"Trump Easily the Worst President in U.S. History"

Libhater said:
MAKING AMERICA GREATER AGAIN PEOPLE are relics of the past? LOL! No, you leftists are
relics of the past Marxist failures.
Click to expand...
MAGA is evil since it is built upon hate, fearmongering and an ideology that is both anti-American and anti-Constitutional. Your own lies about your hatred of Americans and claims to be a Christian are evidence against you.

I pray that your family does the right thing and puts you in a place where you cannot harm yourself or others.
 
Grim Reaper said:
This is not reliable as a factual account. It mixes a few real-world events with large amounts of misinformation, conspiracy theories, and outright false claims, including racist and dehumanizing language. I’ll break down the major claims and what is actually supported by evidence.



1. “Biden was a zombie puppet / not really president”​


False.


  • Joe Biden was elected in 2020 and exercised constitutional authority as president.
  • There is no evidence that he was controlled by a “globalist” group or that he functioned as a “ceremonial” or “non compos mentis” figure in the legal or medical sense.
  • Claims about cognitive incapacity have been politically debated, but no official finding or credible evidence supports the idea that he was unable to govern or that others secretly ran the government.


2. “Barack Obama committed treason / is a criminal mastermind”​


False and unsupported.


  • Barack Obama has never been charged with treason or any comparable crime.
  • Allegations of “treasonous actions” are common in partisan conspiracy content but are not backed by legal proceedings, indictments, or credible evidence.
  • Serious accusations like treason require very specific legal standards and proof in court—none exists here.


3. “Tulsi Gabbard called Obama a traitor at a White House press conference with receipts”​


False.


  • There is no verified record of Tulsi Gabbard (or any Director of National Intelligence) making such a statement at a White House press conference.
  • This appears to be a fabricated claim. Gabbard has criticized U.S. foreign policy in general, but not in the manner described or with “incontrovertible treason receipts.”


4. “Susan Rice ran a secret kill list executing Americans illegally”​


Highly misleading / largely false framing.


  • The U.S. did operate targeted killing programs against suspected terrorists, especially post-9/11 (under both Republican and Democratic administrations).
  • These programs have been heavily debated legally and ethically, but they are not “secret murder of Americans without process” in the way described here.
  • There is no evidence Susan Rice personally ran an illegal assassination system or directed unlawful executions of U.S. citizens.


5. “General Mark Milley committed treason by calling China”​


Misleading.


  • It is reported (e.g., in Bob Woodward’s book Peril) that Milley made calls to Chinese military counterparts late in Trump’s term to reassure them about U.S. stability.
  • These actions were controversial and debated politically, but:
    • They were not secret war coordination
    • They have not been prosecuted as treason
    • Legal experts do not classify them as treason under U.S. law


6. “Ilhan Omar married her brother / immigration fraud”​


False.


  • This is a long-running debunked conspiracy theory.
  • There is no credible evidence that Ilhan Omar married her brother or committed the acts described.


7. “Biden crime family / Burisma corruption proven”​


Unproven allegations.


  • Hunter Biden’s business dealings (including Burisma) have been investigated extensively.
  • While they raised ethical questions and political controversy, no evidence has proven Joe Biden engaged in a criminal enterprise or accepted bribes in relation to Ukraine.


8. Language and framing issues​


The text also includes:


  • Racist generalizations about Black people and countries
  • Dehumanizing language toward politicians
  • Claims of “genetic determinism” for social outcomes (a scientifically discredited idea)

These parts are not factual claims at all, but ideological rhetoric and misinformation.



Bottom line​


This passage is a mix of:


  • ❌ False claims (e.g., Obama treason, Omar conspiracy, Gabbard quote)
  • ⚠️ Misleading or exaggerated interpretations (e.g., Milley calls, targeted killing policy)
  • ❌ Unsubstantiated conspiracy theories
  • ❌ Racist and dehumanizing commentary

There is no credible evidence supporting the central narrative that U.S. presidents or senior officials engaged in coordinated treasonous conspiracies as described.
Click to expand...
I will respond to you remark in a day or two, as I will be away this weekend.

