the 60's I think. Both the DEMs and the GOP are warning him not to fire Muller.

[Delete] @Baden

I would like to see that. Not because I like Trump or don't like Mueller, just because of the public outrage if he does so and the proud and smug look on his face after this. — René Descartes

Why would you want to see that? And is seeing that really worth the political consequences of the firing?

If you're being honest, then I think this is part of the problem facing politics today. Too many people see it as just a game and either don't understand or don't care about the real world effects it has.

[Delete] @Baden

Also that terrible story of the the FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe who got fired two days before retiring. — René Descartes

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, fired by Jeff Sessions, was leading probe into Sessions

Now-fired former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe oversaw a federal criminal investigation into whether Attorney General Jeff Sessions lacked candor when testifying before Congress last year about his contacts with Russian officials

And then McCabe fired for lack of candor.

Likely Sessions held to his position by firing McCabe. If he wouldn't accepted Trump's petty wishes of taking away a pension from a person retiring from office, likely Sessions would have had to go.

One thing is how this bizarre show of a Presidency will end. That will be interesting indeed.

The other interesting thing is the post-Trump backlash that will happen. Because after a few years people will state the obvious: a Presidential candidate had gotten himself entangled with a hostile foreign power, either unwillingly or in this case, possibly willingly, which created a truly historical event in the annals of espionage. The Trump saga will be treated as it is, not spoken with caution as now.

The backlash of that will come. Because later the one question is going to be asked a lot: how could this happen? Likely presidential candidates will be screened and given background checks by the parties themselves. And every firing that Trump will do in the Justice Department will be remembered.

What is certain that the truth will come out. Perhaps not everything, but so much that we do know what happened. Just like how the obvious lies that lead to the war in Iraq aren't anymore disputed by anyone (even the white lie of the President simply getting bad intel from the Intelligence Community is shown false as the role of the Vice President and his team is in the open).

The other interesting thing is the post-Trump backlash that will happen. — ssu

Already happened with Doug Jones winning in Alabama (R+14, Trump+28) and Conor Lamb winning in Pennsylvania's 18th (R+11, Trump+20).

At one time or another, Mr. Trump has attacked the judiciary, ridiculed the media, defended torture, condoned police brutality, urged supporters to rough up hecklers and — jokingly or not — equated mere policy disagreements with treason. He tried to undermine faith in America’s electoral process through a bogus advisory commission on voter integrity. He routinely vilifies federal law enforcement institutions. He libels immigrants and the countries from which they come. His words are so often at odds with the truth that they can appear ignorant, yet are in fact calculated to exacerbate religious, social and racial divisions. Overseas, rather than stand up to bullies, Mr. Trump appears to like bullies, and they are delighted to have him represent the American brand. If one were to draft a script chronicling fascism’s resurrection, the abdication of America’s moral leadership would make a credible first scene.

Will we stop Trump before it’s too late?

We have never had a president, at least in the modern era, whose statements and actions are so at odds with democratic ideals, Trump has spoken harshly about the institutions and principles that make up the foundation of open government, in the process he has systematically degraded political discourse in the US, shown an astonishing disregard for facts, libelled his predecessor, threatened to lock up political rivals, bullied members of his own administration, referred to mainstream journalists as enemies of the American people, spread falsehoods about the integrity of the US electoral process, touted mindlessly nationalistic economic and trade policies and nurtured a paranoid bigotry toward the followers of one of the world's foremost religions.

Madeliene Albright

The other interesting thing is the post-Trump backlash that will happen. — ssu

The backlash of that will come — ssu

Perhaps, but I wouldn't bet too much on it. His core supporters seem unfazed by whatever his administration does, either defending his more execrable actions and statements (often using logic so tortured that waterboarding looks tame by comparison), or sweeping them under the rug with the "fake news" mantra. And as long as he has the support of the Republican base, Congress will likely continue to tow the Trump line (however grudgingly).

The Republicans will likely take some hits in the midterms in November, but that usually happens to the party in power, anyway: I'm not sure how credibly that outcome (assuming it even happens in the first place) could be attributed specifically to a Trump backlash.

To those who wish to see Trump impeached (or otherwise removed from office), I have two words for you: President Pence. I'm not sure that that is preferred outcome.

Pence is just an old-school conservative. Sure he’s backwards-looking but he isn’t going to start WWIII out of pique.

True, he is probably less likely to start WWIII than Trump, but I don't think even Trump is likely to start WWIII (if only because his ego won't let him go down in history as the President that did it and because pretty much any other nation would likely be on the losing side of that conflict when fought against the U.S., and so would probably back down before the bombs started flying).

Pence is a hardline theocrat, though, which is even less desirable to me in many ways than Trump's policies. We had 8 years of evangelicals running the White House with GW Bush, and eight is enough (which, incidentally, is the name of an old sitcom).

I don't think even Trump is likely to start WWIII — Arkady

You presume he knows what he's doing.

Also, we here in Australia all despised W. But compared to Trump, W was a knight in shining armour.

You presume he knows what he's doing. — Wayfarer

Not at all. I just presume that he doesn't want to be the President who ended civilization.

I just presume that he doesn't want to be the President who ended civilization. — Arkady

But that presumes he knows what he's doing. If he doesn't know what he's doing, his not wanting something doesn't mean he won't do it. "I was just trying to get a good deal, honest."

