APP - The case above plain politics. It’s the ethics that count more.

[Uncensored2008]

Stop. I’ve listed many of his wrongs against others on pages like these, including here, and you just say, “Never happened.”

Bunk.

You are pilloried daily, not just be me, but by everyone for posting about your hatred of Trump from an "everyone knows" position. You assume that since you saw it on MSNBC you don't need to support your claims.

Despite the fact that it’s all been heavily documented and much of it been vetted through our legal system. His victims number in the thousands. The amounts taken from them in the hundreds of millions. He’s now blown people up who he hadn’t even proven to a level of probable cause had committed any crime, and the crime he accused them of (drug smuggling) isn’t a capital offense. He’s started a war.

ROFL

More general sleaze and slander. I understand that you HATE TWUMP - you keep starting threads to vent said hatred. But the above diatribe contains only one specific claim - that TWUMP "started a war."

Is that true? You offer nothing to support the claim - which you virtually never do.

But DID TWUMP "start a war?"

This assumes two points;

1. That there is a war in Iran
2. That hostilities began during the Trump administration and were instigated by Trump - that Iran is innocent of wrongdoing.

Are either or both or these true?

Was the bombing campaign last March a "war?"

War is often defined as {a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations} (BTW, this is known as "supporting an argument.) So from this, it is NOT a war in that it is undeclared. Though I would lean to the fact that it was limited and confined to aerial bombardment to say it falls short.

Secondly, did hostilities with Iran start with Trump? I understand that for the left, every ill in human history and possibly beyond is because TWUMP; but the USA has been in a state of conflict with Iran since 1979. Iran killed over 40,000 Americans between 1979 and 2025.

Iranian and Iranian-Backed Attacks Against Americans (1979-Present)

Armed conflict between the United States and Iran did not begin in 2026, but instead has deep roots that extend back to the 1979 Islamic Revolution. For nearly five decades, the clerical regime in Tehran...

www.fdd.org

(The above is known as a "citation." It directly addresses and confirms the claim I made. Far different than a dump of 30 hate site links that are unrelated to the specific topic.)

So in fact, this conflict has run nearly 50 years.

So what is it; do you have a memory problem or is it you just won’t acknowledge the obvious?

I deal in facts, not the prejudice and defamation you of the left engage in.

Provide facts occasionally - you'll do better in these debates.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Bunk.

You are pilloried daily, not just be me, but by everyone for posting about your hatred of Trump from an "everyone knows" position. You assume that since you saw it on MSNBC you don't need to support your claims.

“Everyone” consists of you and a very small (four people in total) number of clones almost precisely like you. They deny the obvious. Including constantly being told that the source of my comments aren’t MSNOW but court cases, books by Trump insiders (family member, staffers), investigative journalists, etc. and so forth. Given links to things like the 278-e firm that lists Trump’s stock purchases while in office this last 18 months and other documentation of his actions.

More general sleaze and slander.

Not sleaze or slander. Just reporting truths based on documentation.

Secondly, did hostilities with Iran start with Trump? I understand that for the left, every ill in human history and possibly beyond is because TWUMP; but the USA has been in a state of conflict with Iran since 1979. Iran killed over 40,000 Americans between 1979 and 2025.

Iranian and Iranian-Backed Attacks Against Americans (1979-Present)

Armed conflict between the United States and Iran did not begin in 2026, but instead has deep roots that extend back to the 1979 Islamic Revolution. For nearly five decades, the clerical regime in Tehran...

www.fdd.org

(The above is known as a "citation." It directly addresses and confirms the claim I made. Far different than a dump of 30 hate site links that are unrelated to the specific topic.)

Stop with the bull crap. I’ve cited many sources. You just say, ‘False. Fake news.”

So in fact, this conflict has run nearly 50 years.

Pretty weak.

No one’s saying different but Trump made it an ongoing shooting situation. There’s a difference you are, as usual, refusing to acknowledge.

I deal in facts, not the prejudice and defamation you of the left engage in.

You deal in denial of fact. Let’s test it.

Did the courts find Trump embezzled from his own charity? Use donations to it to purchase a six foot portrait of himself. Make repairs to his own buildings?

