monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

You are missing the fact that 0bama & friends set out to hide the real
numbers.

Over the last few days, concerns about some kind of a hidden alliance between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin have exploded. There is the president-elect with his apparently fawning regard for the Russian leader. There are Trump’s top cabinet picks, with their unusual Russian ties: as national security advisor, Lt. General Mike Flynn, who has met Putin and done paid events for a Kremlin-sponsored TV station; and as secretary of state, ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson, who has done billions of dollars of business in Russia and received an award from Putin. And then there is the revelation, from the CIA, that Russia may have actively interfered in the US election to get Trump elected.

Of course, Putin may well have reasons for wanting Trump to be president—not least Trump’s apparent skepticism toward NATO and his lack of opposition to Russia’s military interventions in Ukraine and Syria. But a more important connection between the two men may be their common approach to leadership, which will almost certainly outlast any friendship that may form between them. During his campaign, Donald Trump repeatedly expressed admiration for the way Putin governed. “The man has very strong control over his country,” Trump said at one point. “He’s been a leader far more than our president has been a leader.” That revealed a lot about Trump’s concept of the presidency—he seems to believe that effectiveness is measured by the extent to which the leader “controls” the country. But how might that play out in practice? To what extent can Putin provide insight into Trump’s understanding of power?

There is still much we don’t know about how Trump will rule. But in the month since his election, some characteristic patterns have emerged—and they bear some instructive similarities to the style Putin has practiced over many years. Here are a few of them:

This Trump voter didn't think Trump was serious about repealing her health insurance

You expected something more tangible?

I got what I expected.

In July, Republicans on the House Select Committee on Benghazi released a report, confirming what we already knew about the deadly terrorist attack in Libya four years ago, but the controversial panel didn’t officially wrap up its work. In fact, it continued to seek information about the attack even after its chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), declared, “Our committee’s work is done.”

This week, however, the partisan committee, which failed in its efforts to find information damaging to Hillary Clinton, “quietly shut down” and will exist no longer.

...This really is the end of a cringe-worthy process. The GOP’s Benghazi panel, duplicating the work that had already been done by six other congressional committees, spent millions of taxpayer dollars chasing down bizarre conspiracy theories, asking questions that had already been answered, and pulling together evidence that had already been exhaustively reviewed.

The result was a committee that was needlessly partisan, needlessly secretive, and ultimately pointless. Even Republicans who hoped the Benghazi Committee would produce anti-Clinton fodder were left to wonder what about point of this lengthy exercise.

Indeed, this probe was among the longest in American history, and when it comes to congressional scrutiny of specific individual events – Pearl Harbor, 9/11, the Kennedy Assassination, Watergate, etc. – the Benghazi investigation was the longest ever.

Alex Jones Scrubs Pizzagate Content

The GOP’s Benghazi panel, duplicating the work that had already been done by six other congressional committees

Ben Carson’s HUD may roll back housing protections for LGBTQ people
The potential HUD secretary once compared same-sex relationships to bestiality.

I think it's time to just watch what he's doing - let him get on with it.

It's what going to happen and there's no upside to fussing about it.

I hope enough people are interested in holding the country together to figure out a way to mediate the differences.