The conservatives who reluctantly supported Trump are now looking for any "positive" spin they can attach to the bloke to justify his electoral victory. One such justification is pointing to his batch of appointments as the people to drain the swamp, assuming the swamp needs draining in the first place. Has The Donald saved one life in the Middle East as yet, or feed one staving person in the world, no, but we can all take great comfort in fact the swamp dwellers love him, as indicated by the numerical approval give by the swamps Mr Dow Jones.
All looks good now.

There's an interesting website
regarding the Trump appointments. It's worth a read.
Here are some issues that it raises:

The Trump appointments are more establishment than
one might have thought. However, what is also
interesting it raises the question regarding the
Vice-President - Pence. How much power will Pence
really have? Will he be another Cheney? Pence
might turn out to be the 2nd most powerful
person in America depending on how interested Trump
is in actually governing as opposed to just
enjoying the perks being President. We're told that
it is actually the way a lot of powerful
organisations work. There's a person who is a
figurehead who knows how to charm or have a presence
in public, and then there is the behind the scenes
workhorses. Let us not forget that Pence is a hard-core
conservative. He endorsed Cruz in the Republican Primary.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-do-trumps-cabinet-picks-say-about-his-presidency/

What exactly was Obama refering to when he said to Putin to "cut it out". Cut what out?
Could it also mean for Putin to stop helping Assad in Syria?

Putin helping Assad was a slap in the face for the Obama Democrat camp that was supplying the rebels and their allies against Assad.
I think Putin helping Assad was how Russia influenced the US election.

Clinton is a professional politician who has been engaged in warmongering.
Trump is a professional businessman who has a history of making money.

The choice generally is obvious.

People worlwide want prosperity and peace, not hardship and conflict.

There is no evidence of substance of Assad committing crime nor evidence of Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction.
And there is no evidence how Putin meddled with the actual Trump-Clinton election.

People worldwide are I think tired of political warmongering while prosperity and peace in general declines.

Hey Paul1405,
I don't feel any need to justify Trumps electoral victory.
The facts speak for themselves, and the liberal left would always find something to argue about anyway.

Trump won the vast majority of states, and where Hillary did win, it was in 'Sanctuary Cities' that do not send illegals back also the back of policies to encourage illegal immigration AND encourage them to vote without prosecution - as Obama did.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/obama-encourages-illegal-aliens-to-vote/

The Podesta emails mostly outlined the extent to which the DNC rigged the outcome of the primary process for Clinton, and against Bernie Sanders.

So Hillary should never have been running for President in the first place, and that isn't taking into account that FBI director James Comey should have prosecuted her for the Title 18 breaches relating to her private email server.

What about all the other revelations such as Project Veritas?
And the 'Pay for Play' scandals going on inside the Clinton Foundation?
And all this is before Hillary's own track record, like taking down Ghaddafi?
A project that she personally took charge of.
Ghaddafi acted as a plug to stop extremist migration from Africa to Europe and look what happened.
Europe's ruined, but Hillary's in with George Soros and well what do you know he wants 'Open Borders' and they are all part of a group that wants to destroy Nationalism to push for Globalism instead.

All this stuff really all just the tip of the iceberg of what a bunch of crooks they really all are.

But they come out accusing of 'Fake News' when they are engaged in producing it themselves.
- There's no evidence at all that Russia was engaged in any hacking or attempt to manipulate the US election, though I'm sure they will manufacture some; for Hillary.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/comey-fbi-russia-trump/2016/12/14/id/764008/
Other reports this morning however, suggest Comey has now changed his stance.
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/12/16/fbi-director-comey-now-backing-cias-claims-that-russian-interference-helped-trump/
(Not that I'd trust Glenn Beck's 'The Blaze' to be a reliable source of info as he's just another establishment shill.)

Hi AC,

Speaking of shills and swamp-dwellers, it's clear now that there isn't much difference between the two rancid buckets of turds, Clinton's and Trump's. They are both solid Establishment, if from different wings of it. They are both frauds. They will support, or would have supported, the status quo. And neither one will be, or would have been, able to deliver on their promises to the American people.

We've got four years to realise that: I think realisation will come a lot sooner. Will Trump last four years without being impeached for misuse of his Office ? I don't mean some trivial thing like "I did not have fifty shades of sex with those women, at least not all at once," but more to do with his company dealings with Putin's mafia, his rampant use of insider trading and his obvious intent to use his position to massively - and surely illegally ? - build his businesses.

I never thought I'd ever have to feel sorry for Yanks, but ......

Joe

Paul,

I see you are scathing of Trump's record in office. Could you at least wait until he takes office?