How about dud they find he was directly involved in a fraudulent university and identified several thousand victims and require Trump personally reimburse them for the tort he committed?

Maybe this, did a court determine Trump had lied to his bankers and insurers and the state of New York to the point they ordered almost $500 million in recompense for his actions and greatly restricted his abilty to conduct real estate business in New York State?

We could go so much deeper, but let’s start with that.

 

[Uncensored2008]

“Everyone” consists of you and a very small (four people in total) number of clones almost precisely like you. They deny the obvious. Including constantly being told that the source of my comments aren’t MSNOW but court cases, books by Trump insiders (family member, staffers), investigative journalists, etc. and so forth. Given links to things like the 278-e firm that lists Trump’s stock purchases while in office this last 18 months and other documentation of his actions.

You find Mary Trump credible? I understand she is doing porn now. Anything for a buck.

But again, you're flinging generic shit and avoiding specific claims - because you know that if you list specifics you'll be instantly refuted.

Not sleaze or slander. Just reporting truths based on documentation.

Documentation that exists only in your imagination.

You post nothing but sleaze and slander, Goebbels level demagoguery.

Stop with the bull crap. I’ve cited many sources. You just say, ‘False. Fake news.” \

Dumping a dozen unrelated URLS to Marxist hate sites isn't "citing" anything.

In a formal paper, footnotes to specific citations are fine - but need to be placed where the claim is made. APA and Chicago formatting both require all claims to be cited.

On a message board, in-line citation is more appropriate, follow the claim directly with one or more links substantiating the veracity of said claim

Pretty weak.

No one’s saying different but Trump made it an ongoing shooting situation. There’s a difference you are, as usual, refusing to acknowledge.

You are ducking the facts that refuted you. This is why you avoid specifics. You know that I, or someone like me, will destroy the hating points you copy from the Marxist sites.

You deal in denial of fact. Let’s test it.

"Fact" being defined as "the party line."

Did the courts find Trump embezzled from his own charity?

No, as you well know because I proved it.

Use donations to it to purchase a six foot portrait of himself.

No. The portrait was purchased by the operating committee with no involvement by your president - as is customary for such charities. Bill and Melinda Gates, Barack and Michelle Obama, The Clinton Foundation - ALL have (had) portraits of the founders.

Make repairs to his own buildings?

You think building maintenance is unusual or illegal?

What whackjob Marxist hate site are you getting this shit from? We don't know, because you NEVER support your slander and defamation with citations.

How about dud they find he was directly involved in a fraudulent university and identified several thousand victims and require Trump personally reimburse them for the tort he committed?

No.

Despite being corrected, and even admitting that you were posting falsehoods on this subject, you persist in outright lying.

Trump Wealth Institute and Trump Entrepreneur Initiative LLC, referred to as "Trump University" was never an institution of higher learning, was never portrayed as a college or university. Never sought nor claimed accreditation. Never offered nor claimed to offer degree programs of any sort nor college credits.

All it was, was a real estate seminar.

You know this, as I've proven it to you already - yet you persist in outright lying about it.

Nor was there a finding of Tort - you are directly lying. A settlement was reached where the LLC paid $25 million - no finding of liability nor order.
You know this, as I've provided you the information before.

Maybe this, did a court determine Trump had lied to his bankers and insurers and the state of New York to the point they ordered almost $500 million in recompense for his actions and greatly restricted his abilty to conduct real estate business in New York State?

You mean corrupt cunt EnGöring fraudulently claiming the Mar-A-Lago golf club was worth less than 10% of what an adjacent vacant lot sold for?

And Goldman- Sachs testified under oath that Trump was TRUTHFUL and provided accurate valuation. Scumbag EnGöring lied and engaged in fraud.

{
Forbes has significantly increased its valuation of President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate to approximately $560 million, more than triple its 2018 estimate and nearly $190 million higher than the publication’s own figure from just one year ago.

