Whatever doesn't kill it makes it stronger

Note that now that Trump has gotten away with so many crimes, each new one (1) lowers the standards of the office and (2) makes it harder to make anything stick. He's like a comic-book villain that eats everything fired at him at gets stronger with every assault.

The burning question I have is, why do 'the American people' think this is OK? Why is it that the country of George 'I could not tell a lie' Washington is now governed by a mendacious narcissist with no regard for truth?

To little education, and too much television.

To little education, and too much television. — Wayfarer

Teaching critical thinking in schools would create a discriminating consumer. Nobody sees any profit in that.

What the fuck?

Degrees upon degrees of batshittery.

What the fuck?

I tend to do that, sorry.

Degrees upon degrees of batshittery.

Which part? Let me guess: all of it?

I have more, but there are too many people who would rather justify their hatred for Trump (in accordance with the jihad) than understand how much worse of a situation the U.S. would be in right now if Clinton had won.

The people hating on Trump are a part of the problem, not the solution. Stop with the blind hatred and understand the crimes of the Clinton cartel exponentially outweigh anything Trump has ever done.

Just look at the things President Obama was allowed to get away with in office:

- pressured a foreign leader to interfere in the 2020 American presidential election.

- urged a foreign country to intervene in the 2016 presidential election.

- divulged classified information to foreign officials.

- publicly undermined American intelligence agents while standing next to a hostile foreign autocrat.

- hired a national security adviser whom he knew had secretly worked as a foreign lobbyist.

- encouraged foreign leaders to enrich him and his family by staying at his hotels.

- genuflected to murderous dictators.

- alienated America’s closest allies.

- lied to the American people about his company’s business dealings in Russia.

- tells new lies virtually every week — about the economy, voter fraud, even the weather.

- spends hours on end watching television and days on end staying at resorts.

- declines to read briefing books or perform other basic functions of a president’s job.

- has aides, as well as members of his own party in Congress, who mock him behind his back as unfit for office.

- has repeatedly denigrated a deceased United States senator who was a war hero.

- insulted a Gold Star family — the survivors of American troops killed in action.

- described a former first lady, not long after she died, as “nasty.”

- described white supremacists as “some very fine people.”

- told four women of color, all citizens and members of Congress, to “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came.”

- made a joke about Pocahontas during a ceremony honoring Native American World War II veterans.

- launched his political career by falsely claiming that the first black president was not really American.

- launched his presidential campaign by describing Mexicans as “rapists.”

- has described women, variously, as “a dog,” “a pig” and “horseface,” as well as “bleeding badly from a facelift” and having “blood coming out of her wherever.”

- has been accused of sexual assault or misconduct by multiple women.

- campaigned for a Senate candidate who was accused of molesting multiple teenage girls.

- waved around his arms, while giving a speech, to ridicule a physically disabled person.

- has encouraged his supporters to commit violence against his political opponents.

- has called for his opponents and critics to be investigated and jailed.

- uses a phrase popular with dictators — “the enemy of the people” — to describe journalists.

- attempts to undermine any independent source of information that he does not like, including judges, scientists, journalists, election officials, the F.B.I., the C.I.A., the Congressional Budget Office and the National Weather Service.

- has tried to harass the chairman of the Federal Reserve into lowering interest rates.

- said that a judge could not be objective because of his Mexican heritage.

- obstructed justice by trying to influence an investigation into his presidential campaign.

- violated federal law by directing his lawyer to pay $280,000 in hush money to cover up two apparent extramarital affairs.

- made his fortune partly through wide-scale financial fraud.

- has refused to release his tax returns.

- falsely accused his predecessor of wiretapping him.

- claimed that federal law-enforcement agents and prosecutors regularly fabricated evidence, thereby damaging the credibility of criminal investigations across the country.

- has ordered children to be physically separated from their parents.

- has suggested that America is no different from or better than Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

- has called America a “hellhole.”


Oh wait. That wasn't Obama......

This is precisely my point: people would rather justify their hatred for Trump than anything else.

