A Book about the Anti-Trump Conspiracy

Faith writes: I can't prove it because anything I point out gets rationalized away as if it's just normal criticism.

You haven't even tried to prove anything you say yet.

If you can't SEE that everywhere you turn there is NOTHING BUT attacks on everything from big issues to trivia I'm not going to be able to convince you.

What is evident from the news, even from Fox News, is that Trump is disgracing the office of the presidency, and that I can prove.

The work it would take to explain every little thing that's been spun out of context to mean something negative about Trump would take me hours. All I can do is say conservatives see it, why don't you?

If you don't read the news, how do you know that Pirro isn't just spinning tales?

You don't seem to understand that FACTS can be spun, that they can be taken out of context, that there have been fake news facts already that have been shown to have been invented. Marc9000 has described this to some extent. Headlines are just about always skewed to give some negative impression that is unnecessary. Over and over some minor personality is reported to have said something negative about Trump as if that person's opinion matters, totally unnecessary and tendentious but probably influential with a lot of people. ANYTHING negative seems to be the journalistic standard these days.

You sure seem to know a lot about the news for someone who doesn't read the news. Any examples of any of this?

Sometimes I wish I could devote my life to trying to prove these things but I've got too many other things to devote my life to and I've learned by sad experience that no matter how much work I put into my arguments nobody here accepts any of it anyway.

You haven't even pretended to attempt making a case in this thread. If you spent just half the time building a case that you do casting unsupported aspersions and accusations there might be an actual discussion going on here.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

Faith writes: You sure seem to know a lot about the news for someone who doesn't read the news. Any examples of any of this? I know enough to have an opinion, not enough to muster the evidence.

How could you possibly know enough to have an informed opinion? By your own admission you do not watch the news. You say you pick up pieces here and there by occasionally seeing headlines, occasionally hearing news on the radio in the car, and reading the The Trump Presidency thread. Obviously you pick up far too few pieces, because otherwise you'd be supporting your claims. And I just provided a whole article about the Cohen tape in Message 152, accompanied by analysis. It's sitting right there just inches above this message. Give it a read, think on it, make some comments. Attach some facts to your claims.

I don't have the energy for it or the optimism that it would make any difference if I did.

You had enough energy to call leftists neo-Nazis and fascists, so you certainly have enough energy to read an artcile and check a few facts.

In my experience the examples are everywhere every day, there is no avoiding them, so your merely asking me to produce them does not bode well for any effort I might make.

If your evidence is the stuff of everyday existence then it should be easy to point it out. Over the past few days I've been to Home Depot, 110 Grill, a bus station, a doctor's office, some tennis courts, Logan Airport, Banana Republic, Kohl's, and an assisted living facility. Since the examples are "everywhere every day" then what must I have seen and heard that supports your claims?

You produce "evidence" that you may be convinced of but it's the sort of thing that could be the result of all kinds of distortions and at least contrary interpretations.

And since you seem to have no evidence at all, your views are even more likely false. How to settle this? By bringing facts to the table. For example, it is a fact that Trump lied about not knowing about the payoffs to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. If you deny it then what are your facts (mine are in Message 152). If you accept it then we have some common ground upon which we can build.

I'm sure Trump is at fault in many ways...

Can you name some of the ways Trump is at fault?

...but I'm also sure that the reality is far exceeded by the conspiracy to make it out to be far worse than it is.

Given your meager connection to the news and to reality, there is no way you could know that. You're just talking off the top of your head again.

Sorry, no evidence.

Isn't this thread about Pirro's book, and aren't you reading it? Doesn't Pirro provide evidence later in the book for the claims she makes in chapter one? Shouldn't you be using this thread to tell us all the evidence Pirro is providing you?

I was never a fan of Jimmy Carter's, so a few decades ago when I noticed a book in the library that purported to reveal all Carter's misdeeds I pulled it off the shelf and read the first few pages. It was immediately obvious it was a hatchet job, so I returned it to the shelf. I think you can't recognize a hatchet job when you see one.

I do not like the party of Trump (as opposed to the Republican party, which I have no animosity towards though I'm not sure it exists any longer), but I'm not about to waste my time reading hatchet jobs about it, like Michael Wolff's book. I want the truth about the Trump administration, which means corroborated evidence. You should want the same about the left and Democrats, but you seem very determined to remain as ignorant of the facts as possible.