The update appears in Forbes’ latest billionaire rankings released this month. The magazine noted that Mar-a-Lago, purchased by Trump in 1985 for roughly $10 million, has benefited from its status as the “winter White House” and strong demand for the exclusive Palm Beach club.}

Forbes Values Mar-a-Lago at $560 Million, Undercutting New York Fraud Trial Assessment

The Forbes assessment provides an independent, market-based counterpoint to the trial figures. Real estate experts and Palm Beach brokers have long argued the club’s unique prestige, oceanfront location, and private membership model support a far higher value than the tax-assessor figure used in...

rwtnews.com

This is a cite - notice it is contemporary and specific to the claim.

We could go so much deeper, but let’s start with that.

This is why you avoid specifics and NEVER support anything. Once you start bleating the hating points from the Marxist sites that do your thinking, it's a simple matter to refute you. These lies you chant have long since been debunked.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

You find Mary Trump credible? I understand she is doing porn now. Anything for a buck.

She’s contemplating writing a romance novel. How did that become porn?

But again, you're flinging generic shit and avoiding specific claims - because you know that if you list specifics you'll be instantly refuted.

Specific claims not founded in fact, but the subject of 4chan level nonsense. It’s conspiracy bullcrap.

Documentation that exists only in your imagination.

No. It exists in the court documents that are part of that very public record you keep denying exists.

Dumping a dozen unrelated URLS to Marxist hate sites isn't "citing" anything.

Major news publications, government documents, court records… real commie stuff.

In a formal paper, footnotes to specific citations are fine - but need to be placed where the claim is made. APA and Chicago formatting both require all claims to be cited.

Like you’re doing that? This is a website forum. Casual debate. It’s not a doctorate dissertation. Get real.

You are ducking the facts that refuted you.

I’m answering the nonsense, just as I’m doing here. Giving others following along to see just how far you’ll go to refute the obvious. The rest of us recognize these court cases took place. Their findings. That he books exist, publish by long standing publishing houses with lawyers and fact checkers on staff to vet what they publish to prevent their being sued.

No, as you well know because I proved it.

What did, ‘You are lying, you post Marxist MSNOW, party line… blah-blah-blah prove?

No. The portrait was purchased by the operating committee with no involvement by your president - as is customary for such charities. Bill and Melinda Gates, Barack and Michelle Obama, The Clinton Foundation - ALL have (had) portraits of the founders.

Not 0aid for with the donations of the charity they aren’t.

You think building maintenance is unusual or illegal?

Not paid for with charitable contributions they aren’t.

What whackjob Marxist hate site are you getting this shit from?

The court cases where the Trump was found culpable of diverting charitable contributions to pay for things charitable donations are legal to be used for, and the state required he make restitution and was banned from further charitable foundations activity without oversight by others with authority to limit his actions.

We don't know, because you NEVER support your slander and defamation with citations.

That’s a bold faced lie.

All it was, was a real estate seminar.

Yeah, the court orders millions in restitution to plaintiffs because, you know, Trump was giving a seminar.

You example a specific type of Trump supporter: hardcore MAGA.

They are a small group totally detached from reality. I mean deeply so. I engage you to allow others to see just how deep that disconnect is and you’ve not disappointed.

Why do I do so. It’s because you folks are dangerous. You put an autocratic, pathological malignant narcissist in a place of real power. That’s beyond being unaware and a bit challenging. It’s messing with the firmament. The foundational pillars of this republic.

 

[Uncensored2008]

She’s contemplating writing a romance novel. How did that become porn?

ROFL

Specific claims not founded in fact, but the subject of 4chan level nonsense. It’s conspiracy bullcrap.

None of your claims are specific, much less fact.

You repeat in broad strokes what you think the Marxist hate sites you frequent at claiming.

But again, you NEVER post cites to support specific claims - ever.

No. It exists in the court documents that are part of that very public record you keep denying exists.

If it did, you would post it.

It exists only in your hate-filled fantasies.

You never support your claims, because you can't.

Major news publications, government documents, court records… real commie stuff.

Like you’re doing that? This is a website forum. Casual debate. It’s not a doctorate dissertation. Get real.

I cite my claims routinely. Most people here do. You don't. You seem unfamiliar with the process, or even what a cite is.

THIS is NOT a cite for my claim;

https://www.reddit.com/r/demsocialists/comments/18b2uvs/why_are_liberals_so_stupid

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/demsocialists/comments/18b2uvs/why_are_liberals_so_stupid/


Notice it doesn't address the claim that arguments should be cited at all, much less support it.

