Forums - Politics Discussion - Donald Trump: How Do You Feel about Him Now? (Poll)

Last November,

I supported him and I still do - Americas 91 15.77%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Americas 16 2.77%
 
I supported him and I still do - Europe 37 6.41%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Europe 7 1.21%
 
I supported him and I still do - Asia 6 1.04%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Asia 1 0.17%
 
I supported him and I still do - RoW 15 2.60%
 
I supported him and I now don't - RoW 2 0.35%
 
I didn't support him and still don't. 373 64.64%
 
I didn't support him and now do. 29 5.03%
 
Total:577

 

Machiavellian said:
massimus said:

The Russia investigation is a joke though. There is zero evidence of any of it and it has gone on for a year and a half. If trump has a network of people that wake up everyday and trashed him all day based on nothing more than hearsay the question isn’t “why does he trash them” the question is why wouldn’t he. Ok they are just reporting on things with no evidence.... all day long.... what hasn’t he disclosed? What has he lied about? C’mon there are so many it would be easy to link to one.

“That’s how journalism works”

Oh that’s convenient when you’re trying to impeach a president isn’t it? Oh they print retractions after the damaged has been done, that’s convenient. They are as politically biased as Fox News. Pretending that objective reporting still exists especially in failing news papers is a lost cause. I skip straight to the source now.

I read a lot actually. Books, not the New York Times. I wouldn’t wipe my ass with the New York Times.Yes cable news is trash as well, you get no disagreement here. Fox News is literally the only one that doesn’t trash him all day long. Yes it’s obvious why he would rub their belly.

Lol, there is no evidence of Russia trying to influence the election.  Exactly what planet have you been living on for the past couple years.  Now if you say there is no evidence on collusion, well you have absolutely not proof if there is or isn't.  Any prosecutor worth his creds will not present anything thing or even leak anything until they are ready to actually present their findings or go to court.  When the person of interest is the President of the US, well you have to be even more careful.  

You present that same tired defense that the investigation has gone on for a year as if there is a set time limit for uncovering information.  I am wondering if your only source of information is conservative web sites that paint any and everything Trump does as positive.  Think about how many times the news got something wrong compared to the mountain of things that could not be disputed.  Then you have a President that lies every time he gets a chance but does not retract any lie he has told.  You are basically saying its OK for Trump to lie since he is not the press but its a crime if the press gets something wrong then retract their statements.

The fact of the matter is, Trump is not treated any different than any other President.  The only difference is that he is dumb enough to use Twitter to communicate his thoughts unlike going through official channels like most Presidents do.  He says a lot of dumb stuff that probably sounded smart to him when he woke up in the morning but after finding out each thing he talks about is more complex then he understands opens him up to more critique.  This is what Trump wants because he wants to be in the news all the time.  Good or bad, he craves attention and I am sure if he doesn't see his name in a headline or some sort he would invent something that will be talked about for a week.

“You have no proof that he didn’t”

 

well fortunately I don’t have to prove a negative. If they had anything it would have been leaked by now. Literally everything else has. Yes same tired arguments I agree. You. Have. No. Evidence.



Around the Network

lol somebody rushed through "Cliff's Notes: The Russia Investigation".



Nice response, how am I wrong though? That’s all it took to discredit your talking points. That’s pretty bad huh?



In the interest of responding more earnestly:

1.) The claim that the Russia story and investigation started after Trump was elected is bullshit.

Intelligence agencies were aware of the threat of Russian interference throughout 2016. They released a joint report about it. Trump's campaign was warned by the FBI that they would be the target of Russian infiltration. Russian interference was even a topic in the presidential debates.

I will say that Trump put a target on his back by consistently putting up smoke screens for Russia (400lb man sitting on his bed) dragging his feet on sanctions, and firing Comey for not putting an end to the Flynn investigation and publicly clearing Trump.

2.) I doubt Mueller is surprised that Russian nationals aren't jumping to plead guilty. But he had enough evidence to convince both a grand jury, and to convince the Trump administration to sanction the 13 people indicted.

3.) I would say that "process crimes" have something to do with Russian Collusion when the process crime you plead guilty to was lying to the FBI about meeting with a Russian emissary about helping your campaign. As was the case with Papadopoulos.