--Percy

Faith writes: Here's an example of the problem: how do I prove that the remarks Trump has made that are called racist aren't in fact racist?

It isn't just Trump's remarks, it's also his actions. I enumerated a number of Trump's racist remarks and actions in Message 137. I agree that proving unambiguously racist remarks and actions to not be racist is an impossible task, since it's not like Trump was ambiguous about it.

I've said a lot of things in my adult life, and no one could take any one of them to be racist. I've had rental property, and I would rent to black people. I actually only had one black couple look at an apartment, and I never heard back from them, but had they wanted to take the apartment it would have been theirs. But many Trump apartments were off-limits to blacks in the 1970's.

I celebrate the cause of minorities and their right to protest discrimination as they see fit, including before NFL games. Unlike Trump I don't falsely claim they're actually protesting flag and country and urge that they be suspended, fined and fired.

I'm against the Ku Klux Klan, and so I wouldn't lie about knowing David Duke (former head of the Klan, and I don't know him), and I wouldn't waffle about whether I support David Duke (I don't). You'd be surprised how similar David Duke's views are to Donald Trump's. For example, who said this:

quote:

---

Anybody in this country illegally needs to be sent home. Simple as that. We’ve had our policies that have been really wrong. We’ve had productive people been kept out. The Irish people are having a difficult time right now in Boston, where we have massive numbers of Mexicans and Haitians in the country right now and other immigrant groups who are not contributing to the country, who are loading up our welfare rolls, increasing our crime problems. They’re bringing in a lot of the dope that comes into the country.

---

If you guessed Donald Trump you're wrong. It was David Duke, former head of the Klan. Their views are indistinguishable.

Then there's the Trump endorsement of Roy Moore. Let's look at the Roy Moore quote on slavery:

quote:

---

I think it was great at the time when families were united — even though we had slavery. They cared for one another. People were strong in the families. Our families were strong. Our country had a direction.

---

Roy Moore saw America as great despite slavery. The caring he talks about was caring for whites, not blacks. The strong families he describes were white families, not black families. The country's direction was for the benefit of whites, not blacks.

Then there's Africa. Trump referred to an entire continent as consisting of shithole countries.

And Trump cheered Rosanne Barr for comparing a former Obama aide to an ape.

Okay, your turn, explain how those aren't racist comments and actions. The reason explaining them away seems an impossible task to you is because Trump *is* racist, so naturally his talk and behavior reflects that fact about him. It can't be hidden or explained away.

--Percy

Faith writes: He believed what he said.

That would make him an idiot, and he's not an idiot. He knows his inauguration crowd wasn't the biggest in history. He's using the same strategy he always uses: lie, repeat the lie, double down on the lie, never back down from the lie. Of course when something as unambiguous as photos are involved that strategy won't work. Here are the Obama and Trump crowds. The detail in this image is fabulous, give it a look:

Trump makes mistakes,...

He sure does. Where would one start? Family separation? Starting trade wars? Attacking allies? Cozying up to dictators? Destroying confidence in American institutions? Siding with racists and white supremacists?

His trade war mistake is affecting Nevada already, by the way. This is from the Reno Gazette Journal: Escalating tariff war starting to impact Nevada businesses

...he misstates things, he's not careful about his words as he should be,...

The more commonly used term is lying.

...he's not cautious enough...

True, he rushes headlong into his lying.

...in the face of what he should know by now about his opposition,...

Yes, he should know by now that those who oppose him are not fond of lies and liars. His lying on matters both large and small is one of the reasons for opposing him.

...but most of us who voted for him think he's basically honest,...

What evidence leads you to believe he's "basically honest"? He lies at a prodigious rate, averaging about 6 false or misleading claims a day. Here's a graph up through this past May:

Here's the article that image came from - it has much more detail: In 497 days, President Trump has made 3,251 false or misleading claims

Let's take just one example of an extended Trump lie. Here's Trump's evolving story on the meeting with Russians in Trump Tower:

• There was no meeting.
  
• There was a meeting, but he didn't know about it.
  
• He only knew about it after the fact, but had nothing to do with the statement to the press describing the meeting.
  
• He actually drafted the statement to the press himself.
  
