Search the Community

Prosecutors Signal Criminal Charges for Trump Are Likely. Breaking now via NY Times. CBS News also reports: "Manhattan prosecutors invited Trump to testify, sources say, indicated he may be indicted". https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/09/nyregion/trump-potential-criminal-charges-bragg.html

The former US president has posted in ALL - CAPS on his Truth Social platform that he expected to be “ARRESTED ON TUESDAY” and called for his supporters to engage in protests. Will people go out and protest for Trump on Tuesday? Yes, No or other? Also, are the MAGAs on this website, on Tuesday, will you go out for your boss or just noise of keyboard again, like always? If you do go out, just remember what will happen if you cross the line: https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/capitol-violence

When all’s well — This is sort of an October surprise even though it's unlikely to change the apparent trajectory of this year’s election. Driving — Former President Donald Trump — now a Florida man — jolted the political world of his adopted home state by announcing Wednesday that he will do a campaign rally in Miami just two days before Election Day. Missing— Trump made it clear in his announcement that he’s doing the rally to show his support for Sen. Marco Rubio, who Trump has already endorsed. So who wasn’t mentioned in the announcement? Gov. Ron DeSantis. An adviser to the former president told POLITICO that DeSantis was not attending. Each and every one— Let’s recall that Trump — whose endorsement of DeSantis in 2018, ahead of that year’s Republican primary, was a key reason he won — has not endorsed the governor for reelection because DeSantis hasn’t asked for one. More importantly, DeSantis keeps signaling a run for president in 2024 (see Monday night’s debate with Charlie Crist) even though Trump himself continues to strongly suggest he will run again. Rollercoaster — The decision by Trump to hold the rally just ahead of the election — and five days after President Joe Biden holds a get-out-the-vote rally in Miami Gardens — took DeSantis world by surprise. One person who is influential in DeSantis circles told POLITICO that it was “an elbow to Ron’s throat” and blamed Trump's advisers. A Trump adviser, however, contended it was just one of a series of stops the former president was making for GOP Senate candidates. Frost and fire — The timing of Trump’s announcement also comes a few days after Trump and DeSantis had a bit of a dust-up over… the Colorado Senate race. DeSantis decided to endorse and record a robocall for Joe O’Dea, who is trying to knock off Sen. Michael Bennet. DeSantis decided to do this even though Trump had already trashed O’Dea for saying he would “actively” campaign against the former president if he ran again. Trump called DeSantis’ endorsement a “big mistake.” I don’t want to talk about it — There has always been speculation that a Trump-DeSantis confrontation was inevitable, while others have tried to brush off any hint of conflict as some sort of media invention. This week, however, may have marked the moment when what was happening behind the scenes burst into plain view. — WHERE'S RON? — Nothing official announced for Gov. DeSantis. Source: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/florida-playbook/2022/10/27/trump-desantis-rivalry-breaks-into-the-open-00063717

Aside from his social media post that: "Hopefully TODAY will turn out to be one of the most important days in the history of our Country!" under this message ---> he has another message trolling DeSantis. The Washington Post confirmed a few minutes ago, you guessed it: Trump expected to announce presidential bid again amid GOP uncertainty https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/15/trump-running-president-2024/ Unless is a publicity stunt to sell something, today we will find out if the show will begin.

If Donald Trump were convicted, should Joe Biden pardon him? It's a serious question, I mean Nixon was pardoned. Richard Nixon, the 37th President of the United States, was pardoned by his successor, President Gerald Ford, on September 8, 1974.

Trending -> Pence says Trump 'endangered my family' on Jan. 6. https://apnews.com/article/pence-trump-january-6-capitol-riot-carlson-1e38cb44d55737031ca528b4f33aa1fb “President Trump was wrong,” Pence said during remarks at the annual white-tie Gridiron Dinner attended by politicians and journalists. “I had no right to overturn the election. And his reckless words endangered my family and everyone at the Capitol that day, and I know history will hold Donald Trump accountable.” --- ---> In my opinion, Mike Pence, with his issues, will be remembered as a man that stood when it was important to stand.

