Gallup: Trump is at a low and getting lower

[code1211]

There is no doubt the Russians tried to influence the outcome of the election.
The real question is, why doesn't Trump want the Russian interference investigated?

That you think that is the real question says more about you than anything else.

 

[code1211]

Rumor? No, it's actual reported information that looks like:

This is what's being investigated you goofball:
<-- Russia interfered in the U.S. election. -->
And when they looked into it, they found a crap ton of evidence associated with Trump and his campaign, in addition to of course, Trump's subsequent behavior, and tweets, and interviews, that looked like Nixon/Watergate all over again. They then had plenty of these, from all angles:

1. motive
2. cover up
3. obstruction

This is circumstantial evidence. The investigation is looking to see if there is direct evidence, or if the circumstantial evidence is explained by some non-criminal explanations.


So the FBI and now Mueller, are a lynch mob? Are you really this absurd?

So, then, no evidence. This is what I've been saying.

 

[Mach]

So, then, no evidence. This is what I've been saying.

Circumstantial evidence is, surprisingly evidence. I would have thought that the word 'evidence' gave it away, but I am dealing with a Trump supporter, oops!

So you're still wrong, as I've been saying.

 

[Removable Mind]

Probable cause? A woman screaming while being beaten behind an apartment door and a woman screaming on the floor of the Congress in a mindless rant seem to be different levels of "probable cause".

There were 30,000 emails under subpoena at the time of their destruction that seem to have slipped off the radar entirely. Was this probable cause? Was there a conspiracy created and operated to complete this?

There were Americans unmasked illegally and the unmaskers are are in no legal jeopardy. Was there a conspiracy created and operated to complete this?

These are actual crimes.

The rumors about Trump are just rumors. What was the crime?

Would you care to introduce some facts into your consideration? What is the evidence that Trump did anything?

It seems like the perpetrator has been identified and convicted. Now all we need is the crime to initiate the lynching.

.

What rumors? Denial works great for you, but doesn't negate what's going on right before your eyes.

How much longer can you use worthless, diversional comparisons to circumvent the realities around the serious issues that currently impact the Trump family and his appointed enablers?

Trump first serious mistake: Trump admits to purposely intervening in an investigation regarding improprieties by members of his campaign staff. The plot has stepped up about a dozen notches since that admission was made.

You can also avoid the reality that NOBODY connected to Trump farts without his permission. This is especially true with members of his family.

You're about to discover Trump's knowledge and role in serious accusations.

Before I forget. Trump has the power to encourage the DOJ to bring Clinton's email server debacle back before the public eye and seek to officially declare her possession of the server a crime punishable by imprisonment. What's stopping him? He pledged to take her down during the presidential debates.

 

[Dittohead not!]

That you think that is the real question says more about you than anything else.

Exactly. It says that I'm a logical thinker, and that I'm right most of the time.

 

[Linc]

Circumstantial evidence is, surprisingly evidence. I would have thought that the word 'evidence' gave it away, but I am dealing with a Trump supporter, oops!

So you're still wrong, as I've been saying.

The only polls that mean anything to me are 'STATE' approval polls, such as a recent 41-51 approval in Wisconsin by Marquette. Other polls are out there for TX, PA, NC, etc.

Conservative Trafalgar Group had the best polling on the 2016 election, missing only on NH, NV, and WI, so I watch them now.

For next year, my priorities in order are the U. S. House, Governors, state legislatures, and holding serve in the Senate, though we could all make a strong case for going balls to the wall the next two elections to flip state legislatures before redistricting, especially with an estimated 11 or so CDs switching states .

 

[slick]

the election polls were correct. Clinton whooped trumps ass in the general election. I get so weary of having to educate right wingers

Typical nonsense from you! Did you even bother to read the post you responded to, those two mainstream media polls
had Clinton ahead by 11 & 14 points less than a month before the election & you think they were correct, OMG.

BTW, when the election was called for Trump at that time he was ahead in the popular vote that's all you need to know.
California votes later came in in dribs & drabs. Clinton won California by over 4,000,000 votes after the fat lady had sung.
What does that tell you?

 

[haymarket]

I saw no fact, only your opinions.

So then you admit its ridiculous for you to ask me to supply evidence for statements that you see clearly as NOT statements of fact but only as opinion .