Briefly, I find your style of rebuttal to be formalistic "piss and wind'

You often state that no formal legal action has been taken agaist the political reprobates I listed.

Yes, I am fully aware of this; it is one of the points I was setting out to make in this Post. namely that they OUGHT to have been referred to the AG of the DOJ, charged, prosecuted, found guilty (because they all are) and then jailed or deported.

Regarding what is "Court Standard" Evidence.

Ilhan Omar's Father was a Colonel in the Military Regime of a psychopathic strongman named Said Bairre throughout the 1980s. Although there is little in the way of hard, documentary/photographic evidence available, it is clear that Omar's father was a loyal, senior member of Said Baire's military command hierarchy in the latter half of the 1980s. During this period Barre order a gencide of the Isaaq clan in Somalia. There can be very little doubt that Omar's father was involved in the planning, logistics, military tactics/strategies, coordination of the 200,000 Isaaq civilians that were murdered, tortured, raped, etc in what the UN described as one of the worst genocides of the 20th century.

When all of what IS known about Omar's father: his military background in Somalia under Said Barre's blood-thirsty military Dictatorship, his loyalty to Barre, and other facts that known about his background in the Somalian military, and the testimonies of other Officers serving with OMAR'S father in Barre's military command, ALTHOUGHT THE ESE FACTS TO NOT - IN ISOLATION - PROVIDE 100% COLD. HARD. INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE, WHEN THEY ARE LOGICALLY JUXTAPOSED, THEY PROVIDE A COHERENT PICTURE (lie like individual Jig-Saw pieces in a puzzle put together correctly) that easily exceeds the criminal legal standard of PROOF (of GUILT in this case) BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. It is absurd to argue that OMAR;s Father - a Colonel known to have been serving in Barre's military command team, was unaware that the Military Tyrant he served had ordered a genocide of the Isaaq people, and it is frankly absurd to imaging that he played no role in the planning, organization, instigation and execution of this atrocity.


Do you understand what I am saying and how it applies to cases of Political criminals in the US.?


BTW, you need to keep up to date. Tulsi Gabbard (DNI) DID speak recently before a large Press Corp in DC. And she DID very clearly state that her department was in possession of "INCONTROVERTIBLE" hard evidence demonstrating how OBAMA (as PRESIDENT) was personally involved in TREASONOUS CONSPIRACY.



DACHSHUND - THE WONDERHOUND

DLM - DACHSHUND LIVES MATTER !!
 
Libhater said:
All of the war's objectives have been met. Now, Trump is just waiting for the ghostly leadership
to step up to the plate and virtually surrender to the greatest deal maker the world has ever had in Trump. The people loving Trump is taking his time to allow these ghosts to come to the plate by not bombing them out of existence because he wants to make sure that the Iranian people won't be targeted for the grave--like what the IRCG did by murdering 45,000 of it's own people. Trump is in the driver's seat when it comes to the best outcome of this war, which is driving you TDS nuts just crazy.
Click to expand...
“All the war’s objectives have been met?” So, tell us, exactly what war objectives have been met
 
Dutch Uncle said:
MAGA is evil since it is built upon hate, fearmongering and an ideology that is both anti-American and anti-Constitutional. Your own lies about your hatred of Americans and claims to be a Christian are evidence against you.

I pray that your family does the right thing and puts you in a place where you cannot harm yourself or others.
Click to expand...
Reagan started the out loud racism
 
The day after the United Nations voted to recognize the People’s Republic of China, then–California Governor Ronald Reagan phoned President Richard Nixon at the White House and vented his frustration at the delegates who had sided against the United States. “Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television as I did,” Reagan said. “Yeah,” Nixon interjected. Reagan forged ahead with his complaint: “To see those, those monkeys from those African countries—damn them, they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” Nixon gave a huge laugh.
 
evince said:
Reagan started the out loud racism
Click to expand...
It started under Nixon and the Southern Strategy when, after the 1964 CRA, Southern racist Democrats switched parties to support their White Supremacist agenda within the Republican Party. There's a direct line between that and the current situation.

www.britannica.com

Southern strategy | Definition, The South, History, Republican Party, Democratic Party, & Facts | Britannica