Hatred is not a virtue - it is a blinding agent. A person who is full of hatred will never see the way the things are, because hatred is the device needed/used to create any/all "us vs. them" dichotomous worldviews. This dichotomous worldview of "us vs. them" is concentrated in long-standing "believer vs. unbeliever" division that began in Judaism (under a different framework), was solidified in Christianity and is perpetuated by Islam. The latter divides the world into two segments: "believers" and "unbelievers" such that there is a standing order to wage war against "unbelievers" for not "believing" that Islam is the only "acceptable" religion of god. They use "belief" to confuse people into "believing" the sources of:

i. supremacism
ii. fascism
iii. socialism
iv. war

are something *other* than Islam, when in the reality, Islam is the root of these and it takes a "believer" to "believe" otherwise.

The principle pathology of Islam is to scapegoat/project the crimes of its own house onto their political adversaries such that "believers" "believe" the adversary is guilty, instead of the accuser who is scapegoating.

The best example of this is the scapegoating/pinning of "collusion with Russia" onto Donald Trump, when in the reality it was the Clinton DNC who colluded to interfere in the 2016 (and now 2020) election. Again, the Clinton DNC is a front for the House of Islam: one required access to the "underground market" via Clinton, which is where you will find all of your human trafficking, pedophilia etc. and it leads back to the House of Islam. This is the sum of all fears of Islam: the world wakes up and realizes the depths of the corruption of the House of Islam. Hence, the need to destroy Trump at all costs given his knowledge that Islam is the root of fascism, and not "it's the Jews!". The Jews are the perpetual scapegoat for the House of Islam, which is why they still keep *some* Jews alive. You can't blame a group of people that don't exist.

Yes, your ‘whistleblower’ doesn’t even have direct knowledge of Trump’s conversation, according to CNN. — NOS4A2

Please elaborate. I've found nothing on this.

You guys have propped up DNC propaganda, conspiracy theories and investigations for years now it’s not surprising that you’re now calling foul when you beloved candidates and parties are receiving scrutiny of their own.

Let's compare facts. Here's the facts I'm aware of:

1) A whistleblower from the U.S. intelligence community filed a complaint Aug. 12 that alleged some kind of wrongdoing at high levels of the U.S. government.
2) Intelligence community Inspector General Michael Atkinson has reviewed the complaint and determined it was credible.
3) Atkinson also determined that it was a matter of “urgent concern,” which is a legal threshold that requires notifying the relevant congressional committees. In this case, that would be the intelligence committees.
4) Leaks to the press have indicated that the whistleblower report related to Trump's call to the Ukranian President.
5) These leaks also indicated that the nature of the complaint entailed Trump pressuring the Ukranian President to launch an investigation involving the Bidens.
6) The Trump administration began reviewing a $250 million Ukrainian aid package just weeks after the August call and chose to release the aid earlier this month
7) The Trump administration has not complied with their legal obligation to provide Congress with the whistleblower report.

Do you disagree with any of these? What additional facts do you consider relevant to Trump's actions?

Regarding Biden- I'm fine with investigating anything he may have done. Hypothetically, if an investigation were to bear fruit after he's elected President, I'd be fine with impeaching him. Unlike you Trumpists, I apply a uniform standard. Corruption should not be excused or ignored, regardless of party.

You complain about DNC propaganda, and yet you embrace Trump's accusations of Biden. The matter HAS been investigated in the US and no wrongdoing was uncovered. No new evidence has been uncovered to warrant Trump's accusations against him. There is no fact-based motivation to pursue it - so it appears to be politically motivated. Contrast this with Trump's call: there are facts that have not yet been investigated. I'm not proclaiming him guilty of a crime but it seems highly likely he made a politically motivated and inappropriate request to a foreign leader.

It doesn't matter - most Muslims either can not read at all and/or have not read any book but the Qur'an. It also doesn't matter because a Muslim will "believe" that all books are inferior to the Qur'an - the Qur'an being "believed" to be from a god, but is, in fact, just as man-made as any other book. — A Gnostic Agnostic

So the "House of Islam" suppresses information, that Trump has, in order to safe Islam, but also the information doesn't matter because Muslims will not care?

