Best sign from the London protest was a drawing of DOTUS as a Handmaid, with the caption “OfPutin”. 
Once again, words fail me.
Actually, Comey did violate a lot of things - ethics, procedure, policy. The IG report called him insubordinate. He had an idea that his “moral view” (or whatever the fuck it was) overruled everything else - all the time. Too high and mighty, too arrogant for his own good and for ours.
I think we have a pretty good notion about how the Helsinki “summit” will go. What is Russian for, “Thank you, sir may I have some more?”
“Covfefe.”
So basically, if the new sheriff is asked what he’s going to do about the serial killings, he can just say “Well, that happened during Sheriff Jones’ administration” and ignore it. If DOTUS can not see how serious this cyber attack on our political system was, and is so obsessed by Obama that he can’t do his job, then there is little hope for any of us.
Hey, it helped him or was at least aimed at helping him and thus forgivable.
That’s so good.
There’s another good one a bit down that same page (a Pink Floyd reference).
It started at the very end of the Obama administration. Wanna know who squashed that investigation? Mitch Fucking McConnell.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/23/mitch-mcconnell-russia-obama-joe-biden-359531
McConnell stopped the Obama administration from speaking out about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign by refusing to sign on to a bipartisan statement of condemnation.
That moment, the former Democratic vice president said, made him think “the die had been cast … this was all about the political play.”
Biden said he and former President Barack Obama worried that without a united front of bipartisanship, speaking out before the election would undermine the legitimacy of the election and American institutions in a way that would play into the Russians’ larger ambitions.
Former Vice President Joe Biden says he and President Barack Obama decided not to speak out publicly on Russian interference during the 2016 campaign after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to sign a bipartisan statement condemning the Kremlin’s role.
Speaking on Tuesday at the Council on Foreign Relations, Biden said the Obama administration sought a united front to dispel concerns that going public with such accusations would be seen as an effort to undermine the legitimacy of the election.
However, McConnell “wanted no part of having a bipartisan commitment saying, essentially, ‘Russia’s doing this. Stop,’ ” he said. … As recently as July, NBC News’ Kasie Hunt asked McConnell if he regrets the way he handled the threat at the time. The Senate GOP leader responded by dodging the question entirely. … the Obama White House, swayed by the evidence compiled by U.S. intelligence agencies, wanted bipartisan support to push back against Russian intrusion, and in mid-September 2016, the then-president dispatched counterterrorism adviser Lisa Monaco, then-FBI Director James Comey, and then-Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson to brief top members of Congress.
Obama didn’t want to be seen as using intelligence for partisan or electoral ends, so he sought a “show of solidarity and bipartisan unity” against foreign manipulation of our democracy.
That didn’t happen – because McConnel refused. The Washington Post reported:
In early September, Johnson, Comey, and Monaco arrived on Capitol Hill in a caravan of black SUVs for a meeting with 12 key members of Congress, including the leadership of both parties. The meeting devolved into a partisan squabble.
“The Dems were, ‘Hey, we have to tell the public,’ ” recalled one participant. But Republicans resisted, arguing that to warn the public that the election was under attack would further Russia’s aim of sapping confidence in the system.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) went further, officials said, voicing skepticism that the underlying intelligence truly supported the White House’s claims.
As Brian Beutler put it, “McConnell ran interference for Trump during the campaign to stop Obama from warning the country about things Trump was lying publicly about.”
And now that traitor has been blocking a bi-partisan effort and vote to protect Meuller and the investigation - for months now.
Trump also said our real foe is the EU. - our European allies are the Enemy, according to him.
“Well I think we have a lot of foes. I think the European Union is a foe, what they do to us in trade. Now you wouldn’t think of the European Union but they’re a foe."
For real.
Oops, El Kabong beat me to it.
“This is an extraordinary moment. It is without equal, not only in American history but in modern history. A hostile foreign power intervened in our election to help elect a man president who has since actively served their interests and has defended them at every turn.