 

[haymarket]

I don't believe anything being reported by the mainstream media about Trump, most especially the polls. I see no flagging of support for Trump at all. What I do see is increasing anger at the media about the fake news they put out.

Of course you don't. That is to be expected.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Until the next election, the only number that counts is GOP rank & file approval numbers - which still seem pretty strong.

So for now, Trump's impervious. He's Superman, and no one can touch him.

It is america itself that is at a low and getting lower.

 

[katzgar]

Typical nonsense from you! Did you even bother to read the post you responded to, those two mainstream media polls
had Clinton ahead by 11 & 14 points less than a month before the election & you think they were correct, OMG.

BTW, when the election was called for Trump at that time he was ahead in the popular vote that's all you need to know.
California votes later came in in dribs & drabs. Clinton won California by over 4,000,000 votes after the fat lady had sung.
What does that tell you?

tells me clinton whooped trumps ass by close to 3 million votes.

 

[slick]

tells me clinton whooped trumps ass by close to 3 million votes.

So Clinton won California by 4 million votes & Trump won the combined votes of all the other 49 states by ovor
1 million votes & won the election before California votes were even counted electorally for Clinton.

Seems to me you have a unique way of processing the situation. I bet if your favorite baseball team lost a
game 4 to 3, & the winning team got 2 rins in the 1st inning and 2 runs in the 6th inning and your team got
3 runs in the 4th inning according to your sense of fairness your team won because it had the more runs in one inning
than the winning team.

California is an oddity, it's 62% minority! Of course they hate Trump who is very re-actionary to the loose
immigration policies of that state! If you want the rest of America to look like Cal of course your likely
to effort pretzel like contortions to the legitimacy of the Trump presidency.

Just the thought of Trump putting even one more justice on the Supreme Court is treasonous to many
of your fellow members of the 'resistance.'

 

[katzgar]

So Clinton won California by 4 million votes & Trump won the combined votes of all the other 49 states by ovor
1 million votes & won the election before California votes were even counted electorally for Clinton.

Seems to me you have a unique way of processing the situation. I bet if your favorite baseball team lost a
game 4 to 3, & the winning team got 2 rins in the 1st inning and 2 runs in the 6th inning and your team got
3 runs in the 4th inning according to your sense of fairness your team won because it had the more runs in one inning
than the winning team.

California is an oddity, it's 62% minority! Of course they hate Trump who is very re-actionary to the loose
immigration policies of that state! If you want the rest of America to look like Cal of course your likely
to effort pretzel like contortions to the legitimacy of the Trump presidency.

Just the thought of Trump putting even one more justice on the Supreme Court is treasonous to many
of your fellow members of the 'resistance.'

there is one number that matters and you are trying to avoid it. clinton whooped trumps ass by 2.8 million votes...see how that works?

 

[slick]

there is one number that matters and you are trying to avoid it. clinton whooped trumps ass by 2.8 million votes...see how that works?

Yea, I see how that works, it's like this. Clinton is for the second time proven as a loser & to this day seems to
have a lower approval rating than Trump. Furthermore there was a take on the election about 2 months ago as I recall
stating that if the election was held at that time Trump would have beaten Mrs. Clinton even more decidedly!

 

[katzgar]

Yea, I see how that works, it's like this. Clinton is for the second time proven as a loser & to this day seems to
have a lower approval rating than Trump. Furthermore there was a take on the election about 2 months ago as I recall
stating that if the election was held at that time Trump would have beaten Mrs. Clinton even more decidedly!

The fact is she whooped trumps ass in the general election, your games are just that games

 

[code1211]

Circumstantial evidence is, surprisingly evidence. I would have thought that the word 'evidence' gave it away, but I am dealing with a Trump supporter, oops!

So you're still wrong, as I've been saying.

The trouble is, you are referring to unrelated garbage that is not evidence.

I can call dog poop "caviar", but it's still dog poop.

You have not shown and evidence against Trump.

 

[Mach]

The trouble is, you are referring to unrelated garbage that is not evidence.

I get that you think circumstantial evidence is unrelated garbage that is not evidence. Even though it's evidence.
I understand that, you can post it over and over, and I'll still understand it. It does wonders for your credibility and rep.

 

[code1211]

.

What rumors? Denial works great for you, but doesn't negate what's going on right before your eyes.

How much longer can you use worthless, diversional comparisons to circumvent the realities around the serious issues that currently impact the Trump family and his appointed enablers?