They accused Donald Trump of the same: his score came back perfect.

What "mental illness" did you have in mind, specifically? — A Gnostic Agnostic

I am not "accusing" you, I am just worried. I am not a medical professional, so I will not attempt a diagnosis. But your post is so rambling and so far away from what we'd call "reasonable", that I think you should consider getting help.

This is precisely my point: people would rather justify their hatred for Trump than anything else. — A Gnostic Agnostic

This claim is rhetoric. "People would rather" implies that there is a clear binary choice and the people are taking the illogical or disreputable one. "Justify" presumes that any dissatisfaction with Trump is not self evident or supported by documented evidence, but is only an unacknowledged bias. "Hatred" is a melodramatic straw-man, a feeling which no one could really attain without knowing the man, and morally hypocritical given his track record of warm fuzzy feelings.

Whataboutism? That’s convenient when your party and beloved candidates might be guilty of exactly that which you’ve been accusing others of being guilty of. — NOS4A2

You ran out of things to spin, so now it's deflection: "hey look at these other people, maybe they are bad, too".

Honestly, I am a bit disappointed you didn't come up with more creative stories.

I tend to do that, sorry. — A Gnostic Agnostic

Tend to do what, incite hatred? It's very obvious that everything in that post (truth or falsity being totally irrelevant) was clearly expressed with the intent to incite hatred.

Stop with the blind hatred... — A Gnostic Agnostic

Stop the hatred! Says the hypocrite who speaks with a clear design and purpose of creating hatred.

I agree with 2 - 7, giving anonymous sources and you the full benefit of the doubt, though I still remain skeptical about them all. It’s not clear whether this person is a whistleblower or leaker, however.

Let’s add some info that may have been largely ignored or suppressed.

The whistleblower didn't have direct knowledge of the communications, an official briefed on the matter told CNN. Instead, the whistleblower's concerns came in part from learning information that was not obtained during the course of their work, and those details have played a role in the administration's determination that the complaint didn't fit the reporting requirements under the intelligence whistleblower law, the official said.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/20/politics/donald-trump-whistleblower/index.html

The “whistleblower” does not have direct knowledge of the conversations. How does that factor into these conspiracy theories?

Let’s also consider the conversation from the view of the Ukraine.

https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/volodimir-zelenskij-proviv-telefonnu-rozmovu-z-prezidentom-s-56617?mod=article_inline

Sounds like a good little phone call.

Now, do you agree that Biden’s son was making $50,000 a month working for a Ukrainian company, Burisma Holdings, whose owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, was being investigated by Ukrainian officials? All this right after Joe Biden began his work in Ukraine, which he threatened by promising to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees if the general prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, wasn’t removed?

What is the point of a discussion of possible Biden-kin misdeeds? Do you claim it is exculpatory of any of Trump's misdeeds? Last I looked, this thread is about Trump.

What is the point of a discussion of possible Biden-kin misdeeds? Do you claim it is exculpatory of any of Trump's misdeeds? Last I looked, this thread is about Trump.

This is what Giuliani and Trump want investigated. You don’t want it investigated?

The best example of this is the scapegoating/pinning of "collusion with Russia" onto Donald Trump, when in the reality it was the Clinton DNC who colluded to interfere in the 2016 (and now 2020) election. Again, the Clinton DNC is a front for the House of Islam: one required access to the "underground market" via Clinton, which is where you will find all of your human trafficking, pedophilia etc. and it leads back to the House of Islam. This is the sum of all fears of Islam: the world wakes up and realizes the depths of the corruption of the House of Islam. Hence, the need to destroy Trump at all costs given his knowledge that Islam is the root of fascism, and not "it's the Jews!". The Jews are the perpetual scapegoat for the House of Islam, which is why they still keep *some* Jews alive. You can't blame a group of people that don't exist. — A Gnostic Agnostic

It seems to me I see beliefs here. I see us them thinking here. I see blame here.