Trump may deny collusion. But given that this the attack continues, denying it is collusion, distracting from it is collusion, obstructing the investigation of it is collusion — because all these things enable it to go on.
That the president is abetted in his aid for the Russians — again, in the midst of this ongoing attack — by the leadership of the Republican Party makes the situation all the more extraordinary and dangerous. As Republicans seek to undermine the investigation, they serve Russia as directly as if they were officers of the GRU. Some now reportedly seek to impeach Rosenstein on trumped up charges. To attack one of our national defense leaders as we are being attacked, and to do so to benefit our foreign adversary, is textbook treason.
That is strong language. But consider this: If we updated our definitions of war to include cyberwar, then aiding a foreign power engaged in such a war against us would certainly meet the Constitutional definition: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
When only semantics protect our president and our ruling party from the harsh sentences treason demands, we need to recognize the severity of the situation. But more importantly, we need to recognize one of the most important implications of yesterday: while we who watch or chat on cable news have lost the plot here, while the GOP makes it about personal attacks on FBI officers, while the President makes it about him, while many of us make it about partisan politics, Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein have kept their eye on the ball.”
~~ David Rothkopf, CEO and Editor of Foreign Policy Magazine
Nick Akerman, former U.S. Attorney who prosecuted the Watergate case, while speaking with Joy Reid on TV Saturday.
“[Robert Mueller and his team] know who the Americans are,” Ackerman said. “They know who is going to be indicted.”
“There is no way, no how that the Russians would have enough political sense and have enough feel for what the game on the ground is without having spotters and people in the Trump campaign directing this. And if you look at this indictment, it is filled with incredible details about the Russians. I mean, this is not gathered just based on forensic evidence. And they know. They know who the Americans are. They know who is going to be indicted. And they’re in the process now of putting that evidence together so they can convict these people beyond a reasonable doubt.”
According to Politucususa, “Given Republican efforts to undermine the overall investigation, special counsel Robert Mueller’s team is clearly trying to make sure, as Nick Akerman said on Saturday, that any Americans involved will be convicted “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
sure as ehll hope so!
Yeesh. One way or another, this McConnell asshole’s place in history is assured.
Here’s a chilling thought – and I’m being dead serious:
What if Republicans don’t want to stop Russian hacking?
They know they’re going to lose a democratic election, right? Gerrymandering and voter suppression might not save their control of the House. But what if Russians steal 500,000 or 5 million voter profiles? What if they remove their names from databases? Suppose you have 5 million reliable democratic voters who show up at the polls, only to find their names are not on the list, and they get turned away, or they file ‘provisional’ ballots that eventually get rejected?
I’ve been saying this over and over again.
We are in a moment that the Founding Fathers would have imagined, but only in their worst nightmare, and they would have assumed that men with virtues would be at the helm of the institutions they designed in the Constitution.
People who say “We’ve been through worse, we’ll survive,” do not understand the dangers we’re confronting. They’re deceived by the comforts of modernity, and that we’re not fighting a civil war. Our country has faced the great threat of regional strife, a crisis of capitalism, and an aggressive Executive, all of which are threats to the republic. But we now have a new threat: an Executive who does not believe in democracy, and accomplices in Congress who do not see the value in acting as a check against Executive excess. We are confronted with a Constitutional crisis.
[quote=“asahi, post:22860, topic:774070”]
Here’s a chilling thought – and I’m being dead serious:
What if Republicans don’t want to stop Russian hacking?
…/QUOTE]
Republicans are in favor of this Russian terrorism because it favors them. That’s how it always goes with Republicans. It’s like food stamps or welfare or aid of any kind- as long as you’re taking it away from someone else, they are all in. When you take theirs away, they bear arms, aim them at Feds, and occupy wildlife refuges. Republicans never give a shit if it doesn’t affect them.
Wait, what Asahi? Of course they’re not interested in stopping this.
The penny finally drops.