Yesterday a right wing populist on this website assumed that he knows my position on so called "Russia-Gate." Probably because I troll his master Trump, daily. Well, like every person of the mob, he was wrong, and this article which just popped-up now describes some of my views on this topic. I was always at the belief, is just a theory that some members of the media with influences from the Democratic Party overexaggerated this story for their own agenda. Did Trump used the Russians for his narcissism? Sure! But to think there was a conspiracy without the intelligence communities not alerting the political class or the media is just a wild theory out of the woods. Trump is just a puppet in my view, if he would have crossed that line, the people that are the muscle of America would not have allowed it. Muller Report, no action was taken. From Reason.com - leading libertarian source To retain journalistic credibility, getting a story right is more important than pursuing a crusade. That's a fair takeaway from a report published this week by the Columbia Journalism Review dissecting the so-called Russiagate saga, during which former President Donald Trump was accused of colluding with Russian officials to win the 2016 election. While pursuing the story, many journalists went well beyond their traditional role of scrutinizing powerful officials and not only openly picked a side in America's escalating political warfare but committed to proving a literal conspiracy theory true, no matter the evidence. It didn't go well. "The end of the long inquiry into whether Donald Trump was colluding with Russia came in July 2019, when Robert Mueller III, the special counsel, took seven, sometimes painful, hours to essentially say no," former New York Times reporter Jeff Gerth writes at the beginning of his detailed analysis. His old employer was at the center of the frenzy and its editors still defend their efforts, he adds. "But outside of the Times' own bubble, the damage to the credibility of the Times and its peers persists, three years on, and is likely to take on new energy as the nation faces yet another election season animated by antagonism toward the press. At its root was an undeclared war between an entrenched media, and a new kind of disruptive presidency, with its own hyperbolic version of the truth." The whole piece is worth reading, but make yourself a pot of coffee or crack open a bottle of wine—it's long. Nobody comes off looking especially good. That's true of the former president, though the flaws it reveals in Trump are nothing new to anybody who has watched him and his ego on the national stage. It's true of the FBI agents who joined with too many journalists to fan each other into a hopeful frenzy over the Steele dossier and its assertions that Trump was Putin's puppet. And it's especially true of those members of the press who shed credibility by committing to a narrative that didn't pan out. "Before the 2016 election, most Americans trusted the traditional media and the trend was positive, according to the Edelman Trust Barometer," Gerth notes. "Today, the U.S. media has the lowest credibility—26 percent—among forty-six nations, according to a 2022 study by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism." That Reuters study is echoed by other studies finding minimal trust in the media. But distrust is unevenly spread. "Americans' trust in the media remains sharply polarized along partisan lines, with 70 percent of Democrats, 14 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of independents saying they have a great deal or fair amount of confidence," according to Gallup polling in October 2022. That divide is explained by the public perception that the media is not only biased, but out to push an agenda without regard for honesty. Americans "suspect that inaccuracies in reporting are purposeful, with 52 percent believing that reporters misrepresent the facts, and 28 percent believing reporters make them up entirely," a Gallup/Knight poll found in 2020. Journalistic shenanigans like the Russiagate debacle can only feed such concerns. Strictly speaking, there's nothing wrong with journalists having a point of view, so long as they're open about it and emphasize getting the story right. You're reading a libertarian publication right now; we do our best to confine our beliefs to interpreting facts that exist independent of our preferences. A partisan press is well-rooted in American history, from the newspapers that gleefully tormented the early presidents to the Republican and Socialist newspapers over which my grandparents screamed at each other. Efforts at "objectivity" in news coverage—however successful—didn't really become the norm until after World War II. And it's likely a passing norm as journalists re-embrace partisanship and find (or don't) supportive audiences. "A little more than half of the journalists surveyed (55 percent) say that every side does not always deserve equal coverage in the news," Pew Research reported last summer. "By contrast, 22 percent of Americans overall say the same, whereas about three-quarters (76 percent) say journalists should always strive to give all sides equal coverage." "Beyond Objectivity: Producing Trustworthy News in Today's Newsrooms," published last week by the Knight-Cronkite News Lab, found that "a growing number of journalists of color and younger white reporters, including LGBTQ+ people, believe that objectivity has become an increasingly outdated and divisive concept that prevents truly accurate reporting informed by their own backgrounds, experiences and points of view." Authors Leonard Downie Jr., formerly of the Washington Post, and Arizona State University journalism professor Andrew Heyward wisely recommend that post-objectivity newsrooms should be open with their staff and the public about their core beliefs. But, troublingly, they also suggest that newsroom leaders should "move beyond accuracy to truth." It's really hard to get to any sort of truth if you bypass accuracy. "My main conclusion is that journalism's primary missions, informing the public and holding powerful interests accountable, have been undermined by the erosion of journalistic norms and the media's own lack of transparency about its work," Gerth writes in the afterword to his Russiagate post mortem. "One traditional journalistic standard that wasn't always followed in the Trump-Russia coverage is the need to report facts that run counter to the prevailing narrative." If more of the journalists pursuing the Russiagate story had been scrupulous about getting the facts right, they might have noticed that a story that many wanted to be true was remarkably thin and, ultimately, inaccurate. Failing to perform due diligence did the media no favors when the facts finally emerged and further eroded public trust. Gerth calls for his colleagues to recommit themselves to "a transparent, unbiased, and accountable media" in order to win back trust and audiences that are increasingly siloed along partisan lines. "Unbiased" is probably a big ask given the inclinations of journalists themselves. It's not even obvious that it ever existed; the media giants that dominated for a few decades were likely more monolithic in their newsroom ideologies than they were truly neutral. But transparency and accountability should be expected of journalists who should be open about their methods and pursue stories, not results. In the end, no matter what ideologies or causes motivate journalists, nobody will put faith in us if we fail to get the story right. https://reason.com/2023/02/03/getting-trump-was-more-important-to-some-journalists-than-getting-the-story-right/

The Jan. 6 panel voted Monday to refer former President Trump to the Department of Justice on at least four criminal charges, including insurrection and obstruction of an official proceeding of Congress. Why it matters: In an unprecedented move, the congressional committee voted unanimously that the former president committed crimes for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Driving the news: The panel referred Trump on charges of obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to make a false statement and "incite," "assist" or "aid or comfort" an insurrection. "The committee has developed significant evidence that President Trump intended to disrupt the peaceful transition of power under our constitution," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said. The panel also announced Monday the referral of criminal charges against former Trump lawyer John Eastman for his efforts to disrupt the 2020 election. Eastman, with Trump, pushed a theory that Vice President Mike Pence could unilaterally reject electors. "We believe that the evidence described by my colleagues today and assembled throughout our hearings warrants a criminal referral of former president Donald J. Trump, John Eastman and others," Raskin said. The referrals are non-binding and do not require the DOJ to take any additional action. The big picture: The panel on Monday also voted to refer House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and three other House Republicans to the House Ethics Committee for ignoring the panel's subpoenas. A partial copy of the panel's report charges McCarthy, along with Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Scott Perry (R-Pa.) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), with violating House rules requiring members to conduct themselves “at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House." The panel also voted to approve its sprawling final report, which will include legislative recommendations and focus on additional evidence on Trump's role on Jan. 6. Zoom out: Monday's public meeting is likely the last public session for the committee, as it will dissolve at the end of the current Congressional session. The panel over the last 18 months has reviewed droves of evidence and conducted hundreds of interviews to glean insight into what happened that deadly day. https://www.axios.com/2022/12/19/january-6-committee-trump-criminal-charges

