DONALD TRUMP AUG 17, 2026 speaking of his ALLIES! "“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the shit out of them,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News on Monday. 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
🤣1

Channel
@realchrissky
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
33,016subscribers
-233 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001338829305 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @realchrissky |
| Created | 21 February 2021 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 17 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 12 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 17 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/realchrissky |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 17 Aug 2026, 15:24 | 33,016 | -20 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 08:55 | 33,036 | -50 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 19:18 | 33,086 | -29 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 11:56 | 33,115 | -9 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 14:24 | 33,124 | -15 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 15:24 | 33,139 | -12 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 18:32 | 33,151 | -34 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 17:22 | 33,185 | -17 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 14:06 | 33,202 | -27 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 13:17 | 33,229 | -14 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 16:40 | 33,243 | -6 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 09:51 | 33,249 | first reading |
59 posts held, back to 3 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 25 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 17 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 59 (3 August 2026 – 17 August 2026) |
| Views total | 86,517 |
| Reactions total | 1,801 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 17 Aug 2026, 12:51 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Measured directly from 6 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
1,801 reactions across 59 posts, in 42 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 29.9% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 💯 | 539 | 29.9% | |
| 🤣 | 354 | 19.7% | |
| 🤡 | 249 | 13.8% | |
| ❤ | 96 | 5.33% | |
| 😁 | 79 | 4.39% | |
| 🤬 | 57 | 3.16% | |
| 👍 | 56 | 3.11% | |
| 🥴 | 52 | 2.89% | |
| ⚡ | 45 | 2.50% | |
| 🔥 | 40 | 2.22% | |
| 👏 | 31 | 1.72% | |
| 🤯 | 31 | 1.72% | |
| 🏆 | 21 | 1.17% | |
| 💩 | 21 | 1.17% | |
| 😢 | 20 | 1.11% | |
| 🖕 | 15 | 0.833% | |
| 🤔 | 11 | 0.611% | |
| 👀 | 10 | 0.555% | |
| 👌 | 10 | 0.555% | |
| 😭 | 7 | 0.389% | |
| 22 further kinds | 57 | 3.16% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 59 of the 59 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 1,801reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 59 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 17 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
DONALD TRUMP AUG 17, 2026 speaking of his ALLIES! "“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the shit out of them,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News on Monday. 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
🤣1
Pretty Please With Sugar On Top.... Iran "wave the white flag of surrender" (as they are embarassingly kicking your ass right out of the middle east !)
🤣4
If you had to use one article show the workd EXACTLY HOW ISRAELIS THINK AND ACT here it is "ANOTHER IAF OFFICER arrested after placing polymarket bets on attacks in Iran and Yemen" 👍😉 NOTICE#thoughts NOTICE#actions
🤣8❤1👍1
"Iran achieved a “genuine victory” in both the military and political dimensions of the recent war, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said at a meeting with parliamentary reporters late on Saturday. “This does not mean that we destroyed the US and Israeli armies,” Ghalibaf said. “It means that they attacked us with nine specific objectives that they had officially, repeatedly and explicitly declared, but th…
💯18❤3🤡3😁2🔥1
Trump just lost a HUGE MAGA BASE. Even COMEDIANS like Theo Von, have 100% turned on Trump due to his lies and failures. See. Thats what people with a bran and integrity do. Change their view based on the best available information Stupid morons who suck cock on a daily basis cant do this and simply make excuses and the cock goes deeper down their throat I have nevet seen an entire country full of male cock suc…
⚡10❤5💯4🔥2👏1🤡1
Chris Skys Art of War Iran is smart. No doubt. They definitely have balls, too. The question is... how big are they? And what is Iran REALLY willing to risk in provoking the USA? What am I talking about? A way Iran can give the USA two big black eyes on the international stage but also inviting the true wrath and fury of the USA with the full financial and moral support of The People (not just Trumps bs) Do I wan…
💯13🤔6🔥4😢3👍2❤1❤🔥1🍌1
Yes, he really did post this. "Ladies and gentleman, the leader of the free world..."
🤡18🤣14❤2🍾1💩1
Trump is so out of touch with reality. His own people have to PRETEND he was "joking" whenever he says something truly ridiculous. Is anybody stupid enough to think Trump was "joking" about taking control of the Strait of Hormuz? Obviously not. But since reality and Trumps words are always OPPOSITE. His own people gotta pretend "he was joking" He definitely is a JOKE
🤡12💯10❤2
"Ill never apologize" Dont worry Dementia Pedo we know.
🤡20🖕5🤣3💩1💯1
Khabib is and always will be the God and Goat of MMA Nothing but respect. Always. Except when he beat the shit out of connor and shit talked him during the enitre fight while he beat him like an irish red headed step child and then attacked his entire crew (amazing) Listen to him CHECK ISLAM his number 1 fighter for trying to tell his opponent Ian Garry to "shut up" as Ian Garry is Praising Islam but islam didnt u…
💩6👎2
Just in case you thought he wasnt full of shit enough to say it. Mr "i cant put 1 ship within HUNDREDS OF MILES of the Strait of Hormuz "American Territory" Because hes "winning" in Iran Trump supporters. Yes. You are the dumbest fucks to ever live
🤡19😁9👎1
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAH and Trump supporters cheer and "trust the plan" Any day now. The USA will "take hormuz" meanwhile thry dont eve have 1 ship in ther persian gulf their entire navy HIDING hundreds of miles away where they are safe from Iran missiles. This is literally the most blatant. Hilarious load of bullshit to ever come out of this pedos mo…
🤡25😁12🤣4
Showing the 12 most recent of 59 posts we hold for @realchrissky. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank — 83,461 of 1,481,306entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 17 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“REALCHRISSKY” (@realchrissky), 33,016 subscribers as measured 17 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/realchrissky.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.