This IS a cite for my claim;

{
Supporting claims with citations in writing is essential because citations lend credibility to your arguments and demonstrate that your ideas are backed by established research. They also help maintain academic integrity by giving credit to original sources and allowing readers to trace the evolution of ideas.}

Citation - How to Connect Evidence to Your Claims - Writing Commons

As you begin to incorporate evidence into your papers, it is important that you clearly connect that evidence to your own claims. Though connections may seem obvious to you, they may not be obvious to your readers. In this article, you will learn a few ways to link evidence to your arguments.

writingcommons.org

Do you grasp the difference?

An angry post with a dozen links to HATE TWUMP rants is not a citation, it does not directly support anything, other than the thesis that you are driven by emotion and ignore facts.

I’m answering the nonsense, just as I’m doing here. Giving others following along to see just how far you’ll go to refute the obvious. The rest of us recognize these court cases took place. Their findings. That he books exist, publish by long standing publishing houses with lawyers and fact checkers on staff to vet what they publish to prevent their being sued.

You are welcome to your opinions. But most of them are false and based on falsehoods. You post slander and defamation. You do not and cannot support the claims you make.

What did, ‘You are lying, you post Marxist MSNOW, party line… blah-blah-blah prove?

Again, I provide credible sources to prove you are lying and WHY you are lying.

Not 0aid for with the donations of the charity they aren’t.

???

False - ignorantly so.

Not paid for with charitable contributions they aren’t.

False - ignorantly so.

You are so clouded by hate that you're not thinking rationally. Every charity - every business - has a budget for building maintenance. I know you hate Trump, but this is just silly.

The court cases where the Trump was found culpable of diverting charitable contributions to pay for things charitable donations are legal to be used for, and the state required he make restitution and was banned from further charitable foundations activity without oversight by others with authority to limit his actions.

Again, you are ignoring the facts to attack the object of your hatred.

That’s a bold faced lie.

Nope, I don't lie. I also support my claims with citations - you do not.

Yeah, the court orders millions in restitution to plaintiffs because, you know, Trump was giving a seminar.

You are lying. The court ordered nothing. The LLC settled with the plaintiffs (two) and the case was dismissed.

You example a specific type of Trump supporter: hardcore MAGA.

No, I exemplify a person who deals in facts and evidence, rather than spewing emotion laces slander.

They are a small group totally detached from reality. I mean deeply so. I engage you to allow others to see just how deep that disconnect is and you’ve not disappointed.

Why do I do so. It’s because you folks are dangerous. You put an autocratic, pathological malignant narcissist in a place of real power. That’s beyond being unaware and a bit challenging. It’s messing with the firmament. The foundational pillars of this republic.

You can support none of your demagoguery - nor do you support anything you claim.

You lied about Trump U - again.
You lied about the Trump Foundation - again.
You lied about the value of Mar-A-Lago - again.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

ROFL



None of your claims are specific, much less fact.

You repeat in broad strokes what you think the Marxist hate sites you frequent at claiming.

But again, you NEVER post cites to support specific claims - ever.



If it did, you would post it.

It exists only in your hate-filled fantasies.

You never support your claims, because you can't.



I cite my claims routinely. Most people here do. You don't. You seem unfamiliar with the process, or even what a cite is.

THIS is NOT a cite for my claim;

https://www.reddit.com/r/demsocialists/comments/18b2uvs/why_are_liberals_so_stupid

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/demsocialists/comments/18b2uvs/why_are_liberals_so_stupid/


Notice it doesn't address the claim that arguments should be cited at all, much less support it.

This IS a cite for my claim;

{
Supporting claims with citations in writing is essential because citations lend credibility to your arguments and demonstrate that your ideas are backed by established research. They also help maintain academic integrity by giving credit to original sources and allowing readers to trace the evolution of ideas.}

Citation - How to Connect Evidence to Your Claims - Writing Commons

As you begin to incorporate evidence into your papers, it is important that you clearly connect that evidence to your own claims. Though connections may seem obvious to you, they may not be obvious to your readers. In this article, you will learn a few ways to link evidence to your arguments.

writingcommons.org

Do you grasp the difference?