Former President Trump dined and conversed with white nationalist Nick Fuentes and rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, at his Mar-a-Lago resort on Tuesday night, according to two sources familiar with the matter. Why it matters: Trump's direct engagement with a man labeled a "white supremacist" by the Justice Department, one week after declaring his 2024 candidacy, is likely to draw renewed outrage over the former president's embrace of extremists. Source: Axios https://www.axios.com/2022/11/25/trump-nick-fuentes-ye-kanye You know, beside this new episode of the circus and laughing material -> I looked over Twitter. This man has 87.7M Followers right now. A very famous Chinese curse says: "May you live in interesting times" and we sure are. Here they are, los tres mosqueteros: 😂

Narcissism at it again today in my view. The person in question: Donald from New York. Time for some more "anti-Trump spamming" on the board as one of his supporters from the board puts it. I just could not resist. Below is the statement of Trump in regards to the mass shooting in California from last night (suspect is still at large) and riots in Atlanta: ---> The question is: Do you want him as your President or as the U.S. President?

House Republicans are now planning on forming a new select committee to investigate the Department of Justice and the FBI, including their “ongoing criminal investigations,” setting up a showdown with the Biden administration and law enforcement agencies over their criminal probes, particularly those into former President Donald Trump. The new expanded committee proposal is a result of one of the key concessions House Speaker Kevin McCarthy made to his populist (I added this word) opposition to secure the gavel. The proposal is included in the House rules package, which establishes the rules and committees for the 118th Congress. If the proposal passes, McCarthy would be able to select 13 lawmakers to serve on the subcommittee, five of whom would be chosen in consultation with House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries. ABC News Was the FBI good in the Republican book when they announced the decision to investigate Hillary Clinton? Remember that moment? Trumpists were thanking the FBI like they were Santa Claus. Not saying I disagree with the decision of the FBI, politicians do need to be investigated, but if I were a conspiracy theorist, definitely the timing was very suspicious. I will dismiss it as a coincidence and just stick at pointing out the hypocrisy: If Trump says FBI is bad, is bad. If tomorrow Trump wakes up liking the FBI, FBI is good. And everyone follows.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday "that there is no room in the Republican Party for antisemitism or white supremacy." "And anyone meeting with people advocating that point of view, in my judgment, are highly unlikely to ever be elected president of the United States," he said during a news conference. Developing story via Axios: https://www.axios.com/2022/11/29/mitch-mcconnell-antisemites-2024-election *The link will have updates.

there are some posters from the fringes of the left that do not like the Supreme Court. Well, they are judges at the end of the day, not dogmatic like the propaganda which a business like MSNBC puts out. Here it is: Supreme Court denies Trump request to withhold tax returns. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/22/supreme-court-trump-taxes/

via NewsWeek Mr. McConnell time to call DeSantis? = ) Donald Trump Calls on Mitch McConnell to be Impeached The former president made the remarks on Thursday during an appearance on John Fredericks' Real America's Voice show. "Democrats are scheming, probably with some of the RINOs, in order to blow the debt ceiling up," Fredericks said. "What is your position on that?" Republican in Name Only, or RINO, is a derogative term some Trump supporters use for GOP politicians they think are too liberal or moderate. "Mitch McConnell keeps allowing it to happen. I mean they ought to impeach Mitch McConnell if he allows that. Frankly, Mitch McConnell – they have something on him." Newsweek has reached out to Mitch McConnell for comment. No answer yet.

All In my opinion (scenarios from a few threads) -> Trump thinks this is 2020 that you can just walk on stage and take aim at the establishment one by one. In the last 2 days, he resumed his old tactics, making reference to DeSantis (that his wife runs the campaign) and McConnell's wife (using a nickname). These are all thought up leaks and actions to test the market in my view, however, the republican vote (women specifically too) is not between him and non-charismatics politicians like Ted Cruz. The tribal leader idea of the Donald is fading. A newer DeSantis supported by the Republican party, Trump will lose. As he did not make the announcement yet, I am still leaving room that he might not run. People like him don't tend to go into battle if the odds are against him but competition, ego can also turn one blind to what is around and on top of losing the primary -> Trump might give the presidency to Biden (with a condition he chooses a strong woman as a VP). Let me add the other theory which a member of the forum from Florida keeps bringing up: The idea that Florida will not allow DeSantis to run, how? but if that happens, then yes it will be unpredictable. Trump could pick a ticket with Tulsi Gabbard and that can change the equation if DeSantis stays in Florida. Any other VP's that would go with Trump, politically to win? One can't expect in 2024 to win with Trump - Pence.