• The meeting was about American adoptions of Russian children and never had anything to do with dirt on Hilary.
  
• The agenda included dirt on Hillary, but in the end they only discussed adoptions.

Trump denies knowing about the meeting in advance, but now Michael Cohen is saying he did (Cohen claims Trump knew in advance of 2016 Trump Tower meeting), which is what everyone suspected anyway given that his son (Donald Jr.), chief policy adviser (son-in-law Jared Kushner) and campaign chief (Paul Manafort) all attended.

And this is just one single example. If I were recount all Trump's misleading statements and lies and changing stories this post would go on for pages and pages.

So given that Trump has lied constantly throughout his administration and his campaign and his entire life, what facts about him lead you to believe him honest?

...we know he is not a racist and that those accusations are spun from ill-considered comments that have nothing to do with race,...

I laid out Trump's racism in Message 137. Time you replied.

...and we think he really cares about the things he supported in his campaign speeches, which we also care about.

You mean like making America white again?

It's too bad he's got moral problems with women...

The word you're looking for is misogyny.

...but if you compare him to Clinton or Kennedy I'm not sure he's worse than either of them and the main difference is that the press left them alone for the most part, but they're ravening wolves against Trump.

Being a womanizer and philanderer does not disqualify one for high office. Engaging in coverups and payoffs and lying, not to mention possible campaign finance law violations and bank fraud, does.

I keep telling you I grew up in the New York metropolitan area. I've been reading news about Trump for like forever. He was the same sleaze-bag real estate developer then that he is now.

--Percy

Faith writes: There are those who would argue with you about those things...

Of course there are, especially you. You argue against facts all the time.

It's too bad then that Trump was the only candidate among the Republicans who spoke for conservative middle America,...

But he doesn't speak to conservative middle America. He gives a good show, but aside from appointing conservative judges and being against abortion, what conservative stances does he have? None.

Here are things conservatives are for that Trump is against. Conservatives are for free trade, but Trump favors tariffs and has started a trade war with the entire rest of the world. Conservatives have respect for our law and order, but Trump's been unrelenting in his denigration of his own Justice Department, especially the FBI. Conservatives are for promoting liberty and democratic values around the world, but Trump cozies up to dictators. Conservatives are for working with allies to oppose threats against the west, yet he's castigated NATO and praised the Russians. Conservatives are for preventing foreign interference in our elections, yet Trump still won't admit that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and is doing nothing to prevent it from happening again this year.

Any of the other Republican candidates would have appointed conservative judges and been against abortion, just like Trump, but unlike Trump they would have supported all the other conservative positions that Trump opposes. So why do you like Trump? He gives good campaign rally?

...all the others being mealy-mouthed or RINOs or liberals in Republican garb.

That's not true. Trump exceeded the better Republican candidates only in being a very entertaining speaker, a superior verbal bully, and a fluent liar.

And we still see him as sincerely on our side.

After looking at the list of conservative positions he does not support, how can you say that? Plus he's a liar extraordinaire.

The ONLY one we've ever heard "tell it like it is" from our point of view.

He's not telling you the truth. He's only telling you what you want to hear.

Even the conservatives who are less than thrilled with him as a personality still feel that way about his platform.

Platform? Platforms are for campaigns. But anyway, most of the elements of Trump's "platform" are not traditional conservative positions.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

Faith writes: Golly gosh, that must be why the other half of the country was so blindsided by Trump's win,...

Most of the country expected a Trump defeat, so most of the country was blindsided, not half.

...just no clue to how he appealed to so many of us. And still does.

I already told you how he appeals to you. He tells you what you want to hear. People like you love talk of walls that we make Mexico pay for and of getting tough with immigrants who are only at our doorstep because of intolerable conditions in their own home state, and getting tough with our allies who aren't paying their fair share for defense, and getting tough with our trading partners who have been playing us for fools for years, and getting tough with our enemies like Russia - whoops, scratch that last part, that isn't happening. You love being told you're going to win so much you're going to get tired of winning.

When are you going to wake up and realize you're being scammed by a raconteur/entertainer/reality show host/scumbag real estate developer/Russian colluder/racist/misogynist/homophobic/egomaniac/liar who is not, by and large, implementing conservative policies. He's implementing policies that help his friends, the fellow rich. To that end he's giving us our first trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see, and to pay for them he will be seeking to downsize government, especially entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare, programs I'm sure your very familiar with.