4.) I never said firing Comey was obstruction of justice. I'm not a prosecutor or a lawyer, so that's not for me to determine. I certainly think it should be investigated though.

Look how far we've come. A few hours ago, you said the Russia investigation was a joke with no evidence. And you proudly proclaimed that you go "straight to the source" and skip media interpretation.

The "joke" investigation has produced tangible results. Those results are backed by evidence that satisfied grand juries, prosecutors, judges, and even some members of the Trump administration apparently. Let's focus in on two concepts. Evidence, and Primary Sources.

When I call Flynn and Papadopoulos felons, I have federal documentation of that. Pleas that answer indictments that were backed by evidence.

You just baselessly called James Comey a felon. Where is your source for that? Where is your evidence?

You're doing everything you accuse the media of doing, but so much more blatantly. Proudly displaying ignorance is in vogue these days I guess.



massimus said:

Right the Russian collusion story happened as soon as they realized Hillary didn’t win. If she would have won nothing would have been brought up.

Oh yeah the 13 Russian nationals that plead not guilty to the surprise of mueller. It’s quite amusing to watch him scramble for evidence, especially seeing as one of the companies he indicted didn’t exist at the time. He never thought they would show up.

Oh “process crimes” as in lying to the fbi. As in having nothing to do with Russian collusion. Flynn plead guilty because they were bankrupting him lmao! What a load of crap. The FBI even said they didn’t think he was lying.

Firing the fbi director was not obstruction of justice. The president has every right to fire whoever he wants. That’s a load of crap seeing as the DOJ is still investigating the matter long after that goober got fired. The democrats wanted him fired in the previous administration. He’s an incompetent buffoon and a felony leaker. All this talk about felonies, let’s talk about real ones.

I know exactly what I’m talking about, you’re not as smart or well read as you think you are because you read the New York Times. How about sticking to the facts so we can have a reasonable conversation without the ignorant projecting jabs.

What you are saying is that you did not pay attention that the FBI was looking at multiple people within Trump team BEFORE the election, Before Trump announced his Candidacy.  So you conveintenly just either did not know, threw that part out or did not care.  What I see is either selective reading or only reading one source because it justify your opinion.  Either way, there is a mountain of Evidence out there that things started because Trump himself got in the way, thus making him a person of interest.

Having the right to fire anyone you want is one thing.  Firing the person who is investigating you well that seems like a conflict of interest no matter how you try to sugar coat that.  Maybe the laws should be changed because I do not care who is President, if there is probable cause to look into any criminal endeavor even if its the President, then it should not be easily stopped by firing the person doing the investigation.  Also you seem to forget that Trump himself went on National TV and literally stated he fired Comey because of that 'Russia Thing".  He had a note from Rosenstein where he could have easily just kept to the story but NO, he wanted the attention of firing Comey.  How DUMB can he be.  You are trying to defend a person who continue to make dumb mistakes after another.  Mueller would be home eating rice cakes if Trump kept to the story. Why don't you put the blame where it belongs and stop trying to give this man a pass for every dumb mistake he makes as if he is infallible.

Now that we see things keep going and another person Trump has to say has little role in his organization like Cohen.  How many people seem to keep coming up compromised to the point where you want to find out how much swamp meat Trump surrounded himself with.  



Around the Network
massimus said:

 

Machiavellian said:

Lol, there is no evidence of Russia trying to influence the election.  Exactly what planet have you been living on for the past couple years.  Now if you say there is no evidence on collusion, well you have absolutely not proof if there is or isn't.  Any prosecutor worth his creds will not present anything thing or even leak anything until they are ready to actually present their findings or go to court.  When the person of interest is the President of the US, well you have to be even more careful.  

You present that same tired defense that the investigation has gone on for a year as if there is a set time limit for uncovering information.  I am wondering if your only source of information is conservative web sites that paint any and everything Trump does as positive.  Think about how many times the news got something wrong compared to the mountain of things that could not be disputed.  Then you have a President that lies every time he gets a chance but does not retract any lie he has told.  You are basically saying its OK for Trump to lie since he is not the press but its a crime if the press gets something wrong then retract their statements.