From the Reason.com, libertarian source, and with -> the original title. Their opinion: A cult following fails to attract voters dismayed by Democratic policies. With a Democratic White House and Congress presiding over persistently high inflation, economic woes, and deep public dissatisfaction in the direction of the country, Americans turned in a muddled verdict at the ballot box. While Republicans who offered a genuine alternative did well, the GOP put up a host of batty political cultists who struggled to attract votes. The victory in Pennsylvania of Democrat John Fetterman, the stroke-addled candidate who turned in a disastrous debate performance over Dr. Mehmet Oz, suggests that a potted plant could beat a Trump Republican. Most forecasters didn't expect the midterm elections to go this way. "A new CNN national poll paints a very grim portrait of the electorate for Democrats, with any number of warning signs that suggest the 2022 midterms are shaping up to be very tough for their side," Chris Cillizza wrote for CNN the week for the election. "Independents, especially women, are swinging to the G.O.P. despite Democrats' focus on abortion rights. Disapproval of President Biden seems to be hurting his party," agreed the New York Times in assessing its polling. On election day, some Republicans did perform well, including Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who crushed his Democratic opponent by almost 20 points and poised himself for a predicted presidential run in 2024. Likewise, Republicans in New York won congressional seats in what New York magazine called "the kind of sweep not seen in decades." But the failure of New York's Trump-supporting GOP gubernatorial candidate, Lee Zeldin, foreshadowed similar disappointments for the party elsewhere. Despite abysmal approval numbers for Democrats and President Joe Biden, and sky-high dissatisfaction (79 percent according to Gallup) with the direction of the country, Trump-linked Republicans failed to gain much traction. Fetterman's victory over Oz resulting in a Senate seat flipped for Democrats is a case in point. After a stroke in May, Fetterman had very obvious difficulty understanding what was said to him and in articulating his own thoughts. A debate performance described in terms such as "disastrous" and "shockingly bad" raised serious concerns about his ability to perform his duties, or to do anything other than try to recover. Yet voters still picked him over Trump-backed Dr. Mehmet Oz for the Senate. Pennsylvania voters also nixed the gubernatorial aspirations of Doug Mastriano, who had Trump's backing and denied the legitimacy of the 2020 election. "Mastriano spent over $3,000 to bus over 100 Trump supporters to D.C. on Jan. 6," WHYY noted of the candidate who failed to gain traction beyond the party faithful. The results were much the same elsewhere. In Arizona, Kari Lake, who closely aligned herself with former president Donald Trump and who led in polls through much of the state's gubernatorial race, is currently trailing in the vote count. She may well lose to her Democratic opponent, Katie Hobbs, an awkward non-entity who refused to debate and dodged the media. If Lake pulls it out, it will be by a squeaker over an opponent who ran a weak campaign. Right now, the only state-wide office Arizona Republicans appear likely to take is that of state treasurer. Importantly, Trump-backed Blake Masters lost his race for the Senate to incumbent Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, a performance echoed elsewhere as Democrats held on to bare control of the upper house of Congress. Republicans aren't even certain to claim a majority in the House of Representatives, despite basement-level approval for the Democrat-led Congress and Biden. Americans are remarkably unhappy with Democrats on issues including the economy and energy policy, and they were keen to support Republicans who ran actual campaigns based on ideas. But GOP candidates who kept up the tired drumbeat of election denialism and cultish fealty to Donald Trump drew minimal enthusiasm across the country. Republican candidates "closely aligned with the past, those are the ones that underperformed," Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) summed up over the weekend. "We as a party need to have a debate about ideas. In that debate, we need to explain to the American people exactly where we think our country should go." "I think Donald Trump gives us problems, politically," commented Republican former speaker of the House Paul Ryan, of Wisconsin. "We lost the House, the Senate and the White House in two years when Trump was on the ballot, or in office. I think we just have some Trump hangover. I think he's a drag on our office, on our races." Ohio's J.D. Vance was among the few populist Trumpists to score big victories on Tuesday. It's important to emphasize here, again, that Democrats didn't win the midterms so much as fail to completely lose them, despite Biden's reality-defying post-election claim that "the overwhelming majority of the American people support the elements of my economic agenda." Polls of Americans strongly suggest otherwise, and successes by Ron DeSantis, New York Republicans, and non-crazy GOP candidates elsewhere demonstrate that there is a national appetite for a serious alternative. But Trump-ish populists didn't satisfy that appetite. Given a choice between hubristic Democratic incompetence and culty Republican lunacy, voters pretty much split the difference, giving neither party a clear advantage. With a little luck, Republicans will claim a razor-thin majority in the House, giving Americans the respite from bad policies—either party's bad policies—offered by gridlock. Two years of stalled legislation leading up to the next round of elections won't actually resolve anything, especially given the executive authority wielded by an unrepentant White House. But a hobbled Congress has to be an improvement over what we've seen in recent years. That will also give the major political factions, Republicans in particular, some time for reflection. Does the GOP want to be a political party based around ideas or will it continue on its path as a nutty cult of personality? Will Democrats get that they barely eked out a non-drubbing for their unpopularity courtesy of the bizarre disarray of their opposition? Even less certain is whether either Democrats or Republicans will ultimately make any effort to court Americans who want more freedom and less interference with their ability to run their own lives. Recent political history hasn't been encouraging. https://reason.com/2022/11/14/a-potted-plant-could-beat-a-trump-republican/

