Good Morning, and Happy New Year. I totally agree, but you know when I made a very similar comment a week or so ago, you called me negative, on the verge of being seen as a nevertrumper, since I wasn't willing to claim that Trump had already "won." Of course that depends on the definition of winning, but glad to see you admitting we're nowhere near that final stage yet. Or at least it appears we now agree. I hope so, because we are not only fighting the left, but the true nevertrumpers disguised as his supporters. Cheers!
In the context of revealing the FBI/DOJ coordinated plot to plan and execute an unlawful interference with an election, and then engage in conspiracy to commit treason against a sitting president, I believe "Trump has already won".
In those two specific instances, any doubts expressed by some posters as to the logical conclusion and end-game tactics tend to reveal a whiff of NeverTrump. So, following the rules of debate 101, if we can reach a consensus that the two points above are settled and tabled, then we can begin the fun part:
How does Trump solidify his (temporal) wins into a lasting, (semi) permanent restoration of the republic and rule of law?
This is where the question of prosecuting treason/coup will begin to get truly interesting, and will establish a framework for the next 100+ years of American history. I believe in the military option; others, for many valid reasons, believe Trump should adhere to traditional civilian legal procedures.
FR provides a great framework for publicly fleshing out & establishing a core framework for either case. Let the debate(s) begin.