Yeah, just gotta love that Trump appeal!

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Typo.

Faith writes: The more you trash the man...

I'm not trashing the Trump. I'm just quoting his words, showing him on video, recounting his deeds, and he trashes himself.

...the more those on my side just regroup against you.

So pointing out facts just hardens you in your fact-less stance.

The man is human, with a sincere love of America...

You're referring to his xenophobia (which is real) and his jingoism (which is a pose that he uses because it plays well with his base - the Russia stuff gives it away).

...that we don't see on the Left,...

Yes, that is true, you're not going to see unprovoked attacks from the left upon people who merely stick up for their rights.

...and a sincere desire to "make America great again"...

He is making America the laughing stock of the world. Should I provide you a list of quotes from world leaders about Trump, surprising it exists at all given how circumspect world leaders generally are?

...which is far from the Left's thinking,...

Why would you think that? Because Trump told you?

...and his ideas about how to do that might not be feasible...

He doesn't care about feasibility. He cares about appealing to his base.

...but his desire to bring them about makes him a good guy.

His desire to make America white again, to impose suffering on children, to implement policies that hurt those who voted for him like farmers and BMW and Harley Davidson and nail manufacturers and so forth, and his refusal to begin protecting the independence of our elections, and his denigration of law enforcement, his criticism of the Fed which is traditionally independent, and his enriching himself and his fellow rich at the expense of everyone else, and the deficits he created, and that he doesn't know how to increase wages even though he says he does, and his attacks on what should be independent investigations, and his attacks on anyone who might bring evidence against him, and his constant lying, makes him a very dangerous guy.

If there hadn't been such a steep slide from old fashioned liberal Democrats to frank Marxist-Communist anti-Americanism since the sixties, we might not have had to be content with a flawed man like Trump. But he IS the only one who sees these things as we do.

You're being sold a bill of goods. The Democrats are not Marxist-Communist anti-Americans. They're pursuing policies for the poor and indigent and sick and injured and elderly and the environment and economic fairness. Trump is committing enough misdeeds to fill every paper throughout the country every day, and you just refuse to see it.

--Percy

I've read through to the end of the thread, and no one seems able to help you understand how restating your opinion doesn't constitute rebuttal, fact or even explanation.

Trump said just what the videos show him saying, and just what the quotes quote him saying. He did pay off (or have paid off) porn stars and playboy bunnies. He is a cheater and womanizing philanderer. He did enact tariffs that are causing hardships by businesses that are already causing layoffs. He did say he takes Putin's word over his own intelligent agencies. He did say the North Korean problem is solved when it isn't. He did order LBGT's out of the military. He did refuse to make his tax return public. He did attack the media as the enemy of the American people. He is continuously trying to obstruct and end the Mueller investigation. He did cut taxes for the rich, including himself. He is causing the largest deficits in US history. He refused to implement the Russian sanctions enacted by Congress until forced to. He did refuse to divest himself of his businesses and so is making money off the presidency, just as lawsuits now allege. He is anti-Muslim. He is anti-black. He does lie constantly.

Faith writes: ...you are only alienating honest people...

Honest people are not alienated by the truth. Honest people don't cast accusations like "Liberal Nazis" and "Lefty Fascists."

If you wanted to talk policies you;d have to do it fairly and neutrally, but I'm afraid you are so committed to leftist tactics that isn't possible.

I'm neither a leftist for a rightist. I'm neither a Republican not a Democrat. I'm a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. I voted for Ford, Reagan, George H. W. Bush and Hillary Clinton (but not Bill Clinton, George W. Bush or Barack Obama - I abstained). Sometime during the Obama administration the Republican party went crazy, starting with the Tea Party movement. Opposing the current Republican insanity and their complicity in the Trump disaster does not make anyone a leftist. Even George Will, that elder statesman and bastion of the right, opposes the current Republican party and is encouraging people to vote Democrat in the 2018 elections (This sad, embarrassing wreck of a man, Vote against the GOP this November).

Besides that, neither I nor any of the other participants are the topic here, so please stop trying to turn discussion into who is left and who is not.