The Southern strategy is a campaign strategy pursued by the U.S. Republican Party and initially aimed at increasing support from white voters in the South by subtly endorsing racial segregation, racial discrimination, and the disenfranchisement of Black voters.
www.britannica.com www.britannica.com
Southern strategy, in the political history of the United States, a campaign strategy of the Republican Party, actively pursued from the 1960s, that initially sought to increase and preserve support from white voters in the South by subtly endorsing racial segregation, racial discrimination, and the disenfranchisement of Black voters. The strategy has also involved directly promoting conservative views on immigration, taxes, social welfare programs, law enforcement, and states’ rights.
 
evince said:
The day after the United Nations voted to recognize the People’s Republic of China, then–California Governor Ronald Reagan phoned President Richard Nixon at the White House and vented his frustration at the delegates who had sided against the United States. “Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television as I did,” Reagan said. “Yeah,” Nixon interjected. Reagan forged ahead with his complaint: “To see those, those monkeys from those African countries—damn them, they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” Nixon gave a huge laugh.
Click to expand...
www.ms.now

Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.

Lyndon Johnson was a racist. He was also the greatest champion of racial equality to occupy the White House since Lincoln.
www.ms.now www.ms.now
Lyndon Johnson said the word “nigger” a lot.

In Senate cloakrooms and staff meetings, Johnson was practically a connoisseur of the word. According to Johnson biographer Robert Caro, Johnson would calibrate his pronunciations by region, using “nigra” with some southern legislators and “negra” with others. Discussing civil rights legislation with men like Mississippi Democrat James Eastland, who committed most of his life to defending white supremacy, he’d simply call it “the nigger bill.”

Then in 1957, Johnson would help get the “nigger bill” passed, known to most as the Civil Rights Act of 1957. With the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the segregationists would go to their graves knowing the cause they’d given their lives to had been betrayed, Frank Underwood style, by a man they believed to be one of their own. When Caro asked segregationist Georgia Democrat Herman Talmadge how he felt when Johnson, signing the Civil Rights Act, said “we shall overcome,” Talmadge said “sick.”
 
www.archives.gov

LBJ Fights the White Backlash

The Racial Politics of the 1964 Presidential Campaign Spring 2001, Vol. 33, No. 1 By Jeremy D. Mayer © 2001 by Jeremy D. Mayer "If we have to get elected on civil rights, then we're already defeated . . . unless we can get the campaign on some other basis, why it is just going to be agonizing."...
www.archives.gov www.archives.gov


He did it because that was where the Democratic Party was lead to by Kennedy

He was at heart a racist

It was all just political gaming to him
 
archives said:
“All the war’s objectives have been met?” So, tell us, exactly what war objectives have been met
Click to expand...
For starters, and the this is the most important one, is that Iran is no longer the lead terrorist nation in the world, and it's murdering proxies are all but washed up, and the Mideast and the world in general is now not in a threat from the IRGC to spread their apocalyptic agenda. Their military and their economic standing is all but shattered. They'll be no more of the 45,000 innocent Iranians to be slaughtered by an inept and all but washed up Iran. Are you one of of the libs still cheering on for the Ayatollah's son or whomever is in charge to win this war against the U.S.?
 
Grim Reaper said:
  • “Making America Greater Again people are relics of the past”
    This is a subjective political characterization. It’s basically saying a political movement is outdated. There’s no factual test for that.
  • “Leftists are relics of the past Marxist failures”
    This is also a broad ideological generalization. It:
    • lumps a very large and diverse set of political beliefs into “Marxist”
    • labels them as “failures,” which is a value judgment, not a verifiable fact

Key point​


Both sides of the statement are:


  • rhetorical
  • politically charged
  • not grounded in testable evidence
  • not fact-checkable in a strict sense

