According to the Washington Post, as of last month, Trump told 9451 lies over the past 801 days. The ones uncovered in the Mueller report may put him over the 10,000 mark--surely some kind of Guinness world record.https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/?utm_term=.2adbfdc897ca Over three quarters of his statements are total B.S.https://www.usnews.com/news/article...site-donald-trump-lies-76-percent-of-the-time His aides would be hard put to catch up!
I never imagined actually living in BIZARRO WORLD !! I expect Zippy the Pinhead to show up as trumps director of communication any minute carrying a possum and a bowling ball riding a unicycle!!
Ok, so I am going to ask the question again. This is the title of the Mueller report; "Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election" The question is, has there been a single Trump campaign official that has been charged in relation to interference in the 2016 US presidential election? Here is an article, previously presented by others as it appears on a cbs news site, and similar ones appear on most left wing news site Here's who has been charged in the Mueller probe We will use this as a list of biggest fish that got fried. So we will start with Manafort, Trumps campaign manager for a whole three months Charges of Banking and Tax fraud and not registering as a lobbyist for a former Ukraine President...well before the 2016 election This guy is at the top of the list.....and yet he has never been charged with anything in relation to interference with the 2016 election??? The title of the report again: "Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election" There seems to be two main points in the report in regards to Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election 1. A social media campaign (whoop-ti-doo) 2. Who ever hacked Podestas emails (Julian Assange claimed at one stage it came fron a source of his), again whoop-ti-doo, and as far as I am aware we still have no clue who actually hacked those emails. So I will ask the question one more time Is there a single Trump campaign official that has been charged with anything to do with interference in the 2016 US presidential election?
No evidence of any high crime or misdemeanor . However , intentionally manipulating and driving Trump to suicide - hey ! Don't play that game . It's bad nonsense , and its passionate evil will be exposed .
No he did not...so what's your point? We all know that. Mueller was not charged with finding if anyone in the Trump organization, including Trump, were conspiring with the Russians. (See the title of the report as you posted it.) He was instructed to find out if the Russians interfered with the elections. He found they did. He also found that the Russians felt they would benefit from an election of Trump and that Trump, et al, thought they would benefit from the Russians' interference. They didn't co-ordinate. So no conspiracy. They did collude as both sides sought to benefit from the other's actions and worked to that end. So again, what's your point?
Lolz, they didnt conspire, they didnt co-ordinate....but they colluded, without getting specific about what colluded actually means Whats my point? What a load of rubbish
What happened was this in 2014 Russian intelligence was tasked by Vladimir Putin to interfere with the US election system through a campaign of social media, cyberattacks, and with the use of internet trolls. The purpose was to sow mistrust of the candidates and the entire US political and election process This was a year before Donald Trump even announced his candidacy. When Donald Trump declared himself a candidate, the Russians did everything they could to get him elected, because they knew what better way to destroy America then from within. They knew from his psychopathology that he suffers from Narcissistic personality disorder, paranoia, and lacks empathy
I'm pretty sure the electoral facade does that on its own. Don't need a grand conspiracy to see the two party system as ridiculous.
Seems like a massive waste of time overall. However, $30M for 2 years of bullshit (which is what I call a highly publicized "investigation" like this where every turn becomes public almost instantly) is pretty cheap. But it still went from the taxpayers to the pockets of lawyers and their support staff. And it seems to have solved nothing. Much like impeachment has proven in the past. It's all part of the show folks. Did Russians meddle? Well, they've been meddling in the politics of other nations since the time of Peter the 1st (Russians don't call him Peter the Great). So this is no big shock. Seems like tracking down where they have been successful would be a more important priority. Which of the nation's elected and appointed have been extorted, blackmailed and honey pot dupes?
There is no precedence for what the Russians did in regards to the U.S. elections. Putin ordered a cyber attack against the United States which was carried out by the Internet Research Agency troll farm. They created thousand of accounts that presented themselves as Americans, supported radical groups, and promoted and organized rallies both for and against Trump and other divisive matters. They reached millions of people, broke into a Florida voting district and influenced media coverage. The stole information from the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. They released, through DCLeaks, Guccifer 2.0 and Wikileaks tens of thousands of stolen private emails to the public. They offered stolen date to the Trump organization and the Trump organization expressed interest in and went out of its way to receive it. They disrupted the Democratic Party, sowed mistrust among the electorate, and influenced the election to a certain degree. They were warned by Obama, sanctions were placed against Russia, diplomats were expelled, and an investigation into the matter was launched. Numerous investigations are on going. Twenty six Russians and three Russian organizations have been indicted as have numerous Americans. Facebook, Twitter, and other social media have been compromised. 50% of the Michigan news on Twitter was found to be fake news from Russia. Twenty fake stories on Facebook alone generated 8,711,000 shares and comments. Information stolen from the Republicans by the Russians was not released. We now have a President who did seek that stolen information contrary to U.S. law, attempted to obstruct justice ten times in regard to the investigation, and now has his presidency in peril. Remember Trump asked, in public, for the Russians to hack into Hillary Clinton's email accounts. Which they then did hours after the request. (He was just joking!) We will have elections in the future, the Russians will not stop, technology is advancing, experts can now generate very sophisticated fake news using Deepfake techology. The question becomes do we sanction this activity by looking the other way at a president who clearly sought to benefit from stolen material, fake news, and foreign intervention? And if so, what does this mean for future elections? Are you willing to see your favorite candidate from whatever party undermined by this activity? Are you comfortable with allowing those who manage to skirt along the legal limits of the law to sway the electorate? Or is it that some of us could care less about what goes on in the world, who our representatives are, what laws, ethics, and mores are broken or stretched to the limit as long as they can get a constant supply of cheeses curls and video games?
I avoid online dictionaries except for technical or anatomical definitions. They're convenient. But they are absolutely fluid and can be skewed on a whim. Since I write rather often, I keep several paper dictionaries. Sure, I find archaic stuff, my biggest dictionary is from 1927 and is about 9 inches thick and sits on a stand in the corner. If you look up "collude" on most online dictionaries, you'll see primarily a negative tone to the definition. That's not how the word came into being. It has Latin contemporaries that are certainly not positive (delude, elude). There are also benign connotations (allude, prelude). According to Big Dic in the corner, to collude was first defined as planning surprises for unsuspecting individuals (I got a chuckle out of that). As in a surprise party. For me, words are gold (although I write really boring shit for a living). I'm not alone in this. Every mouthpiece on a screen is harvesting words into greenbacks. But words are also power (which is why anyone, regardless of race, gender or faith, can be a racist). People go nuts over words. Whole civilizations have been brought down by words. Words on a hat turn some people into menacing assholes who are more than happy to escalate to assault. Words are freaking amazing. They also keep old fashioned ideas alive. Even after they have been proven absolutely wrong. I redline the big book when a definition has been upended. However, I think I'm going to leave Collude as it is.
If you look at polling aggregation over time, he's the least popular president in the history of polling. If you compare disapproval rating at this moment in time, he's lower than Carter or Reagan, meaning there's about nobody in the center on this divisive jackass. How Popular Is Donald Trump? Your linked poll runs up til April 9th, so before the Mueller report came out. His poll number took a dip last week. Trump approval drops to 2019 low after Mueller report's release: poll So least popular president in history of American presidential polling's approval rating declining. Nothing particularly alarming for Trump.... Weren't you the one saying the GOP would gain seats in the House in the midterms?