An angry post with a dozen links to HATE TWUMP rants is not a citation, it does not directly support anything, other than the thesis that you are driven by emotion and ignore facts.



You are welcome to your opinions. But most of them are false and based on falsehoods. You post slander and defamation. You do not and cannot support the claims you make.



Again, I provide credible sources to prove you are lying and WHY you are lying.



???

False - ignorantly so.



False - ignorantly so.

You are so clouded by hate that you're not thinking rationally. Every charity - every business - has a budget for building maintenance. I know you hate Trump, but this is just silly.



Again, you are ignoring the facts to attack the object of your hatred.




Nope, I don't lie. I also support my claims with citations - you do not.



You are lying. The court ordered nothing. The LLC settled with the plaintiffs (two) and the case was dismissed.



No, I exemplify a person who deals in facts and evidence, rather than spewing emotion laces slander.



You can support none of your demagoguery - nor do you support anything you claim.

You lied about Trump U - again.
You lied about the Trump Foundation - again.
You lied about the value of Mar-A-Lago - again.

Thanks. More of the usual from you. Its great. I love it. You are a marvelous example of the detachment from reality that is MAGA extremism.

None of what I posted are lies. Anyone can Google any of the court cases and get a full report on the outcomes.

Anyone can read any of the books written by insiders who report what Trump is like up close and personal.

Look, I am not going to go round and round with you like we've been doing out of my politeness any longer. It has reached the state of the ludicrous with some of you MAGA extremists on this denial of the obvious stuff.

There is simply too much out there are Trump's many anti-social behavior and grifting ways for it not to be obvious to any discerning person who wants to know. The slumlord history, the betrayal of family members and wives, the many, many, court cases. Its all just preponderus how it could be over looked by anyone with any brains, so its either you don't care to know OR you do know and you just aren't an ethical enough person to care.

Trump is a bad person. That is obvious. So what is left to determine is if the MAGA extreme are just that unaware, of if they share Trump's ethics [or should I say more directly - his lack of them].

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Celebrities and politicians come to believe that they are above the law. They can act immorally and unethically, and nobody will do anything about it. Trump is nothing special here. It is just those with TDS and hatred for the Republicans in general, want an example and it's perfectly fine from their point of view if they exaggerate, nitpick, otherwise find the mote in God's eye while there's a beam in their own, to use a biblical reference.

There are plenty of examples from Congress of this. Hollywood is awash in this sort of stuff. It is not unique to Trump.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Celebrities and politicians come to believe that they are above the law. They can act immorally and unethically, and nobody will do anything about it. Trump is nothing special here. It is just those with TDS and hatred for the Republicans in general, want an example and it's perfectly fine from their point of view if they exaggerate, nitpick, otherwise find the mote in God's eye while there's a beam in their own, to use a biblical reference.

There are plenty of examples from Congress of this. Hollywood is awash in this sort of stuff. It is not unique to Trump.

Maybe in its extreme but there are many of us who aren't being over the top in pointing out this flaw in MAGA extremists as they are doing something YOU haven't acknowledged in yours above.

Trump isn't simply a celebrity or politician thinking they are above the law. Trump is one that has been given extreme power and MAGA gave it to him. That is a whole other kettle of fish my friend. He is making changes that will effect the nation for decades, if not longer.

When are you folks going to get that? You are mucking about with the firmament. The Founding Fathers would NEVER have approved of this, a placing of someone like Trump into the big chair. It was irresponsible. It is literally political malfeasance, what MAGA has wrought.

All this stuff; the tariffs, the deaths in Africa from cutting off USAID, the blowing up of people in the Caribbean. the Iran War, the Federal Agents becoming thug like and killing U.S. citizens and everything else. Trump did it but YOU made it all possible. It is on MAGA's hands. You put the pathological case into the Oval Office. History is going to see it that way, and that is how it will be taught to future generations.

It is now it is already being taught in the current events classrooms of Europe, Canada, Mexico, Central and South America.

I totally get the disdain for the Schumers and the Pelosis of the Democratic Party but you totally miss that there are the McConnells and the Johnsons every bit as bad on the Republican side of it.

