I struggle to see a way where Trump could be prosecuted for colluding with a foreign power in a manner that precludes criticism of it being a partisan set-up. But if there is any way for that to happen, I definitely think it should.
We need to find a rabid anti-Communist federal judge to preside over the trial, and it goes without saying rabid anti-Communists would be a) Republicans b) anti-Putin in general.
This all boggles the mind, though. Imagine if Obama had said this sort of thing about Bush in 2008. Or Dukakis in 1988 ("I hope the Russians release any missing Iran-Contra files..."). The GOP would crucify them, and rightly
Yes, it's impossible to imagine. Your example demostrates well how weak the US has become under Obama. It has lost its position of the superpower. How you are afraid of Russians now. This is the most prominent result of Obama's rule.
What it demonstrates is how dysfunctional our political system has become, where a candidate can nakedly support a foreign leader and his country's subversion of our government, and somehow manage to retain the blind loyalty of 40%+ of the electorate.
I blame, at least in part, the fragmented media landscape. Now everyone can pick the version of the facts that best aligns with their preconceived biases, and hear only what they want to hear. The internet is great and all, but if it was still just ABC, NBC, and CBS (and equally non-partisan cable news networks) delivering the facts on the evening news, and the national broadsheets and regional papers reporting (if online) on the campaign, the entire Trump phenomenon would have never even gotten off the ground, and even if it had, the Russia angle would have killed him. Conversely, if you had had cable news, social media, partisan online outlets in 1964, there could have never been a landslide victory for LBJ.
We'd be in a much better place if there was someone with the stature of an Edward Murrow or Walter Cronkite, who could make a substantive impact if they were to denounce Trump.
Poll
