Because he's a liar, over and over. I have not liked Trump from well before he won the Republican nomination, and at several times here have stated that, if ever given the chance would refuse him entrance through my door. His position on climate does not cloud my judgment elsewhere.

Jun 2, 2019 at 10:35 PM | AK

No disagreements. His track record shows he is more trustworthy than Clinton and probably Obama. Should an investigation into Clinton corruption be instigated it would be fair and reasonable, unlike the Democrat campaigns to destroy Trump.

Because he's a liar, over and over

HaHa!

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/06/a_made_man_mueller_unmakes_himself.html

Two exchanges in particular are noteworthy. In this one he sweeps away the suggestion that the department’s rules precluded Mueller from concluding the president obstructed justice:

JAN CRAWFORD: Was there anything that would've stopped him in the regulations or in those... that opinion itself, he could've -- in your view he could've reached a conclusion?

WILLIAM BARR: Right, he could've reached a conclusion. The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office but he could've reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity but he had his reasons for not doing it, which he explained and I am not going to, you know, argue about those reasons but when he didn't make a decision, the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I felt it was necessary for us as the heads of the Department to reach that decision. That is what the Department of Justice does, that is why we have the compulsory powers like a grand jury to force people to give us evidence so that we can determine whether a crime has committed and in order to legitimate the process we felt we had to reach a decision.

JAN CRAWFORD: Well, I mean, he seemed to suggest yesterday that there was another venue for this and that was Congress.

WILLIAM BARR: Well, I am not sure what he was suggesting but, you know, the Department of Justice doesn't use our powers of investigating crimes as an adjunct to Congress. Congress is a separate branch of government and they can, you know, they have processes, we have our processes. Ours are related to the criminal justice process we are not an extension of Congress's investigative powers.

In the second quote, he was being generous to both Mueller and Comey:

Sometimes people can convince themselves that what they're doing is in the higher interest, the better good. They don't realize that what they're doing is really antithetical to the democratic system that we have. They start viewing themselves as the guardians of the people that are more informed and insensitive than everybody else. They can -- in their own mind, they can have those kinds of motives. And sometimes they can look at evidence and facts through a biased prism that they themselves don't realize.

I say generous because I think a better characterization would be that these people regularly have masked self-interest and partisanship as “higher interest.”

AK, you must absolutely hate Justin Trudeau.

Start off by slagging Trump then realise ("meanwhile") he's half Scottish

Meanwhile, there is evidence that President Trump’s lifelong pro-business instincts are having a beneficial effect on the US economy. Joblessness is at a five-decade low and wages are starting to increase. The FT says the economy is expected to continue to grow steadily over the next few years, outpacing many other western countries.

With his gung-ho attitude towards free trade, his enthusiasm for Brexit, and his apparent willingness to do a free-trade deal with Britain, Mr Trump may be useful for a country drowning in Brexit uncertainty. His national security adviser, John Bolton, says Britain remains the US’s staunchest ally and that the president “is prepared to help out in any way he can”. In trade if nothing else, this might be a friendship worth taking seriously.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/17678154.free-trader-trump-might-be-our-friend/

Clipe
"President Trump’s lifelong pro-business instincts"
Hahaha!!! Sob.

Trump was lying well before his nomination as candidate. So what he does now does not affect my negative opinion which remains constant or becomes stronger. I didn't appreciate his sometimes infantile behaviour nor his spitefulness.

As for Justin Trudeau, although I have retained my Canadian citizenship I have not kept up with Canadian federal politics, so have no informed opinion. In any case to compare Trump and Trudeau is dumb. Trudeau cannot deliberately risk the current world order. He cannot play Russian roulette with belligerent opponents.

AK,

You should re-read the second William Barr quote given by clipe.

then read it again

and again

Then ask yourself " is this me?"

AK:

"Because he's a liar, over and over."

Evidence for that?

Charlie. Don't see necessity for multiple reading, and no it isn't.

Won't waste my time providing evidence that is already available to everyone and which you clearly dismiss or refuse to acknowledge. Just put "Trump lies" into any search engine. By some counts total lies told have already exceeded 10,000. Most are petty, but suggest someone unable to tell the truth.

AK, here's some details of policies he said he would implement, and has done. Not a thing a politician would do.

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/thirty-reasons-why-we-welcome-you-mr-president/

The comments are interesting:

"Here's a few more:

1: Record numbers in employment.

2: Record low unemployment.

3: A resurgence of 'blue collar' jobs - steel, coal, oil, gas, for example - with companies investing in the US and bringing jobs back from abroad.

4: Ditching NAFTA - a generally bad deal for American jobs amongst other negatives - and negotiating the USMCA trade deal in less than two years.

5: Taking on the unfair trading relationship with the EU where the EU can flood America with German cars but makes it difficult for Chevrolets, Buicks and Cadillacs to gain fair access to the nations comprising the EU.

6: Moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem / Recognizing 'The Golan Heights' as legitimate Israeli territory.

7: The Workforce Development Plan - overseen by Ivanka Trump - that aims to encourage companies to take on and train staff rather than just look for already trained, 'off-the-shelf' staff.

8: Putting the mockers on the terrible 'Iran Deal'.