Honest people don't lie, so stop lying about your participation in this thread. The truth is that you have consistently refused to engage any of the specifics offered throughout this thread. You've replied to less than half the posts to you and none of the substance. Rather than engaging in rebuttals you have engaged in character assassination. You haven't even attempted to address your own topic. If Pirro's book later backs up its first chapter claims with facts, tell us what they are.

--Percy

Faith writes: You use leftist tactics in this argument no matter what your voting record is. There are Republicans these days who have some unfortunately leftist tendencies.

Your posts today continue to reveal an unwillingness to respond to the substance of what people say. Accusing people of twisting or misrepresenting things or using leftist tactics isn't actual rebuttal. It seems you don't want to actually discuss your topic. You just need it as an excuse to complain about and cast aspersions at anyone whose opinion differs from your own.

We believe, as do all rational people, what we see Trump saying and tweeting. Trump said just what the videos show him saying, just what the news quotes show him saying, just what the tweets show him saying, just what the documents show him saying (e.g., the agreement with Stormy Daniels), and just what the tapes (only one so far) show him saying. He did pay off (or have paid off) porn stars and playboy bunnies. He is a cheater and womanizing philanderer who covers it all up, then lies about the coverups, then lies about the lies. He did enact tariffs that are causing businesses hardships that are already causing layoffs. He did say he takes Putin's word over his own intelligent agencies. He did say the North Korean problem is solved when it isn't. He did order LBGT's out of the military. He did refuse to make his tax return public. He did attack the media as the enemy of the American people. He is continuously trying to obstruct and end the Mueller investigation. He did cut taxes for the rich, including himself. He is causing the largest deficits in US history. He refused to implement the Russian sanctions enacted by Congress until forced to. He did refuse to divest himself of his businesses and so is making money off the presidency, just as lawsuits now allege. He is anti-Muslim. He is anti-black. He does lie constantly.

All this can be substantiated with videos, tweets, texts of executive orders, etc.

--Percy

Okay, I'm convinced. I fully believe you now that you don't pay attention to the news. That was a prodigious display of ignorance of current events.

Faith writes: You can't just mix up political policies with personal failings as if they are all equivalent.

You're just making up a substanceless criticism. I never implied equivalence. It's a list of Trump misdeeds, lies and failings. Naturally some are more significant and grievous than others. Would you like me to divide them into categories for you?

As I've said, I haven't been following politics lately,...

You said you weren't following the news, not that it was just politics you weren't following. How could you follow the news but not politics? I don't see how that's possible. Except for local papers the headlines in any newspaper are about Washington, almost always Trump related. I don't watch television news, but I assume that all national news broadcasts begin with the news out of Washington, again almost always Trump related. What you say doesn't add up.

...but I can't miss the Trump bashing by the media and the occasional conservative opinion in the midst of the leftist bombardment.

This still doesn't add up. You say you don't follow politics, but when it comes to Trump you apparently do. Why not just fess up? You follow politics, especially when it comes to Trump.

But, given this admittedly inadequate position, I'll give some opinions about your opinions:

I didn't offer opinions but facts that can be backed up by videos, tweets, texts of executive orders, etc. Your post offers nothing of any truth or substance. All your post really says is, "Trump's my man, no matter what."

About the womanizing, Did the Left defend Clinton's womanizing?

The duplicity of politicians is why I refuse to affiliate with any political party or political philosophy. Good examples are the deplorable behavior of both Democrats and Republican during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the far more reprehensible behavior of Republicans under Trump, in other words their proclivity for playing politics at the expense of the country.

If I have a political philosophy it is the Golden Rule.

If you're wondering why I criticized both Democrats and Republicans for the Monica Lewinsky scandal, I denounce,
vilify, censure, excoriate, revile, deplore and castigate Bill Clinton for taking advantage of a young intern, I condemn Democrats for supporting the unsupportable, and I condemn Republicans for the politicized impeachment circus.

It's not something I'd want to defend but I'm more interested in his policies than his sins.

What are you really saying here? If you're saying that his cheating and philandering doesn't bear on his job as president, I agree with you, but it does tell us about the man. If you're referring to his comments about how he treats women, for instance, his comments to Billy Bush:

quote:

---

“I’m automatically attracted to beautiful women — I just start kissing them, it’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy."

