The interference is not altruistic.

... except when the beneficiaries of that interference are Balkan minorities.

I thought you said that wasn't altruistic. Naughty.

So I did!

Does not look like it, after people are nominated they tend to go their own way

Mike Pompeo, Donald Trump’s pick to run the CIA on Thursday sided with intelligence officials who have determined the Kremlin was behind election cyberattacks during his congressional hearing.

Source

Those confirmation hearings are exercises in "say anything" to get approved. Each are greenlighted to speak on their own. Operationally, the President makes the decisions. The exception wold be the Department of Justice, which should strictly follow the laws, unless they work for Obama.

He'll win again.

Please do not be naive!

Trump has over 30 direct reports; he will be lucky if he gets to talk to each of them once in every two or three weeks!

He will only be able to make decisions about thing that are brought to him for decision; most of his direct reports will decide Presidential authority is not necessary for their day to day work.

Most of Trumps nominees are billionaires or ex generals; not the sort of people to ask Mr. President "What shall I do next".
More the sort of people to say I am going this way and keep out of my way.

I do not know why you frame this in a very childish win or lose scenario?

Trump's nominees will choose their own pragmatic way forward.
Trump's own influence will be limited; he will not be so stupid as to give them written instructions like "do not investigate my Russian links".

That is obvious - and logical, since a country is not a charity. Its primary objectives usually relate to the pursuit of its own interests, be they commercial, territorial, what have you.

I am sure the regular Joe/Jane knows and understands 0.0001%, if at all, of what goes on behind the scenes, but even so, as far as I am concerned, I would have been willing to forego some lucrative deals in order to stay the heck away from certain situations completely - e.g. meddling in Iraq, Syria, Israel, just to cite a few.

Its not so much I believe any particular promise. Just objectively looking at what is taking place before us....

He keeps winning, and winning.

And then when I think about the various posts you make about Trump, Brexit and all....

You keep losing, and losing.

Good luck though.

It is not about "winning" and "losing" which you keep referencing in some sort of "Yah sucks" playground way?

If you think about it, there’s no need to win. It’s wrong when we think we need to do it. You can have a beautiful life without it. Moreover, winners are not as happy as we may think.

Losers themselves are luckier. They are still happy, still down to earth, are keeping their hope and dreams alive. They don’t think they’re more than others and thus help, share, are compassionate and kind.

In fact failure can have positive results; look at Trump's six bankruptcies.

Anyway back to topic, Trump has chosen very strong and independent nominees that he will have little real control over; which is likely to be positive for us?

According to a senior U.S. government official, Retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, Trump’s choice for national security adviser phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29, the day the Obama administration announced the expulsion of 35 Russian officials as well as other measures in retaliation for the hacking.
What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions?

The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about “disputes” with the United States.
Was its spirit violated?

GOP Lawmakers Go After Ethics Official Who Criticized Trump

Source

Lovely people!

Trump and his henchmen, ironically, are shaping themselves up to be the biggest whining snowflakes. The irony.

And then, under Trump, dialog and peace with Russia breaks out.
First sign of enhanced U.S.-Russia relations under Trump: An invite to Syria talks


Is he going to win again?


LOL

Am somewhat concerned about Trump's intolerance to valid criticism .

Phos? He's alright really.

Sorry! No! I meant Trump!

Don't worry, it wasn't really misunderstood

The Senate Intelligence Committee's review of Russian meddling in the 2016 election will include a look at any intelligence "regarding links between Russia and individuals associated with political campaigns."

Sen. Richard Burr, R-North Carolina, the committee's chairman, and Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, the committee's vice chairman, said in a joint statement that the investigation also will focus on Russian cyberactivity and "active measures" against the US.

Source

I hope this will give some clarity

Republicans in Congress aren't stupid. They didn't want Trump as a nominee but were able to ride the populist wave to a majority in both houses of Congress. Now they're going to keep a few cards in the hand so they can impeach him when he doesn't play by their rules. It's also why they're not making too much of a fuss over the ethics of continued his business dealings (yet).