I want to bring back to life a theory that I first heard actually on an European think tank. This idea that a lot of Trumpists were pushed by Democrats in the GOP primaries. The libertarian Reason.com publication had an article in regards to this in the past. If this was indeed the tactic, imagine these Trumpists win. Talk about irony. You run away from men like Mitch McConnell ---> just to find Trump standing there. 😂 or maybe the hope is that a lot of moderate republicans will vote for the Democrats? Democrats paid $435,000 to back a pro-Trump Republican in Michigan—nearly $100,000 more than the candidate himself raised. On August 2, freshman Rep. Peter Meijer lost the Republican primary for Michigan's 3rd Congressional District to John Gibbs, a challenger backed by former President Donald Trump. Gibbs' victory over Meijer, who voted to impeach Trump, highlights the strange role Democrats are now playing in the GOP's internecine battles. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) funded an ad labeling Gibbs "handpicked by Trump" and "too conservative for west Michigan." While ostensibly an attack, the ad also served to entice Republican primary voters. The DCCC paid $435,000 for the 30-second ad—nearly $100,000 more than Gibbs raised in total contributions. Gibbs beat Meijer by more than 3,000 votes. For a decade, Meijer's district was represented by Rep. Justin Amash, the Republican-turned-Libertarian who quit the GOP while criticizing Trump and Trumpism. Meijer won the seat in 2020 after Amash chose not to seek reelection, and his single term was characterized by an independent streak reminiscent of his predecessor. Most notably, Meijer was one of only 10 Republicans (and the only freshman) to vote for Trump's impeachment after the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Despite Meijer's principled opposition to Trumpism, the DCCC saw Gibbs, a far-right conspiracy theorist who believes the 2020 presidential election was stolen, as preferable because he will be easier to beat in the November general election. Based on similar logic, Democrats have backed Trumpists over centrists in several GOP primaries. In July, the Democratic Governors Association (DGA) spent $1.2 million on ads targeting Dan Cox, a Republican state delegate in Maryland who attended Trump's pre-riot "Stop the Steal" rally on January 6 and is now running for governor. The DGA's ads said Cox was "handpicked" by Trump and "too conservative for Maryland." He ultimately beat his more moderate Republican opponent by 15 percentage points. In May, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, a Democrat running for governor, sponsored an ad describing state Sen. Doug Mastriano, a GOP gubernatorial candidate who was photographed on the Capitol grounds on January 6, as "one of Donald Trump's strongest supporters." Mastriano prevailed over his closest primary competitor by more than 20 points. These pro-Trump candidates might have won their primaries without help from Democrats, and Democrats may be right that extreme candidates will be unpalatable to the general electorate in November. But it's a risky bet with serious consequences: As Pennsylvania's governor, Mastriano would have the power to appoint a secretary of state who could directly challenge the results of the next presidential election. This article originally appeared in print under the headline "Why Are Democrats Backing Trumpists?". https://reason.com/2022/10/31/why-are-democrats-backing-trumpists/ *A leading libertarian publication outside the left/right spectrum. Midterms are coming soon. Almost there.

Look at this, the "establishment" media is buzzing my phone. Trump Asks Supreme Court to Block the House From Obtaining His Tax Returns I could not resist but to pass this important message that the leader of some is hiding his taxes. A theory that is going around is that maybe he did not donate to charity? https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/31/us/politics/trump-tax-returns-supreme-court.html