---

This tells us even more about the man, that he's predatory and an abuser. Famous men displaying these qualities are losing their jobs left and right these days, from Al Franken to Harvey Weinstein to Bill Cosby to Bill O'Reilly and on and on. Why not Trump?

He did enact tariffs that are causing businesses hardships that are already causing layoffs. This is a complicated issue. Perhaps it has some negative effects but there must also be positive effects or he wouldn't be doing it. You only give one side of it.

I did not give one side of it. The tariffs on steel and aluminum were to help the steel and aluminum industry. That goes without saying, nothing need be said (except perhaps to the ignorant), and so of course I didn't mention the obvious. I gave the side that that you're ignoring, that the impact of higher steel and aluminum prices on industries that use those products is making them less competitive by pricing them out of markets, thereby causing them to layoff workers. There's nothing complicated about it.

I provided you a link to this article from the Reno Gazette Journal back in Message 187, but you never addressed it: Escalating tariff war starting to impact Nevada businesses. A-1 Steel in Sparks is seeing price increases in steel of 25-40%. Construction costs are rising, make houses less affordable. The US Chamber of Commerce estimates that 367,000 jobs and $107 million exports from Nevada will be affected by the tariffs.

You say, "There must also be positive effects." What would those positive effects be? Have you seen them yet? If not, when would you expect to see them? What about the traditional conservative position that free trade is a cornerstone of international relations?

He did say he takes Putin's word over his own intelligent agencies. Again I don't know much about this,...

Oh, please. You say you "can't miss the Trump bashing" but you somehow missed an entire week of news coverage about the Trump/Putin meeting? Could you at least try to be credible?

So obviously you heard a great deal about this, nobody could have missed it who didn't live on a desert island, you're just not going to admit it.

...but I have heard conservative complaints about the politics of some in our intelligence agencies. In other words, perhaps he had good reason to prefer Putin's word.

The NSA, the FBI, the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence all agree that Russia meddled in the 2016 election through social media, through compromising of email servers that made possible the release of emails from John Podesta and from the DNC, and through infiltrating state election computer networks. They all agree that Russia is repeating these efforts for this year's election. For example, the server of Claire McCaskill (D-MO) was just attacked by the Russians. Robert Mueller has indicted 12 Russian intelligence agents and 13 Russians with ties to the Russian Internet Research Agency (most worked there).

And your response to this is that "perhaps he had good reason to prefer Putin's word." Do you think that if he had good reason that he might have passed that "good reason" on to our intelligence agencies? Do you think that if there really was any coherent reason that he wouldn't have waffled back and forth for a week after returning to Washington? Do you have any reason based upon fact for this touching faith in Trump's good reason, especially given his proclivity for lying and winging it?

He did say the North Korean problem is solved when it isn't. That is a work in progress with what looks like some success in spite of the intransigence of the Korean dictator. He did something at least.

Well, yes, he did do something. He gave up joint military exercises with South Korea, gave enormous prestige and status to Kim Jung Un just by meeting with him, and he gained nothing regarding North Korea's nuclear capabilities. Meanwhile North Korea's efforts continue: North Korea is working on new missiles, U.S. spy agencies say. And last week Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed in Senate testimony that North Korean factories "continue to produce fissile material" for nuclear weapons.

What it appears Trump did is perpetuate the same problem all past administrations have had with North Korea, namely that talks are just stalling tactics and distractions while North Korea continues to make nuclear progress. That North Korea was going to do this to Trump just as it had to all past presidents was just as obvious as that Lucy is going to pull away the football.

So what is it regarding the North Korean nuclear threat that Trump gained with North Korea? Please be explicit and factual.

He did order LBGT's out of the military. That is reasonable conservative policy in my opinion.

Why is it reasonable? Have they not hands, organs dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick them, do they not bleed? If you tickle them, do they not laugh? If you poison them, do they not die? And if you wrong them, shall they not revenge? If they are like you in the rest, they will resemble you in that. (Apologies to Shylock in the Merchant of Venice)

LGBT's are people just like you and me. The military is challenging Trump's order in court.

He did refuse to make his tax return public. He isn't required to.

He lied and lied. During the election he lied when he said he couldn't make his latest tax return public (that would have been his 2015 tax return) until an IRS audit concluded. That was a lie. There is nothing in the IRS code that prevents a tax return under audit from being made public. Now, over two years later, that audit has undoubtedly concluded, yet Trump still won't make his 2015 tax return public, so he lied about making it public when the audit concluded.