What can be said factually​


  • Political movements like MAGA and left-wing/center-left ideologies are active, evolving parts of current U.S. politics, not “relics” in any literal sense.
  • Terms like “Marxist” are often used loosely in online political debate and frequently do not refer to actual Marxist political systems or policies in a precise academic sense.
Click to expand...
Your posts read like the kind 'anal', ""Cut-Glass" verbiage that was published in the stuffy, old political science textbooks that were prescribed for second-year college students back in the early 1960s. That is, they have a "pat", abstract, axiomatic quality that reveals you have no real understanding of how politics plays out in the real world. For instance, for instance you saw for yourself how the Bien Junta's DOJ politically weaponized the Law to castigate and hobble Domal TRUMP. How crooked prosecutors like; Jack Smith; Alvin Bragg; NYC AG Letitia James and Fulton County DA, Fani Willis were able to twist and pervert the meaning of the Law to bring what were, frankly, BIZARRE, criminal charges against TRIMP and use equally outlandish legal arguments to prosecute him in Coury was astonishing. These people, for instance. , Letitia James and Fani Willis were actually exposed in due course. as vulgar, Black, criminal lowlife in their own right. As for Bragg he was an extreme-left zealot, while Smith was simply a psychopath.



To continue. even it is true that , at present, there is not a neat, manilla file, packed with hard, objective, bullet-proof "legal - standard "evidence demonstrating in detail how; ILHAN OMAR has: defrauded the US government of millions of dollars in revenue, that she has no loyalty to the Constitution (quite the opposite in fact). that she is a rabid, Islamist, an anti-White (American/European) racist; that she is a treacherous, pathological liar, a devious rogue, and generally- speaking, an UNDESIRABLE individual who is not fit to be a US citizen let alone a member of Congress, and that she out be denaturalised and deported back to Somalia, THEN It IS BESIDE THE POINT. It is beside the point because EVERY SANE, WHITE AMERICAN can see that his is all true... IT STICKS OUT LIKE THE "PROVERBIAL" DOG'S BALLS"! PERHAP'S THIS COULD BE THE BASIS FOR A NEW LGAL PRINCPLE THE US APPEARS TO DESPERSPERATELY NEED? I can hear it now..... "Your Honor, I cite the "DOG'S BALLS" Principle in concluding that the defendant - Hyram P. Fannyrat," is guilty as charged!




On a more serious note, If you wish to insist one academic - type; legal stringency, I have an old (and still well-used) legal principle for you that would be ideal for dealing with a slippery character like ILHAN OMAR.I refer to that venerable old legal principle: "Res Ipsa Loquitor," This translates from the Latin as ,"THE DEED SPEAKS FOR ITSELF" In other words just watching OMAR'S appalling, anti-American behaviour, and listing to the sordid details of the latest corruption scandal she is embroiled in, is all you really need to know that she is a cunning, "dirty-dealing, crooked and all round poisonous viper. One who is guilty on all counts!!


DACHSHUND THE WONDER HOUND

DLM - DACHSHUND LIVES MATTER!!
 
Last edited:
DACHSHUND DAWG said:
Your posts read like the kind 'anal', ""Cut-Glass" verbiage that was published in the stuffy, old political science textbooks that were prescribed for second-year college students back in the early 1960s. That is, they have a "pat", abstract, axiomatic quality that reveals you have no real understanding of how politics plays out in the real world. For instance, for instance you saw for yourself how the Bien Junta's DOJ politically weaponized the Law to castigate and hobble Domal TRUMP. How crooked prosecutors like; Jack Smith; Alvin Bragg; NYC AG Letitia James and Fulton County DA, Fani Willis were able to twist and pervert the meaning of the Law to bring what were, frankly, BIZARRE, criminal charges against TRIMP and use equally outlandish legal arguments to prosecute him in Court. These people, for instance. Incredibly, Letitia James and Fani Willis were actually vulgar, Black, criminal lowlife in their own right.


To continue. even it is true that , at present, there is not a neat, manilla file, packed with hard, objective, bullet-proof "legal - standard "evidence demonstrating in detail how; ILHAN OMAR has: defrauded the US government of millions of dollars in revenue, that she has no loyalty to the Constitution (quite the opposite in fact). that she is a rabid, Islamist, an anti-White (American/European) racist; that she is a treacherous, pathological liar, a devious rogue, and generally- speaking, an UNDESIRABLE individual who is not fit to be a US citizen let alone a member of Congress, and that she out be denaturalised and deported back to Somalia, THEN It IS BESIDE THE POINT. It is beside the point because EVERY SANE, WHITE AMERICAN can see that his is all true... IT STICKS OUT LIKE THE "PROVERBIAL" DOG'S BALLS! PERHAP'S THIS COULD BE THE BASIS FOR A NEW LGAL PRINCPLE THE US APPEARS TO DESPERSPERATELY NEED? I can hear it now..... "Your Honor, I cite the "DOG'S BALLS" Principle in concluding that the defendant - Hyram P. Fannyrat," is guilty as charged!