9: Telling NATO members they need to cough up the cash if they want continued support and protection from US military might.

10: Not agreeing to the quaintly named 'Paris Climate Accord' - which horrified all the right 'virtue signalling', 'climate change' worshippers.

Well that's a good round ten. I'm sure there are more. ( GDP figures beyond all expectations? )"

Better than May saying "Brexit means Brexit", then agreeing to the horrible WA.

Hyperbole such as Khan is only half Di Blasio's height, or that the hamburgers were piled a mile high in the White House is not really lying.

The newspapers that have been calling him a liar spent over 2 years talking about Russia collusion.

We should be talking to Putin about arms limitation. Russophobia is stupid and dangerous.

Trudeau cannot deliberately risk the current world order. He cannot play Russian roulette with belligerent opponents

Tell that to Trudeau.

Obstruction of or perverting the course of justice?

https://globalnews.ca/news/4953015/snc-lavalin-explained/

risk the current world order

You're happy with the current world order?

Clipe
"President Trump’s lifelong pro-business instincts"
Hahaha!!! Sob.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/how-donald-trump-helped-build-canadas-ice-rink-empire/article33430900/

Clipe. First class swerving from Trump's unconscionable interference in UK politics towards another issue altogether - Trudeau.

As to Trump's business acumen - anyone interested in an alternative view, put "Trump business losses" into a search engine, then look up his 4 (or is it 6?) bankruptcies.

Of course Trump did not personally suffer from "his" business failures. When those businesses failed it was other investors and those who were owed who suffered. Shall we move on to the reneging of multimillion personal debts to banks?
That's why I guffaw when I hear comments lauding his business skills, especially those issued by the boaster-in-chief.

It is truly amazing, but rather predictable, that no one here wishes to contest the claim or even acknowledge that Trump has repeatedly interfered blatantly in British politics, yet fell over themselves to chastise Obama.

That's why I guffaw when I hear comments lauding his business skills, especially those issued by the boaster-in-chief.

Have you never heard of Trump Shuttle, Trump Vodka, Trump Mortgage, Trump The Game, Trump Clothing Line, Trump Steak, Trump Magazine, Trump University? All failures.

But Trump can legitimately claim to be a successful, self-made millionaire. I mean Fred Trump of course. Junior not so much. Naturally his son lies about the help he got from his Pa, though at least some of it is public knowledge, like the time Fred sent an employee to buy several million dollars worth of chips from Dishonest Don's failing casino, with no intention of gambling them. It takes a special business talent indeed to lose money on a casino. And yes, that is illegal.

With millions in starting capital and a well-connected father, it would be amazing if Trump had not made money in the property boom of the 1980s, but he over-leveraged and when the 1990s bust came the Trump Organisation found itself $9 billion in the red and Trump himself personally liable for just under $1 billion. He escaped bankruptcy due to a bailout package guaranteed to some extent by family members guaranteed in turn against their inheritances, Fred by that time was beginning to suffer from Alzheimers.

In 2015 Fortune magazine estimated Trump had grown his net worth by 300% since 1987. Impressive, until you realise the S&P 500 grew 1,336% over the same period. That's right, if Tycoon Trump had taken early retirement and put his money into a simple index-tracker, he would have outperformed himself by a factor of 4.

As so often, there is no there, there.

BTW I learned a fun fact today whilst watching the Donald honouring the D-Day veterans - the doctor who furnished his medical exemption from service in Vietnam just happened to be a tenant of daddy Fred Trump. Small world, huh?

AK and Phil Clarke share a view of President Trump's business acumen.

PC gets his info from the NYT and Huff Post.

I have been involved with a small real estate project. Very risky and very complex.

I had a front row view of one of the EU institutions making a total mess of a new office project. Huge cost for extended leases, and hundreds of millions extra to finish the building. Those responsible promoted out of the way. Building still not ready.

The MSM deal out the TDS, and the gullible swallow it.

Charly. I'm interested to learn why (i.e. upon what evidence) you doubt the evidence unearthed by the NYT that you write Phil Clarke relies upon? I'm no expert, but I understand their conclusions are based upon literally thousands of tax documents relating to Fred Trump and his relations' tax dealings.
Also how do you account for Donald Trump's refusal to release his tax documents when he assumed the office of POTUS? This was done by previous presidents without exception. How do you reconcile your support with his behaviour?

AK, PC relies upon the NYT, a paper that has been pushing the "Russia! Russia!" story for years.

The NYT has reached "conclusions" based on thousands of documents. What "conclusions" has the IRS reached based on decades of auditing Trump, and looking at far more material than the NYT? Certainly not that he cheats on his taxes.

You do not make public information on your taxes whilst under audit. You just don't. Ask a tax lawyer. Trump is under permanent audit.

However, some documents are available to the public. They show that he pays hundreds of $M in taxes ( over $300M in one year alone, ask Rachel Maddow ).

Did rapist Bill Clinton reveal his Whitewater gains during his time as AK state governor? Did he declare his CIA drug money from that time?

Curious that you use the words "reconcile" and "support". Or perhaps very revealing.

What a pity Charly that you keep swerving and trying, like others here, to shift the focus to the Democrats. To remind you, the topic is Trump's interference in British politics.