Yes of course.

Investigate and then lay the charges. That is the process, but nothing so far.

You can chant all you like, but if there is no evidence then the only thing they will achieve is losing their voice. 

Doesn't even sound serious to me. certainly, not enough for a judge to impeach.

I mean really! he just said, "I really hope you let this go". Who wouldn't say that in his position?It's not even close to ordering the cessation of the investigation. not even close. Plus, there is no evidence that he even said what he said. Has anyone actually heard a transcript?

Still clasping at straws.

meanwhile, in 4 years time, Trump will win with a landslide. The people will punish you for talking down to them. 

Actually, all the real world indications are that the Republicans are going to suffer massive losses in November next year.

You might want to travel outside your Fox News feed of gloss & no substance

We will see. The legislative elections are still a long way off. 

And even if there is a backlash, it will not effect the presidency that much because Obama had 8 years of a hostile Senate and Congress. 

What is evident to me is that the opposing side are sore losers. they were not expecting it and are now behaving like children clasping at anything. now if they continue to do this, then I can't see trump losing at all, not even in November 2018. People are a lot more intelligent than the media give them credit for. 

How about you travel outside of your Guardian bubble for a second? fox news might give you a bit of balance in your life. 

A hostile senate will block legislation that isn't an executive order. Dems only need to pick up 3 of 10 seats that they don't currently hold. Considering what happened in Florida recently, its a very good chance.

Its amazing the chanting of "we won, we won" blinds simpletons to the realities of policy - Trump'care' got a massive backlash from Republican voters when they realised what they were in for. It helps to inform oneself before voting, rather than gobbling up demagoguery. I'll never forget a guy being interviewed for the 2012 election & he said "I won't vote for Obama, because it sounds like Osama". F.M.D

As for travelling outside Guardian, I don't actually read it too much, but on balance, its definitely more evidenced based reporting than Fox News. When you apply some literally basic critical thinking, its easy to pick the difference. It was interesting to note that Tucker Carlson on Fox News the other day, totally ignored everything that was going on with Donald Trump, but focussed on kids choosing toilets at schools. Speaks volumes.

No different to Obama.

Executive Orders suit trump's style anyway.

And I think you are a long way off from counting your chickens just yet. 

And I am laughing how you consider Guardian a non biased evidenced based outlet. it is nothing but utter junk journalism. 

I get my news from a wide cross section of sources. Plus, I also like reading slightly left leading sources like NYT and Washington Post which are certainly of a very high caliber compared to the tabloid junk of the Guardian. 

I also like looking at Right leaning sources like FOX News and Sky news for perspective. They are not junk news outlets, but the are unashamedly very biased. but the Guardian isn't just biased, but extremely inaccurate. 