On a more serious note, If you wish to insist one academic - type; legal stringency, I have an old (and still well-used) legal principle for you that would be ideal for dealing with a slippery character like ILHAN OMAR.I refer to that venerable old legal principle: "Res Ipsa Loquitor," This translates from the Latin as ,"THE DEED SPEAKS FOR ITSELF" In other words just watching OMAR'S appalling, anti-American behaviour, and listing to the sordid details of the latest corruption scandal she is embroiled in, is all you really need to know that she is a cunning, "dirty-dealing, crooked and all round poisonous viper. One who is guilty on all counts!!


DACHSHUND THE WONDER HOUND

DLM - DACHSHUND LIVES MATTER!!
Click to expand...
This post is highly biased, contains multiple false or unsubstantiated claims, and includes racist and defamatory language.



1) Overall assessment​


  • Not a factual analysis: The passage is primarily opinion, emotional rhetoric, and political attack language.
  • Contains hate speech and racial generalizations (e.g., “EVERY SANE, WHITE AMERICAN”).
  • Uses ad hominem attacks instead of evidence (attacking individuals rather than evaluating documented actions or court findings).
  • Includes serious allegations presented without proof.


2) Fact-checking key claims​


❌ Claim: “Ilhan Omar defrauded the U.S. government of millions”​


  • Status: False / Unsubstantiated
  • There is no evidence or court finding that Rep. Ilhan Omar committed fraud or stole government funds.
  • She is a sitting U.S. Representative. Allegations of criminal fraud would require indictment, prosecution, and conviction, none of which exist.


❌ Claim: She is “not loyal to the Constitution,” “Islamist,” “anti-white racist,” or “treacherous”​


  • Status: Opinion-based / unsupported
  • These are value judgments and ideological labels, not factual findings.
  • There is no legal or verified basis establishing disloyalty to the U.S. Constitution.


⚖️ Claim: Prosecutors (Jack Smith, Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, Fani Willis) “twisted the law” and are “crooked”​


  • Individuals named:
    • Special Counsel Jack Smith
    • Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg
    • NY AG Letitia James
    • Fulton County DA Fani Willis
  • Status: Unproven allegation
  • These officials have brought or overseen legal cases that are publicly documented and subject to judicial review.
  • Calling them “crooked” or claiming they “perverted the law” is a subjective political opinion, not a fact established by any court ruling.
  • In democratic systems, prosecutors can be criticized, but wrongdoing must be proven in court—there is no such finding of criminal misconduct here.


❌ Claim: “Every sane white American can see this is true”​


  • Status: Racist generalization / logical fallacy
  • This is:
    • A racial essentialization (“white Americans” as a single thinking bloc)
    • An appeal to group identity instead of evidence
    • Not a factual statement


❌ Claim: “Dog’s balls principle” as a legal concept​


  • Status: Not real
  • This is a mock legal invention with no basis in U.S. law or jurisprudence.


3) Bias analysis​


This passage shows strong indicators of:


  • Partisan bias (strong political alignment against specific Democratic officials and a Democratic member of Congress)
  • Racial bias / racist framing
  • Conspiracy-style reasoning (asserting widespread coordinated wrongdoing without evidence)
  • Ad hominem attacks (targeting personal character instead of actions or evidence)
  • Emotional and inflammatory language (“crooked,” “vulgar,” “lowlife,” etc.)


4) Bottom line​


  • The text is not a reliable factual analysis.
  • It mixes political opinion, unverified allegations, and explicit racial rhetoric.
  • The concrete factual claims (fraud, criminal behavior, legal corruption) are not supported by publicly established legal findings or evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top