Recent revelations about Trump's handling of presidential documents is likely to start a new round of attacks and defenses, usually ad hominem but almost certainly to rehash his perceived (according to your political view) successes and failures. Defenders will accuse attackers of Trump Derangement Syndrome, and call them "Trump haters".

I don't hate Trump; I despise (feel contempt or deep repugnance for) him. I'll tell you why, and offer the materials I rely on for this opinion so you can judge for yourself. But I want to make it clear from the outset that I am dealing with the person, not the politician, so please don't try to refute me by reciting all the "good" things he did.

One other preliminary point: Trump is well known for rushing to the courts for relief. The fact that apparently he did not do so for the first two occurrences I'm about to discuss gives rise to a pretty strong inference of veracity.

When Trump first became a serious presidential candidate I wanted to learn more about him, so I went to the internet. Two articles came up that I found significant. You can read them, and related articles, for yourself. Just google "trump bulgari jewelry" and "trump deposition perjury article". Here are brief summaries:

Bulgari: Forbes magazine reports on a history of conspiracy to evade New York tax laws in which Trump was an active participant. He escaped conviction by turning on the Bulgari jewelry company. Go to the web for details of the duration and extent of Trump's involvement, and consider this: why would a rich man like Trump engage in a criminal operation for a relatively small return? Conclusion: Trump is not only a crook, but a cheap one to boot. Inference: if he is willing to engage in one criminal enterprise for a relatively small return, he willing to engage in others. Areas of suspicion: the Trump Foundation; the lawsuit brought by his niece; the current investigations by New York and Georgia.

Deposition: This article appeared in Newsweek. Google will also show several related articles. Cynics often tell us that "all politicians lie", and sadly, they are pretty much right. But how would you like to be in court with your life or liberty on the line and hear a police officer lie? Or be a victim in a civil or criminal case listening to a defendant and his friends lie? I'm a retired trial lawyer, and I have to acknowledge that I've lost cases where I am convinced the other side fabricated testimony. If you have a lawyer, ask him or her about lying witnesses.

If your oath means nothing when a personal interest is at stake, can I rely on you to act in the public interest rather than your own?

As time passed, other incidents came to light. Google "trump central park 5 article", and put it together with Trump (and his father) being sued by the Justice Department in 1973 for discriminating against black rental applicants, his repeal during his presidency of a rule intended to combat historical racial discrimination in housing, and his (in)famous comment on Charleston, about good people on both sides. Even if you're not prepared to infer racism you must admit a insensitivity to a substantial percentage of our population that is inappropriate to one who is supposed to lead us all.

And the word "inappropriate" brings to mind his attitude towards and conduct with women.

As to his propensity for fraud, we learned that he avoided the prospect of military service because of shin splints, diagnosed by a doctor who was a tenant of his father. Fortunately, they weren't so severe as to keep him from playing golf. Much more serious, however, was the Trump University scandal. For many years I taught law as an adjunct professor (translation: minimum paid lecturer) at a law school that focused on law as either a second career or to further a current career. Students paid a lot of money to try to enhance their earning ability, often sacrificing time with their family and common pleasures (movies, dining out) for financial reasons. I developed a lot of respect for my students, which is why I have great sympathy for the Trump University students who were defrauded of both time and money. Trumped coughed up $25 million to settle the lawsuit.

Current fraud problems involve real estate valuations in the context of both loan applications and property tax evaluations. It's fair to assume some court action is on the horizon.

Conclusion: I've given you several examples showing Trump's immorality. I could go on but I've probably exhausted your patience. Suffice it to say that I have a deep repugnance for Trump's conduct as described, and for that reason have nothing but contempt for the man. "Hatred", which is defined as "intense ill will", is insufficient to describe my feelings about him.

Recent revelations about Trump's handling of presidential documents is likely to start a new round of attacks and defenses, usually ad hominem but almost certainly to rehash his perceived (according to your political view) successes and failures. Defenders will accuse attackers of Trump Derangement Syndrome, and call them "Trump haters".

I don't hate Trump; I despise (feel contempt or deep repugnance for) him. I'll tell you why, and offer the materials I rely on for this opinion so you can judge for yourself. But I want to make it clear from the outset that I am dealing with the person, not the politician, so please don't try to refute me by reciting all the "good" things he did.

One other preliminary point: Trump is well known for rushing to the courts for relief. The fact that apparently he did not do so for the first two occurrences I'm about to discuss gives rise to a pretty strong inference of veracity.

