Are you going to answer my point?
What I was stating is that the "and" renders your point moot. But, since you think otherwise, I'm happy to deal with what you say, as though it was relevant: That Jesus refers to the Father, and that is, HIS Father, as the only true God, no more defeats the doctrine of the Trinity than anything else does —Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is never spoken of as another God. There is only one. And the three persons of the Trinity are all three, that one God.
"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel" (God With Us).
"For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." —And right there is the Trinity, all in a description of the Son.
But I doubt you will admit it, in spite of all the Scriptures showing the same thing, you want the "natural" way of looking at things, defining God according to the humanocentric POV.