Donalt Trump delusional train will derail before 2020.

1. "Clueless Subservant" first off the moment you insult somebody for using facts, But attacking their person and ignoring or choose not to defute the examples givin is an illogical fallacy or ad hominem which you did throughout this whole debate as I pointed out in the other rounds and in this one too. Example: I say there is no russian collusion I use a qoute fron CNN-washington, You respond with "you're a clueless servant" or when I use qoutes and suggest im talking out of my rear end so your points and remarks really demonstrate with what kind of a person im debating. 2. So in the definition you gave, Scandal is anything morally or legally wrong okay? Legally he has not been in any trouble and so there for I don't see how public outrage has stemmed from that. Yes his policies have cuased outrage, But the reasons for that are not scandalous. A certain demograpghic of a political idoelogy dislike him, Becuase he in in an ideology against their beliefs, So fundamentally it's just an opinion on if his policies are wrong or not. Of course he will cause public outrage presidents are either democractic or republican so one side always has public outrage for another and claim the other side is scandalous all the time so again, Which I know you weren't reading my responses means every president has been scandalous according to you and you're definition showing Dobald Trump is following a trend done by other presidents which means he's no different from other officials and your point of him being the most scandalous is false. People can be outraged from his morality all they want to, But as far as legal actions I don't think public outrage has stemmed from the root of that. Seriously you're going really literal with the the definition even too literal. Public outrage can stem from anything no matter how slight. Literally he was the only president to talk to North Korea and get Kim Jung Un to send the soldiers remains let alone have a representative in the UN and peopke were outraged over that! So if people have a public outrage about a good action of something that Trump does do we consider that scandoulous or evil? That's illogical. I literally just showed you the qoutes from Washington CNN. Com in round 2, My people in the comment section can even look. That showed the alkegations were just that allegations showing he did nothing wrong, With stormy daniels or karen mcdougal and Russion Collusion so morality and legality are out of the question so the public outrage must stem from somewhere else showing your point invalid. Another thing you pointed out was the crimibal procedure and investogation. Literally again, Showed you two qoutes on how there was no evidence he was involved in that and so the investigation itself actually started before this public outcry you keep talking about by trumps lawyers and the poeple. Secondly theres no evidence he was involved in that and so legally and as we know morally he is okay so your definition doesnt fit here, Becuase there is no evidence. 3. Morality, I don't think you read any of my qoutes, " timeinc. Net, " Micheal Cohen Trumps person lawyer recorded a message instructing of logistics of finance whether to pay with cash, What to pay or what there talking about isn't clear. " we don't know what there talking about, Also you're assuming that what they are talking about is hushing up karen which factually as we saw wasn't proven and so you made an assumotion amd yet again another illogical fallacy, Becuase what assumed means that's the constitution for morality according to you? Illogical. 4. Dude. . . U"S opponents have characterised the TPP as a secretive deal that favoured big business and other countries at the expense of American jobs and national sovereignty. And said the TPP would pave the way for companies to sue governments that change policy on, Say, Health and education to favour state-provided services. And it was also seen as intensifying competition between countries' labour forces. " BBC. Com iy would basically kill our economy and cut jobs and favour big business. So. . . He's scandalous becuase he was looking out for his own country? China Trade Bill- first off their was already a law called the trade act of 1974 that actually allows for President Trump to halt the China Trade Bill your liberal friend Clinton put in their that literally let China just ruin our ecenomy, But that's a debate for another day. The senate buy majority vote also allowed for the bill to be broken so your point of this decision being unethical, Illegal is illogical. The world trade oragnization, Dude the China Bill allowed for China to make US meet certain economic demans that would make them a technology hub and force our busniesses over their so again that point is illogical becuase for it to be broken would actually help us. ABC. News. Com for all bills and treaties stated. 5. Your 5th point literally has no factual, Statistical or coborrative evidence and is you just going on a rant about some third party you still havent mentioned. Our two parties have been going on for hundreds of years I dont understand why that would just stop. Even if the parties aren't what they are which you have no evidence claiming such they would still be considered democratic and republic. 6. I like how you claimed im talking out of my rear end when your last two points were even statistical and you other points either were just insulting me or showing me a treaty that would be actually moral to break.