If Trump had nothing to hide he would make his tax return public. Obviously he has something to hide. Given that he lies pathologically we can be pretty sure that much of what he's said about his finances is untrue. He probably lied about how rich he is, he probably lied about how much taxes he paid, and he undoubtedly lied about not benefiting from his own tax cuts, since real estate businesses undeniably benefited.

He did attack the media as the enemy of the American people. These days many of us agree that they are.

But not for any factual reasons that you've been able to bring to light in this thread that is purportedly dedicated to making the case that the media is out to get Trump.

He is continuously trying to obstruct and end the Mueller investigation. There is reason to believe that Mueller is conducting a politically motivated bogus investigation.

What factual and supportable reason would that be?

He did cut taxes for the rich, including himself. This is standard conservative policy to keep money in the hands of individuals where they use it for development and jobs instead of the government which just spends it.

You're not getting it. Percentage-wise he cut taxes for the rich more than for the poor or middle class. In other words, percentage-wise he got a bigger tax cut than you did. How do you feel about that?

He is causing the largest deficits in US history. Not that I've heard. Obama already did a bang-up job on that one.

Not that you've heard? It's been all over the news. The OMB (Office of Management and Budget under cabinet secretary Mick Mulvaney) has projected a deficit over $1 trillion for 2019, the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) a little under. Both the OMB and CBO have projected deficits over $1 trillion for 2020.

He refused to implement the Russian sanctions enacted by Congress until forced to. Perhaps those were politically motivated too.

The sanctions on Russia were passed by the Republican Congress to punish Russia for interfering in our election. This is just another example of Trump's resistance to acknowledging anything indicating he didn't win the election on his own. He's not rational on the subject.

He did refuse to divest himself of his businesses and so is making money off the presidency, just as lawsuits now allege. I thought he'd cooperated with whatever that requirement is.

It isn't a requirement, but it's something all presidents have done to prevent the appearance of impropriety in office. Trump didn't do this. He instead turned control of his business (The Trump Organization, of which Donald Trump, the current US president, is the sole owner) over to his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, and to Allen Weisselberg (CFO) and Matthew F. Calamari (COO).

However, as Pirro points out, everybody who gets into a governemt office manages to get rich, how can that be? We're talking Democrats too. Whatever Trump is doing is just keeping his businesses operating, which isn't getting rich off bribes or whatever.

Trump is being sued in court for violations of the emoluments clause of the Constitution. The suit alleges that he is profiting from foreign nations not just through the patronage of their dignitaries and representatives of his hotels, and he's actively promtoing his hotels to same said dignitaries and representatives.

He is anti-Muslim. No he is not. This is a typical PC lie. He wants to protect the country from violent jihad.

Yes, Trump is anti Muslim, and no it is not a lie. A travel ban from majority Muslim countries does not protect the country from jihad. Actual jihadists will find a means around the ban, and our intelligence services will still have to detect and monitor their operations.

He is anti-black. No he is not, he absolutely is not and the blacks who support him know this. This is the same sort of PC character assassination based on some specific incident that has nothing to do with race.

Of course Trump is anti-black. That's why he's for all the confederate monuments. It's why he said the white supremacists in Charlottesville were very fine people. It's why he wouldn't rent his apartments to blacks in New York City. See my Message 137 for more details about Trump's anti-black racism, the one you never replied to.

He does lie constantly. I suspect there is a better way of understanding a lot of it.

Really? What about the lie about his inauguration crowd being the largest ever? What about his lie that Obama had Trump Tower bugged? What about his lie that Clinton won the popular vote because of voter fraud? What about his lie that crime is rising? What about his law that the law forced him to separate immigrant families? What about his lie that the Post Office loses money on Amazon? What about his lie that his tax cut was the biggest in American history? What about his lie that his tax cut would cost him a fortune (the opposite is true)? What about his lie that he's signed more legislation than any other administration (he's last among recent presidents, actually)? What about his lie that he would replace Obamacare with something much better? What about his lie that black homeownership is at an all time high (it's been declining since 2004)? What about his lie that he would be promoting infrastructure improvements? What about his lie that there was no collusion, since obviously there was since Giuliani is now arguing that collusion isn't a crime (it is a crime, but it's more a catchall term that isn't used in actual statutes)?

