@jorj Yeah it'd be ironic if Trump manages to shut down both open conflicts, it would be his version of "only Nixon could go to China" I suppose. But there's a big difference between articulating a principled withdrawal and drawing down properly, and stabbing our allies in the back. Our credibility in the world was already in tatters. "ISIS is defeated" is also not an honest rationale for what's clearly a political move ... probably so the Russians don't release Kompromat they have on him. And we thought Bush's "mission accomplished" stunt was dishonest!

Right. Going into Syria was not preferred, but we stepped in the dog fecal matter and must deal with it properly and proportionally. Trump looks at that sludge on the bottom of the shoe and thinks walking through a full service car wash is the best method to remove it in this case.

@jorj If you want to understand what is going on (because the media does a generally shitty job of reporting legal matters, particularly out of the ordinary ones like this), either read the book Proof of Collusion or follow the author on Twitter @SethAbramson. He's a former criminal prosecutor and journalism prof and I can't tell you how many times I've turned on the TV to some allegedly "breaking news" that, thanks to Seth, I knew about (and understood the background of) for weeks or even months already. He has the correct "theory of the case" and it's proven out many times. He's meticulous about connecting various dots, solid, credible data points. And he makes predictions that progressives do not like, such as, he doesn't think Pence will be taken down with Trump; he feels Pence's perfidy is sub-criminal, or at least not provably criminal.

Collusion is not a legal term to begin with. Trump, his cronies and organization will go down for criminal obstruction of justice, violation of the emoluments clause and various other actual legal matters which could, in layman's terms, in the aggregate be referred to as "collusion". But no one is ever going to be indicted for collusion as such.

Another big take away is that Mueller's investigation isn't "almost over" or "winding up". That's a baseless story that keeps coming out every couple of months for the past year and a half and keeps not being true, and it's not true now. This is an enormous and complex investigation that has already produced more indictments and convictions in a shorter time than we have a right to expect, but relative to previous similar investigations for Nixon and Clinton, we can expect it to easily take another year or more to produce even a partial report. That doesn't mean that in the meantime it won't produce dozens more convictions and seedy revelations that will change the political landscape, and not in favor of Trump.

@jorj "Collusion" isn't a conspiracy-generated term, it is just a loose sloppy umbrella term that's used indiscriminately by journalists trying to reduce complex issues to sound bytes. NO ONE who is actually involved with the justice department is seeking a collusion conviction as there is no such thing per se. They are simply following the evidence where it leads. That will result in zero or more convictions for actual crimes, the aggregate of which might be fairly at least in part termed "collusion" as a semantic shortcut.

Remember that Mueller is a Republican, appointed by Republicans, and initially lauded by Republicans, to a man-jack. There is nothing partisan about the investigation, in fact it's quite scrupulously non-partisan and by-the-book. And the fact that some people on both sides of the aisle are politicizing aspects of it doesn't change that essential fact. Mueller is dealing in facts, not opinions. It will be up to congress and the Senate what to do about those facts.

The fact is that impeachment is not a legal act, it is a political act. It needs a factual, legal basis to proceed, as a practical matter, but at the end of the day Trump will stand or fall based essentially on which way is less costly for the pocketbooks of wealthy plutocrats, especially but not exclusively Republican plutocrats.

It also will depend (though less than one would imagine) on a rational calculus concerning what will keep the GOP in power over time. The problem there, is that it's easy for the GOP to fool themselves that they can survive Trump -- to the point of not even realizing that their party already lies in ruins because of him. They have abrogated all moral credibility and responsibility to support Trump. They will pay for that. What carries on post-Trump may (or may not) be the GOP in name, but it will be something very different in reality. The only reason this creepshow has gone on for as long as it has is because of Trump's base, which is in its death throes, which is partly the source of its passion. Young people do not buy its arguments or ideology in significant numbers. It's the past. Trump and Trumpism is the past. Even so-called "principled conservatism" is the past. The elderly men finishing out their terms reminiscing about their salad days when men were men and women were barefoot and pregnant and blacks used separate restrooms and everyone knew "their place", are going to die just like everyone else. What then?

Yep. After being involved in two of these brush wars fighting "the godless communists", it became obvious to me that we've no business trying to force democracy and 'Murican lifestyles down people's throats.