Thank you President Trump! Economy... check (best unemployment rates ever) World Peace... check (ended wars Bush/Obama started) Media Integrity.... check (attacked/exposed fake news) Border Security: great job Keep winning! Here are a few reasons why you are a legend and the most persecuted person of political corruption in this century. Four Parts Part One/ the spying and lying First, pre election, in his campaign he promised to " drain the swamp". In response, Hilary Clinton and the DNC concocted a devious and corrupt scheme to counter Trump's plan. They paid a company to create a bullshit smear campaign against Donald. They purchased the " Steele dossier" an obviously fraudulent bunch of garbage to attack Trump in an underhanded manner. See Fusion GPS Fake news coverage deceived the world: https://www.npr.org/2017/08/23/545289362/researcher-behind-unverified-trump-dossier-meets-senate-investigators No honest person would have looked at this file and seen it as credible. This was a political attack, not a legitimate file. The FBI and DOJ, under Obama, took the bogus file and doctored it,(Kevin Clinesmith), and knowingly sold false information to the FISA court so they could spy on the Trump campaign. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2021/01/29/fbi-lawyer-trump-russia-probe-email-463750 They did their spying and found nothing wrong but keep renewing their warrant under false pretense. This negatively impacted/ruined the life of Trump campaign advisor, Carter Page, and Michael Flynn. Their crime? Supporting Trump. Part Two/Russian Interference Trump wins the election despite the above. Hilary rejected the democratic process and falsely cried that Trump didn't win! She created the false narrative that people still believe today! Russian interference! What? Clinton told the world who believes every word that there was Russian hacking and " interference" and unsubstantiated and undefined claims of an illegitimate election. Trump endured that every second of his presidency. All lies. All spread by media and Democrats and celebrities. Bill Maher. What was he telling millions of people? Russian interference planted him. This was on HBO! https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.breitbart.com/clips/2017/03/31/maher-it-looks-like-russia-installed-trump-and-his-crime-family-to-loot-and-destroy-america/amp/ Trump was cleared by the Muller report. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mueller_report Shame on everyone who supported those claims. Part 3/the impeachment attempts to usurp The impeachments. Enemies of democracy attempted to usurp the legitimate president despite the people voting for him. Democrats used their house of rep numbers to push a bullshit claim of illegitimate impeachments. Trump suggested to the president of Ukraine to look into Hunter Biden. Why? Because he is corrupt and was using his dad's connection as VP to make deals, as per reports stemming from Hunter's laptops. The allegations are " the big guy and 10% ". Hunters business partner confirms this. See Tony Bobulinkski. Trump's conversation with Ukraine is now accepted as commonly agreed upon facts. Hunter, a drug addict with no mining qualifications, was on the Burisma board and other boards doing million dollar deals Globally due to his influence with his dad, while Joe was VP. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-54553132.amp Is Trump draining the swamp? Sounds like it! Who thinks his call with Ukraine was wrong? Should Hunter have been on the board of Burisma? All on the up and up? No way. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Ukraine_scandal https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2022/07/27/hunter-bidens-biz-partner-called-joe-biden-the-big-guy-in-panic-over-laptop/amp/ Do you know who interfered in Ukrainian politics and demanded the end of an investigation to get funds? Watch this? https://youtu.be/azLKK0xTOFI Part 4/January 6- the Trespassing! After the FBI colluded with social media, isn't that what Russia supposedly did for Trump's win?, to help Biden win the election by burying Hunter Biden s laptop, there was a close election. Is everyone sure the guy who smells kids and can't speak a coherent sentence got 80 million votes? Yes the FBI again. Timothy Thibeault corruptly buried the Hunter investigation for political reasons. https://time.com/6209942/timothy-thibault-fbi/ Remember Hilary saying Trump's election win was not valid? No one said... treason! But, they did the sham Jan 6 Committee investigation to get Trump. Why? Political persecution. January 6. This was not an insurrection. What a lie! No one had a weapon. No politicians were hurt. Except AOC died. Trump told people go peacefully and then told them to go home. The world still claims Donald started a attempt to overthrow the government! People actually believe this. Read his words: https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial Or watch the video: Go home now is not inciting a coup. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qNES0crpyHk Maybe 20-30 people were being assholes. The rest were in between the ropes and many were let in by police. No police were killed by rioters. The police did shoot and kill Ashley Babbitt but as a white woman killed by a black office the left wing radical media framed it as white supremacists killed 6 police officers! https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1273750 What about Ray Epps? https://www.google.com/amp/s/ca.sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/trump-shares-ray-epps-conspiracy-212501666.html What about the Antifa dude telling Ashley go go go! John Sullivan Antifa member! https://theintercept.com/2021/01/14/capitol-riot-john-sullivan-ashli-babbitt/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Earle_Sullivan https://archive.ph/cURdr Conclusion Trump ended crt and radical left wing idealogy in federal institutions. During Trump's reign, no Muslim terror attacks like there had been: Boston Marathon, Fort Hood, Pulse, etc. Unlike Bush jr. and Obama , he was peaceful and against US wars. Obama left office with US in many wars! https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-pol-obama-at-war/ Trump has a 3.9 % unemployment record, best in history and best in history for black and Hispanic people. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/01/trump-takes-undue-credit-black-unemployment/?gclid=Cj0KCQjw1bqZBhDXARIsANTjCPIGPrD-abwgAADHZvsF-1w2jZxBJyE_mRhMHgWbCAY_aSYLI_a9ReEaAu3lEALw_wcB He called out Coyotes and the cartel for their human trafficking and human smuggling. They are rapists. That's not racist. He supports legal immigration and is against illegal immigration. Isn't that a good thing? Notice how Obama let Russia take Crimea and Biden is on watch while Russia takes Ukraine? I thought Trump was a Russian puppet but... No land grabs on his watch! Right??? He called out fake news and supported statues , not racist fascist who destroy history and historical monuments. People hate him because he says America First. Radical left wing extremists hate America and white people so they hate this mantra. Let them hate while others work hard and make contributions to society. Now they want to get him for boxes and his building worth estimations? Stop embarassing yourselves. I thank him for the good he did the world and for exposing people who abuse their power to attack political opponents and the democratic process! Final Recap of Fun Facts So Trump won the election in 2016 and there was no Russian interference and Trump claiming illegitimate election in 2020 is the same thing Hilary did. The FBI, Kevin Clinesmith, doctored docs to spy on Trump campaign illegally to try to help Clinton win the 2016 election, and the FBI, Timothy Thibeault, lied about/buried the Hunter laptop as " Russian disinformation" to help Joe Biden win the 2020 election. Biden, not Trump, interfered in Ukrainian politics. Let's have a respectful discussion. Caveats: Happy to hear where I am wrong. Just don't argue January 6 was a coup or an attack on democracy. A few idiots unrelated to Trump. Nothing compared to BLM and Antifa looting and burning the country. And Trump disavowed White supremacists a million times. Not sure why though? It's the only group that can't be proud of their culture and heritage.

Donald Trump has accelerated his campaign planning, hoping a White House bid will blunt a series of damaging revelations. Some Republicans are worried. check here full details.