Then you do something as unhinged as put someone of Trump's character and ethics, all readily DISCERNIBLE, into the Oval Office. We have political fires all over D.C. and MAGA thought it would be a great idea to elect a pyromanic Chief of the Fire Department.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Thanks. More of the usual from you. Its great. I love it. You are a marvelous example of the detachment from reality that is MAGA extremism.

None of what I posted are lies. Anyone can Google any of the court cases and get a full report on the outcomes.

Great - you make claims but will not support them.

Because you can't - and everyone here sees it.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Great - you make claims but will not support them.

I have, and you know it. Mostly on the "other sight". but here as well. One gets tired of saying the same thing over and over, and providing the same cites, over and over.

I did it enough, here-there, to prove it exists. I still point to where it is all easily found if anyone wants to go look - see I will do it again now - just google any of the court cases, read the books, the investigative news articles by non-partisan investigative journalists, listen to Trump's own words. I am just not carrying that water anymore because the case I am making isn't about the evidence I presented over and over, that proves Trump is a horrible choice for any rational person to make and grant vast power. That case is made. The case I am making now is about hardcore MAGA. I am making a case against YOU, and you all have been very helpful.

The cruelty in your responses you just can't avoid. The detachment from facts. The equivalency issues. The lack of DISCERNING, ethics and civility. That is my evidence regarding extreme MAGA.

Because you can't - and everyone here sees it.

Oh but I can, and I have, and still am. Uncensored2008, IBeDaMan, Matt Dillion and to a lesser extent Rusty Bell and T.A. Gardner are my evidence being presented. The detachment from reality. The extreme partisan loyalty. The crued responses and need to take it "there". It all points to extreme MAGA being a cult, specifically a cult of personality. All centered around devotion to a single individual. Not a political party, just one person, Trump.

The only thing left to determine is why. Is your devotion based in misunderstanding of the reality involved, the case already made to any DISCERNING person, that Trump is a very bad person and no one power should be given to, or is it that there is something off. Something in extreme MAGA that makes you as unethical in your persons as Trump himself is?

That investigation is still on going, and you folks are the evidence that will make or break it. The clock ticks, the case unfolds.

Make another post so it can proceed.

 

[Yakuda]

The Readers Digest version on why Trump is a very ethically challenged person.

He has an adult life time personal history of unethical acts all documented in the public record.

The definition of the public record are the reams of books, articles, civil and criminal court testimony, depositions under oath, Trump’s own recorded words, all of which paints a stark, vivid, picture of his comings and going’s over his adult life.

He has betrayed three wives in a very public and humiliating way. He has bankrupted companies leaving his investors in the lurch. He has stolen using fraud, some if which in uniquely ugly ways; a charity, a university. He has a wake of thousands of victims he’s taken millions of dollars from. He lies, he cheats, he grifts. That his adult life and it makes of him an undeniably very bad, unethical, person.

Now, IF we accept that the question is this:

Politics totally aside how can any person giving the power of the Presidency to such a person not be one of two things:

1) Completely naive of Trump’s abysmal track record, in which case one has to question their ability to observe the obvious. I mean it is blatantly in one’s face his bad character and horrendous behavior. One has to be able to DISCERN his lack of ethics relatively easily, or…

2) They know darn well precisely the kind if person Trump is and they gave him the most powerful elected position in the world. In which case one has to question there ethics.

Can MAGA supporters be considered ethical people themselves if they willfully gave power to a person as unethical as Donald J. Trump?

It’s a legitimate question. Its answer could well determine whether we are a society/culture in steep decline. Certainly, it would be hard to argue we are not just that if we conclude that Trump is a despicable example of humanity, that such is known, yet we made him our leader.

Again, not pot stirring. Serious question, based on what logic suggests of the situation, and just what do we do with this if I’m right? Do we even have a chance to remediate and rectify our decline, or are we too far gone?

To the question...why not especially if the other candidate is perceived by them as a greater threat to their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness? It isnt that you assume trump is "unethical" thats the problem, its how did you reach that conclusion and is it possible you could be wrong? If you have had added "in my opinion" somewhere in the question that would have changed things.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

To the question...why not especially if the other candidate is perceived by them as a greater threat to their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness? It isnt that you assume trump is "unethical" thats the problem, its how did you reach that conclusion and is it possible you could be wrong? If you have had added "in my opinion" somewhere in the question that would have changed things.