For me these are not necessarily criticisms: beliefs are necessary for so much that I love, there are divisions and us thems and some people deserve blame. That said, it seemed like elsewhere you have been contrasting yourself with people who believe, blame and promote us them thinking.

This is what Giuliani and Trump want investigated. You don’t want it investigated? — NOS4A2

We know they want it investigated. The issue is over why they want it investigated and what they’re doing to push it to happen. If Trump is using taxpayer money to seek leverage against or otherwise damage a political opponent for no other reason than him being a political opponent then the outrage is warranted. If the United States has a legitimate stake in the situation and withholding military aid is appropriate in light of this then the outrage isn’t warranted.

We know they want it investigated. The issue is over why they want it investigated and what they’re doing to push it to happen. If Trump is using taxpayer money to seek leverage against a political opponent then the outrage is warranted. If the United States has a legitimate stake in the situation and withholding military aid is appropriate in light of this then the outrage isn’t warranted.

That’s completely fair. It is inevitable that Joe Biden’s campaign will suffer, even if him and his son are found innocent of any wrong doing.

But remember, at least half a dozen committees of the U.S. Congress are investigating the President, which should give an idea of what taxpayer money is being spent on: seeking leverage against a political opponent. This is to say nothing of the spying on the Trump campaign by the previous administration and the party in power. Let’s be sure we hold firm to our standards.

Let’s be sure we hold firm to our standards. — NOS4A2

There are no "our standards". There is you, employing your entire arsenal of rhetoric to defend Trump, and there is the rest of us. Your insistence that you defend some impartial standard is just more rhetoric.

But remember, at least half a dozen committees of the U.S. Congress are investigating the President, which should give an idea of what taxpayer money is being spent on: seeking leverage against a political opponent. — NOS4A2

Your supposed standard here is really just false equivalence. It's the parliament's job to investigate the president. It's not Trump's job to investigate the Bidens.

This is to say nothing of the spying on the Trump campaign by the previous administration and the party in power. — NOS4A2

Trying to sneak one of Trump's false claims in here by including "the party in power" here. Any spying on Trump has since been disclosed, and it wasn't done at the behest of the party.

Let’s be sure we hold firm to our standards. — NOS4A2

My current standard is simply that the Inspector General (a Trump appointee no less) considers it credible and of urgent concern (whether criminal or as a matter of national security), and so there is a good reason to believe that Trump's motives and/or actions aren't appropriate – and so certainly in need of Congressional oversight, which makes the DNI's decision to not turn over the complaint to Congress (at the White House's behest) despite their legal requirement to do so suspect and troubling.

There really just doesn't seem to be a legitimate defense against this scandal. You're more than welcome to support Trump's presidency and policies, but you really don't have to blindly support everything he does and accuse every criticism of him as being a politically motivated hoax.

Your supposed standard here is really just false equivalence. It's the parliament's job to investigate the president. It's not Trump's job to investigate the Bidens.

Parliament? Yes, you’re right, Congress should investigate the executive branch. But as far as I know Trump is not investigating anyone. In fact, he was accused of encouraging the Ukrainians to do so.

Any spying on Trump has since been disclosed, and it wasn't done at the behest of the party.

The interactions between the FBI, the DNC, FusionGPS and Christopher Steele’s DNC-funded oppo research implies to me otherwise. We already know from testimony that the FBI counsel, James Baker, was given Russia investigation-related information by one of the lawyers of Perkins-Cole, who funded the dodgy Steele dossier, all of which was funded by the DNC. Either way, the investigation into the beginnings of that investigations, and the incestuous interactions between FBI and DNC, will be illuminating.

My current standard is simply that the Inspector General (a Trump appointee no less) considers it credible and of urgent concern (whether criminal or as a matter of national security), and so there is a good reason to believe that Trump's motives and/or actions aren't appropriate – and so certainly in need of Congressional oversight, which makes the DNI's decision to not turn over the complaint to Congress (at the White House's behest) despite their legal requirement to do so suspect and troubling.