How many lies do you want? Face it, Trump's a liar, and so pathological about it that he has trouble telling the truth when a lie will do.

All this can be substantiated with videos, tweets, texts of executive orders, etc. Your misinterpretations can't be substantiated, just some raw date you misunderstand, misinterpret, twist or spin.

I can substantiate everything I've said in this post. Challenge anything or everything, whatever you like.

--Percy

Faith writes: Conservative political policy is not a "misdeed, lie or failing."

That's not even close to what I said. About my Message 269 I said it contained a list of Trump misdeeds, lies and failings.

And politically correct character assassination accounts for important things on your list -- your fault, not Trump's.

That list was not character assassination. It's all true and can be substantiated. Here it is again:

• Trump paid off (or had paid off) porn stars and playboy bunnies.
  
• Trump is a cheater and womanizing philanderer who covers it all up, then lies about the coverups, then lies about the lies.
  
• Trump enacted tariffs that are causing businesses hardships that are already causing layoffs, including in your own state.
  
• Trump took Putin's word over his own intelligent agencies about 2016 election meddling by the Russians. Even his own DHS chief says it was the Russians.
  
• Trump said the North Korean problem is solved when it isn't.
  
• Trump ordered the military to no longer accept LBGT's into their ranks.
  
• Trump refused to make his tax return public.
  
• Trump attacked the media as the enemy of the American people.
  
• Trump continuously tries to obstruct and end the Mueller investigation.
  
• Trump cut taxes for the rich, including himself.=
  
• Trump is causing the largest deficits in US history.
  
• Trump refused to implement the Russian sanctions enacted by Congress until forced to.
  
• Trump refused to divest himself of his businesses and so is making money off the presidency, just as lawsuits now allege.
  
• Trump is anti-Muslim.
  
• Trump is anti-black.
  
• Trump lies constantly.

Nothing in that list is untrue.

Perhaps I should go post on your Trump Bashing Thread to give you an excuse to suspend me permanently to do away with the temptation to keep subjecting myself to the craziness here.

Act in haste, repent at leisure.

Your reasons for saying Trump are anti-black are STUPID CONTEXT-CHALLENGED POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. Blech.

You're referring to Message 137? It's all true.

--Percy

ringo writes: Faith writes: Conservative political policy is not a "misdeed, lie or failing." I agree that conservatism isn't necessarily evil. It just depends on what you're trying to conserve.

I never said that conservative political policy is a misdeed, lie or failing. Faith is making things up again. What I said was, "It's a list of Trump misdeeds, lies and failings," referring to my Message 269.

Unfortunately, all too often today's self-styled "conservatives" are on the wrong side of good and evil.

The modern conservative, especially the tea party or Trump conservative, isn't a true conservative (and certainly not a Reagan conservative). It was such conservatives in Congress that pushed through repeal of the Glass-Steagall act during the 2nd Clinton administration, though Glass-Steagall was already mostly dead after years of chipping away. It had kept us safe from all kinds of financial shenanigans since the Depression, including keeping banks and stock broking from mixing.

When the dot-com bubble burst during the early 2000's financial institutions and markets were very hard hit. Reserve requirements were increased again. But we forget quickly, and during the 2000's financial constraints, most notably bank reserve requirements, were again loosened. When the financial crisis of 2008 hit many financial institutions lacked sufficient cushion and failed, others were bailed out after being deemed too big to fail. Hard hit companies like GM were also bailed out. Safeguards were put back in place, but shortly after Trump took office conservatives in Congress began removing them again.

I'm a fiscal conservative. I understand the conservative philosophy against overregulation, but obviously we need at least some regulation. The dot-com bubble crisis and the mortgage security crisis are clear evidence that that is so.
And conservative philosophy understands the importance of healthy and stable financial institutions, which means, among other things, keeping considerable reserves on hand so as to weather crises, and not mixing banking with stock broking. But the modern conservative, especially the tea party and Trump conservative, does not agree. I don't think they are truly conservative. In fact, whatever they're doing doesn't seem to follow any political philosophy. It seems to follow a human foible: greed.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Clarify a couple sentences.