The fact of the matter is, Trump is not treated any different than any other President.  The only difference is that he is dumb enough to use Twitter to communicate his thoughts unlike going through official channels like most Presidents do.  He says a lot of dumb stuff that probably sounded smart to him when he woke up in the morning but after finding out each thing he talks about is more complex then he understands opens him up to more critique.  This is what Trump wants because he wants to be in the news all the time.  Good or bad, he craves attention and I am sure if he doesn't see his name in a headline or some sort he would invent something that will be talked about for a week.

“You have no proof that he didn’t”

 

well fortunately I don’t have to prove a negative. If they had anything it would have been leaked by now. Literally everything else has. Yes same tired arguments I agree. You. Have. No. Evidence.

What you just said means absolutely nothing.  They will bring what they have when they have concluded their investigation and not any sooner just to please you or anyone else opinion.  If you have any clue how Mueller goes about his business maybe you should do more research on how Mueller took down John Gotti.  This isn't going to be a week investigation as there are way to many moving parts.  Each part has to be investigate properly but mainly what it looks like Mueller is doing is following the money.  Before he touch Trump, you can be sure he will have probable cause.  As we have seen with Cohen, following the money brings up all kinds of crap. Now that the FBI can look into those documents they pulled from Cohen, now President Trump wants to investigate the FBI....LOL.  Lets see what gets turned up in these documents since Cohen played a VERY small role as a Lawyer for Trump.  His own words again coming back to slap him in the face because he doesn't know when to shut up.  Keep giving this fool a pass because no one else is.  If anything they are just waiting on another dumb slip up.

Last edited by Machiavellian - on 21 May 2018

"The claim that the Russia story and investigation started after Trump was elected is bullshit."

I didn't say the investigation started after he got elected, I said it was a story after he got elected. The fake media started after the election. The only collusion going on is between the federal government and the media. This story never would have broke if Clinton got elected. Obama was laughing at Trump when he said to watch the elections closely.


"Intelligence agencies were aware of the threat of Russian interference throughout 2016. They released a joint report about it. Trump's campaign was warned by the FBI that they would be the target of Russian infiltration. Russian interference was even a topic in the presidential debates."

Indeed. His campaign was warned, there was zero evidence that his campaign was involved, there still isn't.

"I will say that Trump put a target on his back by consistently putting up smoke screens for Russia (400lb man sitting on his bed) dragging his feet on sanctions, and firing Comey for not putting an end to the Flynn investigation and publicly clearing Trump."

Lmao smoke screens for russia, what a joke. Were the sanctions put in place? Has he bombed the hell out of Syria? That's not why he fired Comey, you made that up. He fired Comey because he was a serial leaker and a political hack. The Clinton investigation proved that and I can't wait to see the Inspector General report on how much illegal shit went down there.

"I doubt Mueller is surprised that Russian nationals aren't jumping to plead guilty. But he had enough evidence to convince both a grand jury, and to convince the Trump administration to sanction the 13 people indicted."

Ummmm.. They didn't have to show up at all, they are Russian Nationals dude. They showed up because it's obviously bullshit, "a smoke screen" lol. If they were guilty why would they show up in court? That makes no sense. Yes he is surprised, did you see him scrambling trying to get a delay on the trial because "They weren't properly served their papers"? What a pathetic joke lol. The defendants are standing there in court and he's worried about how they were served. The judge laughed him and denied his request and now he has to show them his evidence. He's worried, don't doubt it.

"I would say that "process crimes" have something to do with Russian Collusion when the process crime you plead guilty to was lying to the FBI about meeting with a Russian emissary about helping your campaign. As was the case with Papadopoulos."

It has nothing to do with Russian collusion. It's not illegal to talk to Russians, what a stupid thing to say. A process crime is nothing, "Did you talk to this russian this day", No, "Well i have a transcript where you said this, you're lying" boom process crime. If you lie about what you ate for breakfast it can be a process crime for a mob lawyer like meuller. They were bankrupting and pressuring Flynn to flip on Trump. That's the whole purpose of that. There is no evidence of Flynn getting help from Russians, zero. You have nothing.

Don't get me started on papadopolous... Are you reading all this crap about the FBI putting informants in Trump's campaign to prey on little pipsqueeks like papadopolous... I think even your New York Gospel has admitted that much. What a shitshow that is, the more we learn about this investigation the more it looks like we live in a police state.