Trump Hysteria in 2022 We are all obligated to believe that Donald Trump is evil. We are almost in 2022 and people will not stop complaining about this guy. Why? Well, he is racist to start. Okay, I hate racists, let us examine why we accept the fact that he is racist. Also, I am from Canada and I have no idea why so many Canadians feel triggered and violated by the former leader of another country. The next time you hear someone in Canada criticize Trump, please refer them to this article. Trump Refuses to Disavow White Supremacy: Debate with Joe Biden It is absurd that anyone can construe Trump’s words in the debate to mean he supports racism. He clearly answered “sure” when asked if he disavows white supremacy and then he disavowed. Anyone interpreting that response during the Biden debate to indicate that Trump supports racism makes a mockery of themselves. For those who believe that Trump has never disavowed white supremacy or racism please watch below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd0cMmBvqWc&t=7s He also directed the Proud Boys to “stand back” which is hardly an endorsement. By the way, the Proud Boys are white supremacists based on what definition? Any specific tenet of the organization to support this claim or just CNN? Their leader, Enrique Tarrio, is black, and their founder, Gavin McInnes, is married to a Ho-Chunk woman. Gavin’s children have tribal rights and are recognized as members of the Indigenous group. PB has Latino, Black, Jewish, LGTBQ, all types of members. In Canada, the PB have been labelled as a domestic terror group although no explanation was ever provided. The only incident with the PB in Canada was in Halifax in 2017. The Halifax 5 peacefully, without violence or criminal convictions, asked why protestors wanted to destroy/remove a statue. The Halifax 5 includes a member of the LGTBQ and Indigenous community. They were military members proudly serving this country. PB, in Canada, is now labelled on the same degree of threat as ISIS and Al Qaeda- makes sense, right? You could be arrested for wearing a PB hat in Canada. Question: Why? Answer: Ummm. January 6th. The “storming” of the capital by white supremacists! Question: Was that in Canada or USA? Answer: USA Question: Did PB organize the January 6th trespassing event? Answer: No one knows but, based on CNN, probably. Question: Any convictions linking PB members to any criminal/terrorism acts on January 6th? Answer: Not as of December 2021. But still, definitely terrorists and white supremacists! Sh*T Hole Countries Firstly, this was allegedly about Haiti and some African countries. There is also no audio of what was actually said and even the most un-objective person would agree that Donald does not get any benefit of the doubt from the media on context. Anyone who has ever been to Haiti and wants to vouch for the wonderful development of this country, please raise your hand. Statistically, check out the data on Haiti. Haiti remains the poorest country in the LAC region and among the poorest countries in the world. In 2020, Haiti had a GDP per capita of US$2,925, the lowest in the LAC region and less than a fifth of the LAC average of US$15,092. On the UN's Human Development Index, Haiti ranked 170 out of 189 countries in 2020. At every standard and every measurement, it is not a successful country. Prove me wrong. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/haiti/overview#1 Secondly, Haiti is a country. If one disparages Haiti, it is not racist. Personally, I think Detroit is a sh*t hole. Detrotians are not a race. This would not be a racist statement. Parts of Scarborough, Ontario (GTA) (see Kingston Road) are a sh*t hole. Shuter Street, in downtown Toronto, is a sh*t hole. Sudbury and Hamilton-predominantly white, are sh*t holes. These are not racist statements. Haitians could be any colour or race. Haitian is a nationality, not a race hence the absence of any racism. The comment was against the country not the people. Thirdly. And yes, it is a sh*t hole. “Mexicans are Rapists” Obviously, on its face this is egregious and offensive. Mexico has challenges as a country-corruption, crime, cartels, etc. However, Mexican people are typically religious, family-orientated, hard working, friendly and al-in-all good people. Context is important. The actual point that Trump was making was to criticize the US Visa lottery process which is based on arbitrary selection as opposed to merit. Would anyone disagree that visas should be issued to people based on their individual merit as opposed to being selected randomly? It is my understanding that this comment/allegation by Trump was also raised in another context in which Trump was referring to the coyotes who transport illegals across the border. Does anyone defend the way people are smuggled into the USA? There are reports of the women being raped and some of the people sold into human trafficking. Human smuggling is a terrible racket filled with horrible crime. If people believe that coyotes do not rape people and their vocation is an honourable one, please present your points below in the comments. Kindly use facts, not hyperbole and empty rhetoric or made up words. If the comment was made outside of these contexts and used to describe all Mexicans in all situations, it would be offensive and inappropriate. No argument. Ban on Muslims Again, a ban on Muslims is not racist as Islam is a religion, not a race. People of all races/colours are Muslims. It is also important to note that the Supreme Court agreed with Trump. I am sure the Trump haters, with their CNN and google powers, are more knowledgeable than the judges but take that up with the jurists. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-travel-ban.html Trump pulled out of wars with Muslim countries, Iraq and Afghanistan, which saved Muslim lives. He also signed the peace deals with Israel and its neighbours, Muslim countries, which has brought peace and security to the Muslim region. Trump also stopped Obama’s drone policy, arguably a war crime?, in which many Muslims were killed by drones without due process, clear identification, or any legal protection or opportunity to defend themselves against accusations. How many Muslims died under Trump’s reign compared to Obama? U.S. military forces had been at war for all eight years of Obama’s tenure, the first two-term president with that distinction. He launched airstrikes or military raids in at least seven countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. Any pattern in the above seven? Yes, all Muslim countries. https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-pol-obama-at-war/ Fort Hood. Boston Marathon bombing. Pulse. Nothing like this happened on Trump’s watch. China Virus Trump was racist to call covid the china virus. It was actually universally called that in early 2020. Trump calling on a ban of travel to and from China is no different from countries banning travel to and from African countries sin December of 2021. Is it not? Trump was “racist” yet it was common place to use the term Wuhan virus or China virus. Was he following the regular term used? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eZtCq1aj2g Good People on Both Sides at Charlottesville Is it not always best practice to be objective and to have perspective? Trump said some people defending the statues and some people protesting the statues were good people. Isn't that fair? Or should everyone on one side of an argument be considered right and the others wrong? History and statues are nuanced and both sides have legitimate points. Is anyone suggesting all people defending a statue are wrong? Why should people not want to protect their history and historical figures? History is nuanced and complex. Finding middle ground by Trump seems mature and reasonable. From the videos I saw, there was good people on both sides and aggressive people on both sides. It was chaos in Charlottesville. What was wrong with this balanced approach? Rigged Election Trump is evil because he disagreed with the election results. I am not suggesting there was fraud but does anyone really have 100% confidence that Biden received over 81 million votes? He is not by any definition charismatic, eloquent, competent. JFK and Obama have charm and stage presence. Natural leaders. Obama had under 70 million votes in the historic 2008 election. Sound plausible that Biden won over 10 million more votes than Obama? Biden's leadership skills, winning personality, and affability? Not so much. He is funny, not charming, for all the wrong reasons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgC8dFmhyJQ His speeches, gatherings, events do not reflect this massive degree of 80 million people popularity, do they? His most interesting quality seems to be his comical speech pattern which is to forget what he is saying, not a trait that typically brings 80 million votes, is it? Hilary Clinton took a similar stance on Trump’s win. A year after her defeat by Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton says “there are lots of questions about its legitimacy” due to Russian interference and widespread voter suppression efforts. In an interview with Mother Jones in downtown Manhattan, Clinton said Russian meddling in the election “was one of the major contributors to the outcome.” Can anyone really suggest that this conspiracy by Hilary is significantly different from what Trump did regarding his opinion on the 2020 election? How much coverage did “Russian collusion” get? It was ubiquitous yet never made sense on any level. Was the theory that Russians used Facebook to encourage people to vote for Trump or what was it? It was never explained just believed to be true that Trump’s election victory was illegitimate and Russians (ooo scary Russians) were involved! The FBI got involved to promote the idea that Trump’s win was illegitimate. The foolishness of the Steele dossier will forever disgrace the famous federal police organization. https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/steele-dossier-reckoning/index.html “He Put Kids in Cages!” Trump put kids in cages who arrived illegally and separated children from their parents. Sure. The government has policies and process on addressing those who enter illegally which requires detainment, processing and assessing. For anyone who knows anything about correctional facilities, the jailers have the highest obligation to protect those whom they jail. Common sense suggests that children cannot be jailed with adults. If so, they are at great risk of assaults, rape, and murder. It is an unsupportable position to jail children and adults together which is why there are different sets of jails in Canada and the US for youth and adults. If he had jailed kids with adults, he would have been a monster and responsible for anything that happened to them. If he separated them and placed them in protective custody, he would be a monster for “putting them in cages”. The separation between kids and adults resulted in parents being separated from those whom they claimed to be their children. Obviously, this is not ideal. The infrastructure does not exist to provide each group arriving illegally private housing. This is the result of their parents committing crimes. President Obama’s policy was the same. Obama stated: “Don’t send your children to the borders!” He had the exact same position as Trump on people to not send their children to illegally cross the border. It is a difficult situation and one without a perfect solution. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjxay-XeSks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7cmxB16eX4 For anyone believing this to be an easy fix, check out Biden’s response. He has camps all across the border towns and under highway passes. Does this look like a better response than Trump’s? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrXvJJ6MisM Kamala Harris’s role? To research the roots of the issue. Why are they coming? Trump already answered that- see sh*t hole countries above. Ukraine was an Impeachable Offense If you really believe that the call trump had with the leader of Ukraine would warrant the entire democratic process of elections be overturned then sadly, you are dismissed from this conversation. That is absurd. By no logic does that under the legal analysis qualify as treason/impeachable offense. First Step Act Trump signed into law the First Step Act which is designed to help those with criminal records succeed upon their return into society. Many racialized people will benefit from this program. This is different from Kamala Harris who incarcerated many racialized people for drug use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Step_Act Next Steps If you live in Canada and you hate Trump and spend hours on social media letting everyone know how much you hate him…sigh…Time to let it go. Go for a walk. Get a pet. Play Candy Crush. Swipe away on Tinder. Watch a hockey game. Turn off CNN and keep the virtue signaling to a minimum. Its not your country. Not your problem and you don’t know what you are crying about. Signed Big Jim on the Danny (Toronto) Go Leafs go!

