If Trump does nothing else he has certainly brought to light the obvious fact that the tantrum throwing left just can't accept democracy. Of course his two fingers to Paris was so sweet.

mhaze,

Just because I say that Trump is screwed and note that he has committed an impeachable offence, that in no way implies that I am under the illusion that an impeachment process is already underway. That was an assumption you inserted into what I had said to make it look like I see things that aren’t there.

That’s dishonest, and as we've established once before (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7734#238224), you are dishonest.

Oh Dear...
Why exactly do we post on this forum?
Why do we do it if nobody listens anyway?
Why are people so trapped in their belief systems that you could line up a queue of people to slap sense into them and still it would not make any difference?

A few here think the truth is irrelevant and they just would just continue to believe whatever it is they believe safe in their comfort zone no matter what evidence was presented.

'Are people proud to post when all they are doing is advertising to the world their close minded belief systems and that they are uninformed ninnies?'

Lets ask some basic questions.

Can anyone explain why everyone was so against Trump and non accepting of democracy for so long?
The real reasons, do any of you even know the real reasons?
You all act like you know 'something' but what exactly do any of you know?
I'm betting next to nothing.

Now here's my problem, I could tell you the answers but still no one would listen.
So I'll make this fun.
I'll give you a link to the answers, and those who don't want to be informed and would rather be mindless jellyfish are going to be reminded everytime I have to read their uninformed crap.
That's fair isn't it?

You want to know who the 'Deep State' are?
You want to know what's really going on?
Well you'll have to watch to find out.
http://youtu.be/72t5wDZOZq8

If you'd rather be stupid muppets that think you know something when you don't know squat then don't bother watching it.
Obviously you're one of the people who already thinks they know everything, and you should continue with the 'useful idiot' approach.

Binoy displays his pathetic, customary antipathy for Trump, but has toned down his nonsense and even shown a loose connection to the truth, in this article.
Slightly less abysmal than your previous efforts on this topic, Binoy.
The nonsense is still there, as demonstrated by this extract from the article: “but Trumpland is a flickering pantomime, destroying any pretence of virtue in politics. There are only positions, opponents, and resolutions through bullying force”
Who does Binoy think would be fooled by such a baseless utterance?
He does not mention Comey”s temerity in his laughable assertion that he prepared notes of the conversation about which he expected Trump to lie. It is obvious that he prepared notes to support the lies he will tell. I laugh when I think of the cross examination that Comey has invited, and Binoy’s disappointment when it is carried out..
Others disappointed, I am pleased to say, will be the Rectophobe (A.J.Phillips), and the delusional Rusty Reflux.

Bjelke-Petersen had problems with separation of powers and sacked a teacher for having wrong opinions. Judges from the swamp are helping Donald with migration law.

In the election , voters were promised that Mexico will pay for a wall and now US pays fora fence. He would fit in with Oz pollies.

AJ wrote:

"Just because I say that Trump is screwed and note that he has committed an impeachable offence, that in no way implies that I am under the illusion that an impeachment process is already underway."

And I didn't say that you'd said that. Asserting that I'd said or implied that was just something you made up in order to assert that I made it up.So to be clear, when you said that I said that you said impeachment was in process, you made it up because I never said what you said I said. :)

But this is all by the way of you trying to deflect from my original observation that you tend to be easily led down the garden path, seeing "beautiful things" that you hope are there rather than see what's actually there. Specifically here, when you hope that "It looks like he's committed an impeachable offence " that is indeed one of those false "things" since no impeachable offence has occurred, even if you totally accept Comey's version, which you seem to as part of the search for "beautiful things".

As to our previous discussions on traditional marriage, it shows impressive chutzpah to assert that your mere assertions are the equivalent of having established as fact my claimed dishonesty. The problem for you in that instance was that you based your refutation of my position upon data which you later had to admit to be wrong but didn't seem to understand that that then made the initial refutation invalid. A similar thing happened in regards to education and what you claimed to Finland's preeminence in that field.

As a matter of logic, if the data you use to make a claim or refute a claim is shown to be invalid then those claims or refutations are equally invalid. The problem many people seem to have is that they reach a conclusion and then seek supporting data. In such cases the accuracy or otherwise of the data is immaterial to the conclusion.