The reason I know and I can’t be wrong is what I keep saying about “the public record”. Trump has lived a very public life. He has a known history. His adult life is strewn with the evidence of his pathological nature that is the cause of his bad character and horrible ethics.

The way he betrayed his brother on his death bed when their father died and screwed over his Niece and Nephew of their share of the family inheritance of their Grandfather’s estate. The way he betrayed and publicly humiliated three wives. The constant breaking of his contractual oaths that he’s been sued more than 4000 times. His constant need to lie. It’s a compulsion. The hundreds of millions in fraud. The tens of thousands of victims.

He’s got a history only someone with a pathological issue could own.

That there are people who can see that personal history and think, “There is a guy I want to make President.”, is precisely the “stupid” Bonhoeffer was referencing.

It’s the same “stupid” that allowed the German people, with what was available to be known about Hitler and think, “That’s the guy I want leading us into our future.”, that makes it fair to connect the two even though Trump is no Hitler.

The mechanics of what got each into their nation’s highest office is the same, even if the individuals aren’t.

 

[Yakuda]

The reason I know and I can’t be wrong is what I keep saying about “the public record”. Trump has lived a very public life. He has a known history. His adult life is strewn with the evidence of his pathological nature that is the cause of his bad character and horrible ethics.

The way he betrayed his brother on his death bed when their father died and screwed over his Niece and Nephew of their share of the family inheritance of their Grandfather’s estate. The way he betrayed and publicly humiliated three wives. The constant breaking of his contractual oaths that he’s been sued more than 4000 times. His constant need to lie. It’s a compulsion. The hundreds of millions in fraud. The tens of thousands of victims.

He’s got a history only someone with a pathological issue could own.

That there are people who can see that personal history and think, “There is a guy I want to make President.”, is precisely the “stupid” Bonhoeffer was referencing.

It’s the same “stupid” that allowed the German people, with what was available to be known about Hitler and think, “That’s the guy I want leading us into our future.”, that makes it fair to connect the two even though Trump is no Hitler.

The mechanics of what got each into their nation’s highest office is the same, even if the individuals aren’t.

You dont like him. In fact you hate him. I get it. But getting info about trump from someone like you is like getting info about Jews from Palestinians. It might be right but its definitely always slanted. I take all of it with a pound of salt. A grain is utterly fucking useless.

Heres the thing we dont elect a religious leader. In 1998 in the aftermath of the Monica Lewinsky scandal where slick willie lied through his fucking teeth under oath Dr James Dobson a preacher associated with the Family Institute was addressing a crowd in Boston and he said this:

"As with many Christians around the country, Shirley and I have been in prayer for our leaders in government who must deal with the fallout from this scandal. They will need great wisdom and discernment in the days ahead. Our most serious concern, however, is not with those in Washington; it is with the American people. What has alarmed me throughout this episode has been the willingness of my fellow citizens to rationalize the President’s behavior even after they suspected, and later knew, that he was lying. Because the economy is strong, millions of people have said infidelity in the Oval Office is just a private affair--something between himself and Hillary. We heard it time and again during those months: “As long as Mr. Clinton is doing a good job, it’s nobody’s business what he does with his personal life.”

That disregard for morality is profoundly disturbing to me. Although sexual affairs have occurred often in high places, the public has never approved of such misconduct. But today, the rules by which behavior is governed appear to have been rewritten specifically for Mr. Clinton. We now know that this 50-year-old man had sexual relations repeatedly and brazenly in the White House, with a woman 27 years his junior. Then he spoke on national television while shaking his finger at the camera, and denied ever having a sexual relationship with Miss Lewinsky. He was the most powerful man in the world and she was a starry-eyed intern. That situation would not have been tolerated in any other setting — ever. And yet the apologists for the President have said endlessly, “It’s just about sex,” as though cheating on your wife was of no particular significance. But the majority of the American people replied, “I support the President.”"

Its not that you people bring this shit up thats annoying its that you think you have the right to some moral high ground when in fact you dont