Acts20.com

www.xojane.com/issues/stephanie-cegielski-donald-trump-campaign-defector The World As I See Itworldjeffreysees.blogspot.com/Revuriah's Facebookwww.facebook.com/people/Jeff-Richard/1226257444Jeffrey David Richard's Myspace Musicwww.myspace.com/547856946

Already debunked.She was never an insider or some top strategist. She worked for a super-pac, nothing more. Notice how the story vanished over night.www.snopes.com/stephanie-cegielski-letter-trump/solonews.net/252988/news/stephanie-cegielski-was-not-donald-trumps-top-strategist.html

My point in posting is that Trump is looking out for himself The World As I See Itworldjeffreysees.blogspot.com/Revuriah's Facebookwww.facebook.com/people/Jeff-Richard/1226257444Jeffrey David Richard's Myspace Musicwww.myspace.com/547856946

You use the writings of a fraud to make that point? If the person who wrote that letter has been discredited, then maybe the idea that Trump is only looking out for himself is also discredited

She was trying to inflate her importance and influence in the Trump camp. Nothing she says is credible

She identified herself correctly as the Communications Director of the Make America Great Again Super PAC.Do you think she actually wrote the headline?? Good grief.

She identified herself correctly as the Communications Director of the Make America Great Again Super PAC.Do you think she actually wrote the headline?? Good grief.As to what she said being credible, you are calling her a fraud and lacking in credibility, when in actuality, you just disagree with her opinion. There are plenty of reasons to have reservations about Trump. But those who truly know him scoff at the idea that he never really wanted to be President. Let's deal in reality and not fantasy. Anti-Trumpers claim he does not talk enough about policy. Perhaps they should start that conversation instead of chasing silly fairy tales

The reality is that she identified herself correctly. She is not a fraud as you say.If you disagree with her opinion, that's fine; everybody has an opinion. But you are trying to change the subject after you claimed she was a fraud and say already debunked.That's the only part of this I'm addressing. Frankly, I'm not interested in the debate of whether or not Trump wants to be president.

Sorry, RS, I've been working for 10 hours today. Just got a chance to respond. That snopes link did not debunk the article. She did correctly explain her position. More than that, she articulated who Trump is. If you are so concerned about falsehood, why support Trump? He has made his campaign on falsehood. He has repeatedly accused Cruz of lying, even when his hand is caught in the cookie jar. Just today, he brazenly lied AGAIN, about his off the cuff remark that women who have abortions, should it ever be illegal, should be jailed. Then his campaign says the doctors should, and that's been his position all along. No, his position changes when the heat comes, then it's lie like Obama till everyone repeats it. Dude is actually pulling a Saul Alinsky The World As I See Itworldjeffreysees.blogspot.com/Revuriah's Facebookwww.facebook.com/people/Jeff-Richard/1226257444Jeffrey David Richard's Myspace Musicwww.myspace.com/547856946

Your disposition against Trump causes you to read into him things that are not there. Every politicians says things that an hour later he wishes he had articulated differently. This is the rabid fanaticism of the Never Trump crowd. They hold Trump to a standard Cruz is never held to.They are more like Alinsky than Trump ever will be. As for the article, no the stupid phony writer did not articulate who Trump is. The very idea that he never really wanted to be President is believed only by the very weak minded. It is one of the silliest premises out there. Go for it if it makes you feel good