After the Comey testimony, how much longer do you think the Russia

>>130049920
There doesn't seem to be a backup narrative, so I reckon they'll just keep double downing on it for as long as its useful for obstructionism. So probably easily until the midterm elections if not longer.

Absolutely nothing stops them from saying
>does jow blow have ties to the Russians?
or whatever any time they need to pick a new target

>>130050317
>>There doesn't seem to be a backup narrative
They still have the obstruction narrative, and Muller is Comey's buddy so him testifying doesn't actually mean anything.

>>130049920

Two years. They won't see how unsustainable it is until they get BTFO in 2018.

>>130050574
I suppose. But I still don't see them dropping the Russia narrative until and unless it's no longer useful, even if it winds up taking a back seat.

It's so broad and vague of a narrative that you can basically accuse anybody of being part of the vast Russian conspiracy any time you want. Something like obstructionism is a bit more technical and revolves specifically around Trump and anybody close enough to be accused of playing some role in it.

>>130049920
Bumping.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/wray-trumps-new-pick-for-fbi-chief-has-russian-ties-too

Does it ever end?

>>130055205
Always archive or screenshot https://archive.is/BZcar

File: 1497113446385.jpg (7KB, 280x269px)

7KB, 280x269px

>>130049920
>those noses

They'll find something else.