According to a CIA assessment, Russia's interference in the 2016 election was intended to help one candidate: Trump. Predictably, the Trumpkin spin factory is in overdrive, trying to undermine the CIA and denying that the interference influenced the result. However, they're missing the point. As Evan McMullin (former CIA operative, former policy director for House Republicans) tweeted: At the very least, Trump actively encouraged foreign interference in the election and is now preparing to cover up and evidence of it. This alone should make Americans enraged. Of course, in the current, hyper-partisan environment, Trumpkins will doubtless have no trouble rationalizing this immoral (and probably criminal) behavior. But the real question isn't even being seriously asked. The real question is how much did Trump know about the interference. Was he or his organization actually involved in some way? The relationship between Trump and Putin has not been thoroughly investigated or documented. Trump himself made several contradictory statements about his relationship with Putin. Senior people associated with his campaign and cabinet have questionable associations with Putin's Russia. Former campaign Paul Manafort is under investigation by the FBI for his dealings. His Secretary of State pick, Rex Tillerson received the Order of Friendship, one of Russia's highest honors, from Putin. So, is it credible that Trump knew nothing of Russian interference?

Despite not exactly supporting the values of Christianity or respecting probably any of the ten commandments, would you still call him a Christian?

BBC: Jersusalem is Israel's capital I commented on some thread last night of someone from the U.S. asking if Trump was all that bad for them. I tried to relate without prejudice. I assumed that much of the world's problems in communication/miscommunication deal with today's technology. However, today this announcement appears as though he may be setting up for some suicidal 'fuck you' before he possibly gets impeached. ?? I'm a bit surprised no one else here even mentioned it yet. What do you guys think?

The way the corrupt Clintonite Nancy Pelosi and the Israeli Fifth Column Chuck Schumer have sat upon DNC and choked life out of it Bernie Sanders is barking up the wrong tree --this party is irredeemable--the high-profile special election in Georgia’s 6th District is a wake up call-- but is Sanders waking up? Or is he too busy signing ridiculous petitions that UN is too harsh on Israel!