Trump first serious mistake: Trump admits to purposely intervening in an investigation regarding improprieties by members of his campaign staff. The plot has stepped up about a dozen notches since that admission was made.

You can also avoid the reality that NOBODY connected to Trump farts without his permission. This is especially true with members of his family.

You're about to discover Trump's knowledge and role in serious accusations.

Before I forget. Trump has the power to encourage the DOJ to bring Clinton's email server debacle back before the public eye and seek to officially declare her possession of the server a crime punishable by imprisonment. What's stopping him? He pledged to take her down during the presidential debates.

Hillary's crime is defined and actually occurred.

Others are in jail for doing less than she did and they did not even have a staff of hired professionals acting with them in a conspiracy. We know that Hillary did so.

This is all I'm asking you to provide in the case of Trump.

What was the crime that actually occurred?

Please link to that crime that has caused the investigation to exist.

I keep asking. You keep failing to do so.

I conclude that there is no crime to link to. If you have a case, make it.

 

[code1211]

Exactly. It says that I'm a logical thinker, and that I'm right most of the time.

That you think so is beyond question.

 

[code1211]

So then you admit its ridiculous for you to ask me to supply evidence for statements that you see clearly as NOT statements of fact but only as opinion .

I agree that asking you for facts is ridiculous.

 

[code1211]

I get that you think circumstantial evidence is unrelated garbage that is not evidence. Even though it's evidence.
I understand that, you can post it over and over, and I'll still understand it. It does wonders for your credibility and rep.

I only have one request that you seem unable to satisfy:

Please link to the actual crime that occurred.

 

[haymarket]

I agree that asking you for facts is ridiculous.

What you should do is learn the difference between an alleged statement of fact and statement of opinion.

I would think you already know that but you just made a mistake and now you cannot stop digging .

 

[Removable Mind]

Hillary's crime is defined and actually occurred.

Others are in jail for doing less than she did and they did not even have a staff of hired professionals acting with them in a conspiracy. We know that Hillary did so.

This is all I'm asking you to provide in the case of Trump.

What was the crime that actually occurred?

Please link to that crime that has caused the investigation to exist.

I keep asking. You keep failing to do so.

I conclude that there is no crime to link to. If you have a case, make it.

The investigation is based on probable cause that a crime or crimes have been committed...thanks to Trump's admission on national TV that he fired Comey to stop his investigation into his campaign staff's potential relationship with Russia. I've said that so many times that you should be dreaming about my repeated statement to that fact.

Since that time Donald Jr has pissed in his peanut butter by he and his band on conspiracist meeting to gather nail Hillary met with Russians and god only knows what else.

There reasons to believe Trump and his family's business finances will open up a whole new chapter to the links to Russia.

There's more links than posts in this thread (and all others like it) that the investigation(s) are based on probable cause. You've read the probable cause(s) many times.

Every time you logon to the Internet there's news linked to the investigation AND THE REASONS FOR the investigation on every major search engine. Your favorite news site...even Fox.

Your denial is blocking your ability to comprehend these headlines that are virtually everywhere and I've repeatedly stated the reason the investigation came into being over and over.

You can go the the DOJ site and review as much information as you want about everything you're denying.

 

[Mach]

I only have one request that you seem unable to satisfy:
Please link to the actual crime that occurred.

That's not true, you were rambling on about "no evidence", and I corrected you twice on it.
Now you're right back to wailing about "what crime".
And the very first response I wrote detailed why your boy Trump is being investigated by Special Counsel Mueller, and possibly in some limited fashion, by the house and senate "investigations".

Removed Mind just responded why Trump is being investigated, in case you've forgotten, his post suffices too. I mean, if you've watched or read the news at all in the past 4 or so months, you'd also know.

 

[code1211]

That's not true, you were rambling on about "no evidence", and I corrected you twice on it.
Now you're right back to wailing about "what crime".
And the very first response I wrote detailed why your boy Trump is being investigated by Special Counsel Mueller, and possibly in some limited fashion, by the house and senate "investigations".

Removed Mind just responded why Trump is being investigated, in case you've forgotten, his post suffices too. I mean, if you've watched or read the news at all in the past 4 or so months, you'd also know.

So, no crime to investigate, then.

I keep asking. You keep dodging.

All I'm asking for is why is this investigation under way?

In Watergate, there was a break in. No such thing here.

What was the crime?