"I never said firing Comey was obstruction of justice. I'm not a prosecutor or a lawyer, so that's not for me to determine. I certainly think it should be investigated though."


I think a lot of shit should be investigated lol. No, it's not for anyone to determine, it's the law. The President runs the executive branch, he could fire anyone he wants. He could fire mueller if he wanted but that wouldn't be the brightest thing to do politically. Nobody liked Comey, The dems were trying to fire Comey and blamed Clinton's loss on him. They don't have any evidence, just let them waste tax dollars for 10 years who cares.

"Look how far we've come. A few hours ago, you said the Russia investigation was a joke with no evidence. And you proudly proclaimed that you go "straight to the source" and skip media interpretation."


It is a joke, you still don't have any evidence and you haven't changed my mind lol. Yup, I can go to a news source I hate if the source checks out. I don't care.

"The "joke" investigation has produced tangible results. Those results are backed by evidence that satisfied grand juries, prosecutors, judges, and even some members of the Trump administration apparently. Let's focus in on two concepts. Evidence, and Primary Sources."


No it hasn't lol. Process crimes? Oh really what evidence? You still haven't mentioned it. Yes lets focus on those, No evidence, unknown sources, felony leaks and illegal unmaskings. We covered that.

"When I call Flynn and Papadopoulos felons, I have federal documentation of that. Pleas that answer indictments that were backed by evidence."
They aren't convicted felons. They have plead guilty to process crimes, lying to the FBI. There is no evidence that they colluded with russians.

"You just baselessly called James Comey a felon. Where is your source for that? Where is your evidence?"

Baselessly lol? Comey himself said he leaked classified intel to his professor friend in order to get a special counsel going. That's just the leaks he admitted to. That is a felony, period.  Just like Clinton sending classified emails through a private server that was hacked by the Russians. Of course they havent plead guilty because they're not on trial. That investigation lasted 2 weeks and there was a mountain of evidence. "nothing to see here!".They are allowed to do whatever they want, apparently...

He is as much a "felon" as Flynn who hasn't even gone to trial yet. It's okay for you to call people felons who aren't convicted but I can't? Okay that's the hypocrisy I talked about in my first post. Flynn could reverse his plea tomorrow and he should. Also the special counsel run by Comey's long time friend, mueller lol. That and the whole "whatever hurricane" nonsense, the little sect of anti-trump FBI and intelligence officials... That's more collusion than anything they have unearthed. That's worse than russian collusion, we have a sitting administration trying to influence elections by targeting the opposition party. That's insane and a first for the country.

"You're doing everything you accuse the media of doing, but so much more blatantly. Proudly displaying ignorance is in vogue these days I guess."

Well first of all I'm not journalist and I'm not held to the same standard. I still have more integrity and objectivity than all of them combined, their ethics are a joke. I'm not a special pleader for Trump. I'm a realist and this investigation and the media he trashes is full of scumbags.  If Trump had the FBI and CIA plot against the next Democrat running for president i would be saying the same thing about him. You were doing so good and you had to go back to your weak deflections, that's pretty sad.



Machiavellian said:
massimus said:

Right the Russian collusion story happened as soon as they realized Hillary didn’t win. If she would have won nothing would have been brought up.

Oh yeah the 13 Russian nationals that plead not guilty to the surprise of mueller. It’s quite amusing to watch him scramble for evidence, especially seeing as one of the companies he indicted didn’t exist at the time. He never thought they would show up.

Oh “process crimes” as in lying to the fbi. As in having nothing to do with Russian collusion. Flynn plead guilty because they were bankrupting him lmao! What a load of crap. The FBI even said they didn’t think he was lying.

Firing the fbi director was not obstruction of justice. The president has every right to fire whoever he wants. That’s a load of crap seeing as the DOJ is still investigating the matter long after that goober got fired. The democrats wanted him fired in the previous administration. He’s an incompetent buffoon and a felony leaker. All this talk about felonies, let’s talk about real ones.

I know exactly what I’m talking about, you’re not as smart or well read as you think you are because you read the New York Times. How about sticking to the facts so we can have a reasonable conversation without the ignorant projecting jabs.

