The student movement continues to amaze. They are doing it for each other and they’ve checked egos at the door with one thing in mind; stopping mass shootings at their schools.

“Enough” is their key phrase and operative word.

While they concentrate on getting things done, America watches the latest battle between President Trump and his critics, which took a new turn with the Stormy Daniels interview on "60Minutes" in late March. In the end, it boiled down to “he said, she said” and who do you believe.

To come to any commonsense conclusion, look at facts and boil them down to nuggets. Once you have the nugget, you need to taste it, see if it passes the smell test, and then decide whether you like it or you don’t.

Supporters argue “Who do you believe, the president of the United States, or a porn star out for a money grab and publicity?" Supporters say it was a decade ago and Trump is not the same person he was then; they say if it happened before he was president, it doesn’t matter. Then they add, if it did happen, she was a consenting adult and this is personal between Trump and his wife. Some say "Who cares, what we care about is his policies and that he is helping America become great again” and that he is only in this because he loves us.

Detractors create a different narrative; character matters and, to this president, lying is second nature; a sign of a deficient character. They point to video clip after video clip, tweet after tweet, where Trump contradicts what the truth was or is, and their point is that it is habitual. They believe Stormy Daniels because she has everything to lose — coming forward will create the same leper mentality it did for Paula Jones or Monica Lewinsky, and perhaps millions in lawsuits for breaking her nondisclosure agreement; this is a no-win situation for Stormy, Trump's critics argue.

Does the president really love us, or is it ego, money and greed that drive him? He tells us in an interview that he is a very religious man; when pressed by the interviewer “had he ever asked God for forgiveness,” he stumbled and, unsurprisingly said “No, never.” He added that he knows when he needs to do better and that’s what he does. He does not need God to tell him.

Both sides agree that this is a distraction, but for different reasons – detractors say this takes away from the Mueller investigation, while his supporters say this takes Trump away from running our country and protecting us against illegal immigrants and making great trade deals and fixing our health care system.

I say "enough." It is a distraction and doesn’t matter; it is between Trump and his family to figure it out. If laws were broken and campaign funds diverted to pay Daniels and/or others, that’s a separate issue and let the chips fall where they may.

Let’s make this about truth; it is not cut and dried, so look at history for answers.

Look at everything that has been documented by Trump’s own words (tweets) and from his stump speeches (video) and decide where he falls on the truth meter – where is the weight of his foot; is he a truth-teller, or is he a liar? Each person gets to decide for themselves.

The second thing is what does Trump stand for and is he the great protector of all Americans, or is he self-absorbed, greedy and dishonest?

To answer this; look at facts.

The tax reform bill is a place to start. Trump and the Republicans still hang onto Reagan’s “trickle-down economics” theory (George Bush called it “voodoo economics” during a primary debate with Reagan).

The very term “trickle-down” says it all; supporters say it works to cut taxes of the rich because they invest in our economy and that trickles down to more jobs that benefit the working class.

But circle back to the term “trickle-down” – doesn’t that equal giving tax breaks to the rich so that their crumbs trickle down to the workers? That’s what the word "trickle" means (if the riches flowed down, maybe we would have something).

"Trickle," by definition, tells us what Trump and others in his position think — they don’t want to share, they want it to trickle down, just enough to stop the revolution. Just enough to give hope. Just enough so they can take credit for helping the middle class. Just enough to keep the critics at bay.

That is not caring; it is selfish and greedy.

Enough, I say — “just enough” isn’t OK.

“Evidence is the only good reason to believe anything.”

— Richard Dawkins, biologist and author (b. March 1941)