When Trump first became a serious presidential candidate I wanted to learn more about him, so I went to the internet. Two articles came up that I found significant. You can read them, and related articles, for yourself. Just google "trump bulgari jewelry" and "trump deposition perjury article". Here are brief summaries:

Bulgari: Forbes magazine reports on a history of conspiracy to evade New York tax laws in which Trump was an active participant. He escaped conviction by turning on the Bulgari jewelry company. Go to the web for details of the duration and extent of Trump's involvement, and consider this: why would a rich man like Trump engage in a criminal operation for a relatively small return? Conclusion: Trump is not only a crook, but a cheap one to boot. Inference: if he is willing to engage in one criminal enterprise for a relatively small return, he willing to engage in others. Areas of suspicion: the Trump Foundation; the lawsuit brought by his niece; the current investigations by New York and Georgia.

Deposition: This article appeared in Newsweek. Google will also show several related articles. Cynics often tell us that "all politicians lie", and sadly, they are pretty much right. But how would you like to be in court with your life or liberty on the line and hear a police officer lie? Or be a victim in a civil or criminal case listening to a defendant and his friends lie? I'm a retired trial lawyer, and I have to acknowledge that I've lost cases where I am convinced the other side fabricated testimony. If you have a lawyer, ask him or her about lying witnesses.

If your oath means nothing when a personal interest is at stake, can I rely on you to act in the public interest rather than your own?

As time passed, other incidents came to light. Google "trump central park 5 article", and put it together with Trump (and his father) being sued by the Justice Department in 1973 for discriminating against black rental applicants, his repeal during his presidency of a rule intended to combat historical racial discrimination in housing, and his (in)famous comment on Charleston, about good people on both sides. Even if you're not prepared to infer racism you must admit a insensitivity to a substantial percentage of our population that is inappropriate to one who is supposed to lead us all.

And the word "inappropriate" brings to mind his attitude towards and conduct with women.

As to his propensity for fraud, we learned that he avoided the prospect of military service because of shin splints, diagnosed by a doctor who was a tenant of his father. Fortunately, they weren't so severe as to keep him from playing golf. Much more serious, however, was the Trump University scandal. For many years I taught law as an adjunct professor (translation: minimum paid lecturer) at a law school that focused on law as either a second career or to further a current career. Students paid a lot of money to try to enhance their earning ability, often sacrificing time with their family and common pleasures (movies, dining out) for financial reasons. I developed a lot of respect for my students, which is why I have great sympathy for the Trump University students who were defrauded of both time and money. Trumped coughed up $25 million to settle the lawsuit.

Current fraud problems involve real estate valuations in the context of both loan applications and property tax evaluations. It's fair to assume some court action is on the horizon.

Conclusion: I've given you several examples showing Trump's immorality. I could go on but I've probably exhausted your patience. Suffice it to say that I have a deep repugnance for Trump's conduct as described, and for that reason have nothing but contempt for the man. "Hatred", which is defined as "intense ill will", is insufficient to describe my feelings about him.

What was the strangest lie told about the 2020 US presidential election?

The idea that voter fraud impacted the results. This is a statistical impossibility.

The highest rate of voter fraud ever found in the US is 0.0025%, or 1 in 40,000 votes. With 160 million votes cast nationwide, that’s 4,000 fraudulent votes ACROSS THE WHOLE COUNTRY.

Biden’s win margin in 2020 exceeded 4,000 votes in every state he won, so it’s laughable that fraud could have changed the results.

Biden won Georgia by the closest margin, about 0.23%. There, Biden and Trump combined for 4,935,487 votes. Statistically, no more than 124 of those votes were fraudulent, and Biden won by a margin of 11,779 votes—about 95 times that number. So for Trump to have only lost that state due to fraud, we would have needed to see 95 times as much fraud in that state as ever found to have happened before in American history, all of that fraud would have had to have been for Biden, and this would have had to have happened invisibly under the watchful eyes of the Republicans who controlled the state. This is absolutely impossible.

But suppose Biden pulled off the greatest election fraud in history in Georgia—almost a hundred times greater than any election in history. Without Georgia, Biden still wins. So now we have to see an even greater degree of fraud in Arizona—120 times more than ever before, and even without Georgia and Arizona, Biden still wins. So now we have to see over 250 times the fraud in Wisconsin. And if that happened, it’s an electoral tie.

So if Biden gets 100 times as many fraudulent votes as ever in history in two states under Republican control, and 250 times that amount in one swing state, then it’s possible he stole the election. You’d have to be a complete idiot to think that was possible. So that lie is the strangest, because it defies all reason.