Difference between revisions of "Main Page"
(→Media and Public Relations)
|Line 109:||Line 109:|
== Legal (or illegal) Conduct ==
== Legal (or illegal) Conduct ==
Latest revision as of 20:01, 20 October 2019
This page is currently under active development. Significant changes may appear as we add, modify or relocate its contents.
We believe that Trump and his business enterprises were poorly vetted on a “nuts and bolts” level before the 2016 election. Whether you supported or opposed Trump, you will be surprised at how much you didn’t know. We believe that truth has power. Facts cannot be ignored forever. Our goal is to empower you by providing access to important facts about Donald Trump, his business interests, and his collaborators. This wiki will serve as a permanent and comprehensive center of known significant information about Donald Trump. We're currently under construction, so please pardon our dust. Feel free to check in early and often!
Mendacity ("Mendacity" is a fancy word that is short for "habitual and constant liar")
Media and Public Relations
Legal (or illegal) Conduct
Frequently Asked Questions
Who are you and why are you qualified to do this?
My name is Geoffrey Andersen. I have been a professional opposition researcher for over a decade and have provided research to many political campaigns including a national presidential race and several US Senate races. My research has been the subject of public reporting.
RAGEPATH is a research project directed by (and primarily conducted by) Geoffrey Andersen. "This one unfolds in the public libraries and coffee shops of San Francisco, where a self-employed 40-year-old named Geoff Andersen has worked since November for 16 hours a day, seven days a week, burning through nearly $45,000 in personal savings and donations from friends and family in pursuit of hidden truths about Trump’s rise to power. Andersen, a freelance Democratic opposition researcher who worked on President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign (inaccurate factual claim omitted), has downloaded thousands of newspaper articles dating from the 1970s, hunted down obscure court and real estate records, and is even reading a textbook on money laundering. " (Politco, August 20, 2017)
What's your real agenda here? Aren't you trying to get Trump impeached?
Nobody at RAGEPATH likes Donald Trump. Any human being with a moral conscience would dislike Trump if they knew as much about him as we have learned over the course of our investigations. Donald Trump is unfit for the Presidency and has committed multiple crimes in office that clearly call out for impeachment - the only remedy for presidential criminality specifically provided by the Constitution. That, however, is a matter for others. Our investigation primarily focused on Donald Trump's personal conduct in the years prior to 2016. It's easy to forget now, but it is still our central thesis that voters were actively misinformed about the manifest depravity of Trump's character including by figures in the media who breached their duty to provide the public with true, accurate, and complete information.
How do I read the information that you are presenting?
Information throughout this wiki is provided in a relatively standardized "bullet format," often used in press releases. The bullet format opens with a bold-faced statement of the relevant facts. It is followed by a quotation from a reputable publication that corroborates the asserted fact. Finally, it concludes with a citation to the news article or publication from which the claim has been extracted. When possible, we will try to provide a direct hyperlink to the source. Since we worked with news articles extracted from a database, that is itself a big project!
- Bullet format presents information in the format of a bold-faced statement of relevant fact. "The bold-faced statement is then followed by a quotation from a reputable publication that supports the assertion made in the bold-faced statement. Since this is an example of format, not an actual 'bullet,' it is not a direct quote." (Reputable Publication, August 21, 2019)
Aren't wikis inherently unreliable because anyone can edit them?
The only author of this wiki is Geoffrey Andersen. A couple of volunteer site administrators could conceivably edit information, but have no reason to do so. If we add more authors or contributors, we will try to identify them clearly and their work will still be subject to review and approval by Geoffrey Andersen. So, this wiki is as credible as I am. You are welcome to determine for yourself how credible you believe me to be.