They weren't wiretapping Trump Tower but

they were probably wiretapping Russian officials and maybe caught Trump campaign officials talking with the Russians. That could be what Trump is afraid of coming out.

How the extreme left gave us Nixon, Bush and now Trump

Democrats have lost elections that they should have won in 1968, 2000 and now last year because too many on the left either didn't vote or voted for a third party candidate with no chance of winning because the Democratic candidate wasn't pure enough for them.

As any political analyst will tell you, most elections are won in the middle, not at the extremes of right or left. Thus, any Senator, Governor, Member of Congress, Mayor or President needs to do is win over enough of these centrist/moderate/independent voters to add to their base to achieve 51% and victory. The larger or more secure the base is, the fewer of these independents need to be won over.

The GOP has had a large & secure base for over 50 years. Thus, they don't need to win over that many moderates in order to win elections.

The same is not true of Democrats. Too often many in the base make the perfect the enemy of the good and abandon the Dems either by not voting or voting for a third party candidate. Thus, the Dems are more and more forced to pander to centrist/moderate voters to get re-elected. Which in turn alienates the base even more and the cycle repeats itself.

Case in point, during the run up to the Iraq war, Tom Daschle was being vilified daily by Rush Limbaugh, FAUX News and others in the right wing media. However, many on the left abandoned him because he wasn't stronger in fighting Bush on the war. In the end Daschle was left twisting in the wind and lost re-election.

The net result is that over the years Democratic incumbents on average have had to become more moderate while GOP incumbents have not.

While no candidate or political party is owed anyone's vote, setting the bar too high on certain issues or looking at the glass as half empty rather than as half full can be damaging overall. Why should any Democratic incumbent stick their neck out on certain issues knowing that in the end they will have to accept some compromise, because that is the way our system works, and then will be abandoned by their base because they accepted said compromise. The safer path it to not take a chance in the first place and just tack to the middle. Many say that Democrats have no backbone but the real problem is that many on the left don't have their backs. In contrast those on the right will defend their candidates against anything.

Therefore, the insistence by some on the left for 100% ideological purity can only serve to marginalize themselves. If the left abandons someone who has a 85%-90% record of voting for progressive legislation, because of the 10% to 15% that they didn't; they why should any incumbent bother to listen to the base. The end result is that the left becomes more and more marginalized because incumbents need to more and more go after the middle to win.

Now to anyone here who either stayed home in November or voted for Jill Stein, do you really think the country is better off now than if Hillary Clinton were President?

Trump fact check: Almost every big claim he made to Congress was false

I have to disagree with Fran Lebowitz

Just watched this week's Real Time and really have to disagree with something said by Fran Lebowitz. She said that it's OK to give idiots a platform because it exposes their idiocy. She is wrong. It shows that she lives in a bubble and only knows other people who think like her. But everyone doesn't think like her. I do as many here on DU do. But many don't.

After she said it I'm glad Seth MacFarlane said 'that hasn't been working'.

In reality, by giving idiots, bullies, hate-mongers, etc. a platform you are only emboldening other idiots, bullies and hate-mongers. It legitimizes them. I think we all saw this over the last two years with Trump's campaign. Back in the 70s, Norman Lear was surprised to learn that many conservatives loved All in the Family. Why? Because they thought that Archie made a lot of sense. They didn't see the show as Lear wrote it, a satire on the stupidity of bigots and the right. But rather as a validation of the those views that they held. Archie their hero who slapped down the views of his liberal son in law week after week.

I believe in the 1st Amendment and don't believe in censorship. But these is no right to be on TV. And those that spew the most vile and disgusting views have no right to that platform.

George Takei vs. Bill Maher