There really just doesn't seem to be a legitimate defense against this scandal.

I agree it needs congressional oversight.

There is one legitimate defence to not releasing the complaint. It’s a matter of privilege, according to the DNI. It’s classified or a matter of national security. I don’t agree with these, but these are legitimate concerns.

Parliament? Yes, you’re right, Congress should investigate the executive branch. But as far as I know Trump is not investigating anyone. In fact, he was accused of encouraging the Ukrainians to do so. — NOS4A2

So you agree it's a false equivalence?

The interactions between the FBI, the DNC, FusionGPS and Christopher Steele’s DNC-funded oppo research implies to me otherwise. — NOS4A2

Obviously, because it implying otherwise fits your agenda.

We already know from testimony that the FBI counsel, James Baker, was given Russia investigation-related information by one of the lawyers of Perkins-Cole, who funded the dodgy Steele dossier, all of which was funded by the DNC. Either way, the investigation into the beginnings of that investigations, and the incestuous interactions between FBI and DNC, will be illuminating. — NOS4A2

So your standard for an "incestous relationship" (nice job inserting another baseless claim) is that a lawyer from a firm affiliated with the DNC gave information to an FBI counsel. That's about as incestous as sitting in a room with your cousin.

So your standard for an "incestous relationship" (nice job inserting another baseless claim) is that a lawyer from a firm affiliated with the DNC gave information to an FBI counsel. That's about as incestous as sitting in a room with your cousin.

DNC-funded, anti-Trump opposition research led to the spying of their political opposition, and led a vast subsection of credulous voters to believe in the Russian collusion hoax. At no point was the fact that the research was DNC funded, was gathered by a biased anti-trump spy, added to any FISA applications or their subsequent renewals.

The FISA investigation will be out soon, hopefully.

This is what Giuliani and Trump want investigated. You don’t want it investigated? — NOS4A2

F-off nose-4. How about you? Don't you think the murder of princess Diana needs to be followed up? Or are you covering for someone or something? Going off course is easy; staying on hard. Why don't you attempt some honesty in this thread instead of being the lying, f***ing troll that you have been.

DNC-funded, anti-Trump opposition research led to the spying of their political opposition, and led a vast subsection of credulous voters to believe in the Russian collusion hoax. — NOS4A2

There was no Russian collusion hoax. There was an investigation. It found that the efforts of Trump's campaign fell short of criminal collision. You're lying through your teeth again.

At no point was the fact that the research was DNC funded, was gathered by a biased anti-trump spy, added to any FISA applications or their subsequent renewals. — NOS4A2

Perhaps it would have been added, if any of it was true, and not just partisan rhetoric. By the way, you seem to have omitted the question of whether the information was actually true.

There was no Russian collusion hoax. There was an investigation. It found that the efforts of Trump's campaign fell short of criminal collision. You're lying through your teeth again.

There was. Russian collusion was a theme of the media and, not coincidentally, the DNC for years. You guys believed it all, and spent years promoting nonsense and still do apparently.

Russian collusion was a theme of the media and, not coincidentally, the DNC for years. — NOS4A2

A theme is not a hoax. Stop sneaking in falsehoods via rhetoric or offhand remarks.

A theme is not a hoax. Stop sneaking in falsehoods via rhetoric or offhand remarks.

It was a ruse, a fraud, a swindle, a trick, a hoax. Believers were duped.

You're both more or less wrong. There's no such thing as criminal collusion. The hoax is that Trump introduced a term he could never be convicted of. Mueller concluded there was unlawful interference in the 2016 election by Russians and there was an incomplete picture "due to communications that were encrypted, deleted or unsaved, as well as testimony that was false, incomplete or declined." Nothing proved but definitely worrisome in and of itself even without the possible role of Trump in it.

The Mueller report also sets out 10 instances of possible obstruction of justice by Trump. In accordance with advice from the OLC the report doesn't conclude one way or the other but the facts are there for those who want to read it.