A Book about the Anti-Trump Conspiracy

If you are attacking me PC style I will certainly focus on YOU as attacking me PC style.

And you still have presented no evidence any anti-Trump conspiracy is not just wilful mass delusion.Faith you have made 80 posts so far in this thread, your very own thread, where you wanted to discuss a particular book and have yet to address the utter absurdities and actual nonsense found in the second paragraph of the first page.Do you have any evidence there is any anti-Trump conspiracy as opposed to the overwhelming evidence that the man is a failed businessman, a liar, a cheat, a boor, an unfit for polite company racist?

As I keep telling you, there's no twisting. I'm talking about Trump's own words, as recorded on video. We can see what he said. Stop the nonsense about twisting.For example, he did say that he had the biggest inaugural crowd in history. You can not deny that. There is no twisting.Is he numerically challenged? Do we want a President who can't count?Did he misspeak and doesn't have the courage to admit he was wrong? Do we want a coward for a President?Is he a bold-faced liar?If there is any good spin that you can put on that one claim, please tell us what it is instead of accusing us of using spin.And when you're finished dealing with that one example, there are plenty more.

Why do you keep changing the subject? Percy said the things I referred to in his Message 234, imposing his own opinion on things Trump said.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

We can't assassinate what isn't alive. You'd need to show examples of good character first.

You have asserted that his statements and actions were twisted yet have offered no evidence to support your assertion or to show that any anti-Trump conspiracy is NOT simply wilful mass delusion.

You are denying that even a direct quote can be distorted by being taken out of context, and even a comment like his claim of having the biggest inaugural audience if only a misimpression is being blown out of proportion, and I've even seen his impression validated somewhere. And as I believe marc9000 pointed out on the other thread, simply reporting on whatever Trump says and does shows media bias if they didn't report on the exact same things said and done by other Presidents.

You are out of your mind.; The evidence is in the statements. Learn to read.

No Faith, the statements are assertions. There must be external evidence that can support the assertions or they remain simply unsupported assertions.Where is the evidence the claimed anti-Trump conspiracy is not at best wilful delusion and more likely totally fabrication.Edited by jar, : fix quotebox

Yes indeed, I am. If you can show how a statement that 2 + 2 = 5 can be taken out of context, fire away. I told you what the implications are: he's incompetent with numbers, he's afraid to admit that he made a mistake, he's a liar, or maybe something else. None of those are "out of proportion". It's important to have a President with none of those faults. Would you hire an accountant who couldn't count? Other Presidents are irrelevant. You don't hire a pilot who can't see even if the previous pilot couldn't see. You don't hire an accountant who steals even though the previous accountant also stole.

I get it FaithIf we criticise Trump - or report news you object to - you will accuse us of peddling fake news or twisting and distorting, without caring about the truth. And the only solution is for us to stop saying things you don’t like.You on the other hand can actually do those things but we aren’t allowed to say that you are doing them.How can any sane person think we’d possibly agree to that ?

No, if you ONLY criticize Trump, and do it by taking his words out of context, and by refusing to gtive any benefit of the doubt, and certainly by changing his words, such as by saying he "wants to make America "white" rather than great, or that his entire motivation is to get rich and he doesn't care about his political promises, only keeping his base happily deluded, you are indulging in character assassination and I wish he'd sue you all for slander. .Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

No

---

It’s certainly what you’ve been doing here.

quote:

---

if you ONLY criticize Trump, and do it by taking his words out of context, and by refusing to gtive any benefit of the doubt, and certainly by changing his words, such as by saying he "wants to make America "white" rather than great, or that his entire motivation is to get rich and he doesn't care about his political promises, only keeping his base happily deluded, you are indulging in character assassination and I wish he'd sue you all for slander. .

---

Nobody is only criticising Trump. You have provided no actual evidence of anyone here taking Trumps words out of context. Trump’s greed and unethical behaviour is rather well known - consider the Trump University scam and the abuse of the Trump Foundation for example. Really Faith, you are doing an excellent job of supporting my point.And wishing for baseless lawsuits is just another example of you wanting critics of Trump to be bullied into silence.

Your posts today continue to reveal an unwillingness to respond to the substance of what people say. Accusing people of twisting or misrepresenting things or using leftist tactics isn't actual rebuttal. It seems you don't want to actually discuss your topic. You just need it as an excuse to complain about and cast aspersions at anyone whose opinion differs from your own.We believe, as do all rational people, what we see Trump saying and tweeting. Trump said just what the videos show him saying, just what the news quotes show him saying, just what the tweets show him saying, just what the documents show him saying (e.g., the agreement with Stormy Daniels), and just what the tapes (only one so far) show him saying. He did pay off (or have paid off) porn stars and playboy bunnies. He is a cheater and womanizing philanderer who covers it all up, then lies about the coverups, then lies about the lies. He did enact tariffs that are causing businesses hardships that are already causing layoffs. He did say he takes Putin's word over his own intelligent agencies. He did say the North Korean problem is solved when it isn't. He did order LBGT's out of the military. He did refuse to make his tax return public. He did attack the media as the enemy of the American people. He is continuously trying to obstruct and end the Mueller investigation. He did cut taxes for the rich, including himself. He is causing the largest deficits in US history. He refused to implement the Russian sanctions enacted by Congress until forced to. He did refuse to divest himself of his businesses and so is making money off the presidency, just as lawsuits now allege. He is anti-Muslim. He is anti-black. He does lie constantly.All this can be substantiated with videos, tweets, texts of executive orders, etc.--Percy

You can't just mix up political policies with personal failings as if they are all equivalent.As I've said, I haven't been following politics lately, but I can't miss the Trump bashing by the media and the occasional conservative opinion in the midst of the leftist bombardment. But, given this admittedly inadequate position, I'll give some opinions about your opinions:About the womanizing, Did the Left defend Clinton's womanizing? It's not something I'd want to defend but I'm more interested in his policies than his sins. This is a complicated issue. Perhaps it has some negative effects but there must also be positive effects or he wouldn't be doing it. You only give one side of it Again I don't know much about this, but I have heard conservative complaints about the politics of some in our intelligence agencies. In other words, perhaps he had good reason to prefer Putin's word. That is a work in progress with what looks like some success in spite of the intransigence of the Korean dictator. He did something at least. That is reasonable conservative policy in my opinion. He isn't required to. These dsys many of us agree that they are. There is reason to believe that Mueller is conducting a politically motivated bogus investigation. This is standard conservative policy to keep money in the hands of individuals where they use it for development and jobs instead of the government which just spends it. Not that I've heard. Obama already did a bang-up job on that one. Perhaps those were politically motivated too. I thought he'd cooperated with whatever that requirement is. However, as Pirro points out, everybody who gets into a governemt office manages to get rich, how can that be? We're talking Democrats too. Whatever Trump is doing is just keeping his businesses operating, which isn't getting rich off bribes or whatever. No he is not. This is a typical PC lie. He wants to protect the country from violent jihad. No he is not, he absolutely is not and the blacks who support him know this. This is the same sort of PC character assassination based on some specific incident that has nothing to do with race. I suspect there is a better way of understanding a lot of it. Your misinterpretations can't be substantiated, just some raw date you misunderstand, misinterpret, twist or spin.