All will be forgiven once he goes back to his normal fare, which includes holding aloft a bloody skull and ululating in front of a gigantic portrait of Reagan.

He's too rich. Someone like Carter Page or Stephen Miller is much likelier.

My sense is that Trump will probably quit when it looks like impeachment is more or less inevitable, but no one's going to jail except maybe some unlucky functionary who goes away to make it look like there were consequences.

We could just designate them "Diarrhea Zones" and see what people do there.

Funny enough, Trump has openly referred to his fanbase as "you people." Good shit.

Not that it's ever really meant anything anyway, but it's super-hilarious how we've now been informed that complying with the emoluments clause would be too hard so Trump isn't going to bother trying.

People say Trump really likes the woman whose brother killed a dog for sport, so probably her.

"Mr. President, do—"
"What?"
"Mr. President, do you think—"
"What do you want Spicer? I thought I sent you for a cheeseburger."
"Sir, you ate that cheeseburger a while ago. I was—"
"Well, I'm hungry again."
"—hoping that, seeing as how I'm Catholic and all—"
"Go stand over there, you moon faced little chimp, I don't want…

Everybody knows that viciousness and spite cultivate loyalty among employees.

Well, him and Morrissey.

You can die of any of a panoply of preventable diseases!

Carl Reiner is like comedy's Maester Aemon.

The best kind of reactionaries are the ones who are genuinely convinced they're the true radicals.

This is where you're wrong, friend.

And for that reason it seems to me like the real villain is voter apathy, and the only ways to change that are laughably unrealistic (i.e., responsive elected officials who promote popular policies, making election day a national holiday, tight regulations on campaign finance, etc.).

Then not voting is certainly a significantly worse problem than third-party/protest/write-in votes given how much more widespread it is, right? I mean, third-party voters couldn't have changed the election given how few of them there were, whereas a turnout of less than 80,000 additional Clinton voters in three…

There are several orders of magnitude more nonvoters than third-party voters.

Okay, so granting they threw away their vote (which, duh), practically no Johnson voter would realistically have voted for Clinton and there weren't enough Stein voters period in swing states to change the election.

Not choosing is a third choice.

Third-party voters didn't do anything. Save your ire for people who didn't vote.