US President Donald Trump told Russian officials that firing FBI director James Comey eased "great pressure" on him, US media report.
The New York Times, citing a document summarising last week's meeting, says he called Mr Comey a "real nut job".
Mr Comey had been running an inquiry into possible collusion between Russia and Donald Trump's election campaign.
The ex-FBI chief has agreed to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee about the investigation.
The latest report was published just as Mr Trump took off on a flight to the Middle East for the first leg of his first foreign tour as president.
"I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job," Mr. Trump said, according to the report.
"I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off."
The White House has not disputed the language used in the meeting at the Oval Office between Mr Trump, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak.
In another development, the Washington Post reported that a current White House official is a "significant person of interest" in the investigation into alleged links between the Trump campaign and Russia.
It quoted unnamed sources familiar with the investigation as saying it was someone "close to the president" but they would not identify them further. The White House has denied there was collusion between the campaign and any "foreign entity".
Donald Trump called the ongoing Russia investigation a "witch hunt", but reporters have just found a boiling cauldron and a closet full of broomsticks.
The key takeaway from these latest blockbuster stories - there have been so many this week it's hard to keep count - is there's now further evidence of Mr Trump's intent to dismiss FBI Director James Comey because of his handling of the ongoing Russia investigation.
That this revelation came as a result of a meeting with Russian officials, one of whom is a key figure in the investigation, is just the icing on the cake.
What's more, it now appears this investigation has expanded to involve an individual who currently holds a senior post within the White House, not just an ex-aide (Michael Flynn) or campaign official (Paul Manafort). If that's the case, it's only a matter of time before subpoenas are issued and the entire administration adopts a bunker mentality.
Donald Trump reportedly told his Russian guests that firing Mr Comey had relieved the "great pressure" his administration was under because of the Russia investigation.
That, it turns out, was wishful thinking in the extreme.
Grey line
Warning that leaks were undermining national security, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said: "By grandstanding and politicising the investigation into Russia's actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate with Russia.
"The investigation would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey would not have ended it."
The BBC's Gary O'Donoghue, in Washington, says the White House has chosen to interpret the president's words as relating to the national interest rather than to himself.
The summary was drawn from a formal account of last week's meeting, which was attended by Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak - a man at the centre of many of the controversial contacts between the Trump campaign and senior Russian officials.
Mr Trump had fired Mr Comey the evening before, a move that sent shockwaves through Washington.
Critics accused the president of trying to thwart the FBI investigation into Russia's alleged interference in the US election and any Moscow ties to Trump associates.
Mr Comey has agreed to give details of the investigation to the US Senate Intelligence Committee at a public hearing, as well as take questions surrounding his dismissal. The date has not yet been scheduled, but is expected to take place next month.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39983257

In 119 days, President Trump has made 586 false and misleading claims
The Fact Checker’s ongoing database of the false and misleading claims made by President Trump during his first 365 days in office.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/?utm_term=.bd578aaf9863

Appears to be total nonsense.

the report purports to track 586 misleading claims from his 365 days in office.

Trump has only been in office for 119 days, not 365 days. 

and just reading through a few of the "misleading statements", it is apparent to me that a lot are a matter of interpretation, and not misleading per se. It's just clasping at straws again. 

Total hubris...

Trump 68% lies
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

Obama 26% lies
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/

Can they provide the metrix of how they came to this conclusion?

It appears very rigged to me, and concocted because they are saying Trump lied about alleged collusion with Russia when there is no proof at all, as confirmed by the Democrats. 

No chickens being counted, just looking at the available evidence. I choose to approach things using available evidence & being informed.

It seems you haven't read the two sentences quoted. Really, really basic stuff.

What available evidence? All we have is a whole lot of media misinformation, fake news and a hostile media hellbent to bring him down.; 

If there were any evidence of collusion, he would be impeached.

Pray for (insert latest city)

Terrorist attack in Manchester :angry:

Manchester Arena blast: 19 dead and about 50 hurt

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-40007886

Why?

Tories are guaranteed reelection now

You know what absolute shits me up the wall. Those on the ABC saying this and that about terrorism. 'You are .0003% chance of dying by terrorism' or 'more people die in incidents involving giraffes than people die in terrorist attacks in the UK'.

Innocent people have died and to trivilise it as if it is nothing should be considered a crime as far as I am concerned.

-PB

spooky

This. And people who turn around before the bodies are even cold and start blaming tragedies like this on "racism" and "Islamophobia".

I await Waleed to come out and make his usual statement and all the useful idiots to predictably gush over everything he says...

@theselectfew

I'll add it to the list

#notallmuslims
#mentalhealthawareness
#racism&poverty
#partandparcelofabigcity
#giraffeskillmore

But above all, make sure you dont resort to islamophobia, because when an ideology inspires the murder of 22 people, including 8 year old children, the most important thing is that you don't hate that ideology.

100%

As for the poverty thing, when I am low on funds I don't go around killing people.

Fix your ideology.

He has lost a lot of respect but the fact he has any at all makes me sick.

And people that turn around before the bodies are even cold and start blaming tragedies like this on "Islam" as a whole and "immigrants/refugees"

I'd love to live in a world without terrorism, but can i just make an offensive culture war comment involving people I disagree with dying?

Consider this a warning, to TSF for his original comment too.