But that presumes he knows what he's doing. If he doesn't know what he's doing, his not wanting something doesn't mean he won't do it. "I was just trying to get a good deal, honest." — unenlightened

I don't think Trump would accidentally order a nuclear strike, no. But, I don't presume that he knows what he's doing with regard to possessing expertise or knowledge on any substantive area pertaining to foreign relations, foreign or domestic policy, geopolitics, or diplomacy.

but Putin does. And Trump will do whatever Putin tells him to. But oc there will be no nuclear strike because US 'is not capable' of anything so substantial.

the third world war is already rolling and here.

Also, we here in Australia all despised W. But compared to Trump, W was a knight in shining armour. — Wayfarer

This is one of the main problems with the left and the MSM. It's what I would call the boy who cried wolf syndrome. Just look at how the word "white supremacy" has now been normalized as a means of slander. Once all the meaning of "racism" was beaten out of word, they had to find another word with which to hurl ad hominems at their political opponents.

Trump is a brash New York liberal, nothing more.

And Trump will do whatever Putin tells him to. — Seastar

A bit of an overstatement. Trump and Putin are not exactly best buds lately. Did Putin tell the Trump administration to impose sanctions on Russian citizens?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/06/politics/russia-sanctions-oligarchs/index.html

they're faking it all.

they're faking it all. — Seastar

I see. Good luck with all that. <slowly backs away with smile frozen on face>

bit of an overstatement. Trump and Putin are not exactly best buds lately. Did Putin tell the Trump administration to impose sanctions on Russian citizens? — Arkady

I heard a commentator say the US is locked in an ideological conflict with Russia. When did that happen?

I heard a commentator say the US is locked in an ideological conflict with Russia. When did that happen? — frank

You'd have to ask him, I suppose. It's not anything I said. I don't think Trump and Putin are even that different ideologically: I think that Putin (or perhaps Putin-lite) is someone Trump would resemble were he not constrained by the checks and balances of American democracy, such as they are (for now, anyway).

when you hear a commentator saying anything it probably means nothing happened. When things happen they say nothing bc they have no idea it's happening and even afterwards they don't get it:joke:

Luck has nothing to do with it. It's getting to be a pretty stable fact within the European union. But the US still just sniggers at it.

I don't think Trump and Putin are even that different ideologically: I think that Putin (or perhaps Putin-lite) is someone Trump would resemble were he not constrained by the checks and balances of American democracy, such as they are (for now, anyway). — Arkady

The inept Trump who basically wants to be the classic playboy and Putin are quite different.

First, Trump has no true ideological otherwise that he would want everybody to like him and be as great as he says he is. Ideologies don't matter to this basically stupid and most ignorant person.

Putin's trauma is the collapse of the Soviet Union. This has been the objective behind all of his policies: stop Russia from plunging into chaos something like during the Time of Troubles and get Russia to be a Great Power. I assume that Putin has hoarded his wealth in order to be able to fight any oligarchs that have independent agendas of their own concering political power in Russia.

When you just listen to the speeches of the leaders, Putin has understanding and objectives, Trump is just an ignorant idiot.

The inept Trump who basically wants to be the classic playboy and Putin are quite different. — ssu

I don't know about that. Classic playboys don't generally seek to be the leader of the free world. Trump clearly had larger plans. He has been vocal about politics for some time.

First, Trump has no true ideological otherwise that he would want everybody to like him and be as great as he says he is. Ideologies don't matter to this basically stupid and most ignorant person.

Putin's trauma is the collapse of the Soviet Union. This has been the objective behind all of his policies: stop Russia from plunging into chaos something like during the Time of Troubles and get Russia to be a Great Power. I assume that Putin has hoarded his wealth in order to be able to fight any oligarchs that have independent agendas of their own concering political power in Russia.

When you just listen to the speeches of the leaders, Putin has understanding and objectives, Trump is just an ignorant idiot.

If referring to Trump's "ideology" imputes too much intellectual credit to the man for your liking, then feel free to substitute something else ("mindset," or "worldview," perhaps). I find it doubtful that historians will ever refer to the "Trump Doctrine," in discussing foreign policy.

My point was that I think that Trump has authoritarian tendencies and inclinations, as does Putin, and that, were Trump unconstrained by the checks and balances of American democracy, he would govern much more in the style of a Putin (though perhaps not quite as odious as that) more than in the style of a small-d democrat or classic liberal.

In barely more than one year in office, Trump has already waged war on the free press, dismissing inconvenient facts as "fake news" (a rhetorical tact subsequently adopted by other strongmen or abusive regimes), expressed admiration for authoritarian rulers such as Rodrigo Duterte and Abdel el-Sisi, flirted with the idea of taking away broadcast networks' operating licenses when their news divisions push stories he doesn't like, "joked" that lawmakers who show him insufficient adulation at State of the Union addresses might possibly be branded as treasonous, has taken steps to militarize the southern border, has openly threatened nuclear war with North Korea, has personally demonized judges whose rulings displease him, and on and on. Not to mention that, as a candidate, he encouraged the violent removal of protesters from at least one of his rallies.

Trump is a brash New York liberal, nothing more. — Thorongil

Nothing more? Really?Brash (does the brash mean anything?) NY liberals are just Trumps, nothing less? Nonsense, unless you have a very low opinion indeed of NY liberals. And, just for the heck of it, on what basis do you class Trump a liberal? It seems to me that liberal is one thing his brand of pathology rules out.

Btw, "white supremacist" was a pejorative long before Trump was around.

As a card-carrying member of the elitist, intellectual, Jewish, left-wing, New Yorker, the idea that Trump is a "New York Liberal" is a risible epithet.

But he's given huge tax breaks to the rich, tried to destroy Obamacare, deruglated business, is trying to gut environmental regulations, has banned transgender people from the military, and is doing his best to build a wall along the border. How more liberal can you get?