What you are saying is that you did not pay attention that the FBI was looking at multiple people within Trump team BEFORE the election, Before Trump announced his Candidacy.  So you conveintenly just either did not know, threw that part out or did not care.  What I see is either selective reading or only reading one source because it justify your opinion.  Either way, there is a mountain of Evidence out there that things started because Trump himself got in the way, thus making him a person of interest.

Having the right to fire anyone you want is one thing.  Firing the person who is investigating you well that seems like a conflict of interest no matter how you try to sugar coat that.  Maybe the laws should be changed because I do not care who is President, if there is probable cause to look into any criminal endeavor even if its the President, then it should not be easily stopped by firing the person doing the investigation.  Also you seem to forget that Trump himself went on National TV and literally stated he fired Comey because of that 'Russia Thing".  He had a note from Rosenstein where he could have easily just kept to the story but NO, he wanted the attention of firing Comey.  How DUMB can he be.  You are trying to defend a person who continue to make dumb mistakes after another.  Mueller would be home eating rice cakes if Trump kept to the story. Why don't you put the blame where it belongs and stop trying to give this man a pass for every dumb mistake he makes as if he is infallible.

Now that we see things keep going and another person Trump has to say has little role in his organization like Cohen.  How many people seem to keep coming up compromised to the point where you want to find out how much swamp meat Trump surrounded himself with.  

Uhhh.. Who was in the Trump campaign before he announced his candidacy? If somebody in his campaign was being investigated before Trump picked them then how does that prove Russian collusion? There is no mountain of evidence, you haven't named a single thing yet? If there was a mountain you surely could name one thing right?

Comey wasn't investigating Trump, the special counsel is and it's not a criminal investigation, it's a counter intelligence operation. Trump could fire someone who was investigating him, that's well within his authority as president. The FBI is nowhere in the constitution. Has firing Comey stopped the investigation? Obviously not right? The DOJ is still going strong with no evidence lol.

Im not defending Trump or giving him a pass on anything. I'm talking shit about the Russia investigation because you have no evidence.

Oh yeah, "using campaign funds to pay off a pornstar" has fallen really far from the Russian collusion tree. It shows how desperate you are for anything, GIVE ME SOMETHING PLEASE! a process crime, anything! You really showed the president by raiding his lawyers office!



Machiavellian said:
massimus said:

 

“You have no proof that he didn’t”

 

well fortunately I don’t have to prove a negative. If they had anything it would have been leaked by now. Literally everything else has. Yes same tired arguments I agree. You. Have. No. Evidence.

What you just said means absolutely nothing.  They will bring what they have when they have concluded their investigation and not any sooner just to please you or anyone else opinion.  If you have any clue how Mueller goes about his business maybe you should do more research on how Mueller took down John Gotti.  This isn't going to be a week investigation as there are way to many moving parts.  Each part has to be investigate properly but mainly what it looks like Mueller is doing is following the money.  Before he touch Trump, you can be sure he will have probable cause.  As we have seen with Cohen, following the money brings up all kinds of crap. Now that the FBI can look into those documents they pulled from Cohen, now President Trump wants to investigate the FBI....LOL.  Lets see what gets turned up in these documents since Cohen played a VERY small role as a Lawyer for Trump.  His own words again coming back to slap him in the face because he doesn't know when to shut up.  Keep giving this fool a pass because no one else is.  If anything they are just waiting on another dumb slip up.

What you have said means absolutely nothing lol. They will bring what they have when they have concluded that nothing happened in 10 years. No, they are leaking everything to please you. The little crumbs that the media gets so excited about, all of these "bombshells" that has only made his approval numbers go up. Maybe you should do some research on how mueller let innocent people rot and die in jail to protect his informant in the anthrax case.

 

Yeah what has raiding Cohen's office turned up? Evidence of russian collusion? NO lmao... I don't care about Trump tweets or his rallies, I only care about policy and the shit that effects me. I'm not a child who is triggered by twitter wars. His mouth is of no concern to me.



Why is the tax plan a positive for Trump?

Deficit is growing...
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-republicans-growing-deficit/

...while wage growth is still anemic.
https://www.epi.org/nominal-wage-tracker/

And corporations are using their new money on stock buybacks at a record rate.
http://time.com/money/5267940/companies-spending-trump-tax-cuts-stock-buybacks/