Is anyone actually making this argument? And is defending Trump by pointing out that he’s not the only person that sucks a position we want to take? Does every time someone brings up a criticism of Trump it needs to include “of course he’s not the only person who lies?”
It’s Trump the third year thread he’s the main topic of discussion. I don’t think anyone in here actually thinks he is responsible for all the wrong things in the world.
1 Like
That’s a fine bubble you’ve created for yourself. No amount of logic or reason appears to be able to penetrate it, and you’re happy with it. Suit yourself.
You’re like the kind of person that gets a speeding ticket, goes to court, and tried to raise the defense that there was a guy going down the other side of the road faster than you. That’s not a defense. All that matters, though is this: were you speeding? You don’t get this.
But all this is a waste. Like many Trumpkins, you’ve immunized yourself from objective thought.
The proof is still coming in, but indications appear that Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden for personal gain, sent Giuliani to keep it informal and arguably outside of use of public authority, but Giuliani wasnt getting anywhere, so Trump decided to deploy some leverage (withholding aid) to get the favor Giuliani wasn’t securing privately.
What I just described isn’t some fanciful rendition wanting for facts - it’s a credible theory based on facts we currently have, which makes it worthy of further investigation. You know this - which is why you’re so slippery and evasive when I try to engage you on the facts (e.g., what Giuliani was up to).
That’s where we are, and that’s why polls she increasing interest in impeachment inquiry. Most people can set aside emotion and bias and stick to facts and logic and see where it leads, a concept we call justice. You obviously can’t do that.
2 Likes
Are his opponents the president? The idea that people who aren’t even in office, Biden and Clinton, are more dangerous than someone who is, is rather stupid. But being a cultist requires you turn your brain off.
- You might be surprised - I agree 100%.
- “Article ll says I can do whatever l want” - I disagree 100%.
- “We have the task of oversight of the Executive” - I agree 100%.
- We can pronounce guilt in advance, fabricate bs as credible theory, use government agencies to infiltrate presidential campaigns with desire to bring them down - I disagree 100%.
- Actually use the same Impeachment Inquiry precedent of full House vote - I agree 100%.
You don’t know me fellow.
If Trump needs to go from legal standpoint, then the law should be able to legitimately make it happen. But if it all political and can only be reached by methods less than aboveboard, then I am against it.
What’s so sad, (and quite frankly scary), about it all @loppar and @thunderbolt23 …is how effective the disinformation has been, and continues to be. And that it’s spread and propagated by individuals, groups and organizations who were historically anti-Russian, and now, even the President of the United States.
What’s the saying…“The scariest and most dangerous state to be in is when we don’t know what we don’t know…” (or something like that).
It’s chilling.
1 Like
Could have fooled me. Where is your outrage at Trump’s executive overreach?
No onw can truly pronounce “guilt” at this point - that’s what an investigation and an inquiry are for. But since you agree there are enough facts to require investigation - that something smells stinky about this, we need to dig deeper - then why are you insisting it is partisan witch hunt? It’s obviously not.
Of course, plenty of partisans are prematurely concluding Trump is “guilty”, and it’s fine to criticize that, but saying “hey, this is worthy of investigation, but pump the brakes untiI all the facts are in before rushing to judgment” is not the same as “this is all bullshit and it’s a partisan witch hunt!”.
You can’t believe both of those statements, despite you saying both - they are mutually exclusive. So which do you actually believe?
That’s exactly what impeachment is for, and it’s purposely set up to be more of a political process than a legal one. Thus, the higher standard of proof in a criminal matter isn’t necessary to impeach. When a President abuses his authority, impeachment should be on the table.
The antidote to these kinds of disinformation campaigns is supposed to be a wise and educated free people - smart, informed citizens who don’t get fooled easily because they’ve grown up getting the tools they need to think independently. If we’ve learned anything, it’s that we don’t have it, not like we should.
1 Like
1 Like
It really scares the shit out of me actually. We are being totally outplayed and everyone is either too distracted or too petty to care about these campaigns as much as they should.
1 Like
And that somehow we should be more afraid, or just critical, of the aging (and more and more politically irrelevant) Clinton’s than of a sitting President spreading Russian propaganda?
I can’t even begin to wrap my head around that.
This is a great point, and one that needs to be put to bed. Hillary was a terrible candidate and appears to be, by many accounts, a pretty terrible person, too. But the Right had mythologized her into a demon capable of ruining society as we know it. The fear and loathing of Clinton (and her irrelevant husband) reached cult-like status well before 2016.
It never made sense. She’s a power hungry, careerist politician - not good, but not all that different than a bunch of people in politics. Had she won, we’d have four more muddling years of Obama-esque policy (the Right would shriek, but the country didn’t end during Obama’s tenure, so spare me the hyperbole) and she’d have crap approval ratings because the more she is in the spotlight, the less people like her.
But she wouldn’t be a malevolent, baby-eating supervillain.
Understanding this, well, stupid phenomenon is understanding why the Right engages in galactic-level cognitive dissonance with respect to Trump. He’s a terrible person - a narcissist and a sleaze. He’s a terrible president - he’s unqualified, not very smart, capricious, and doesn’t have any appreciation for the importance of public trust and duty. Trump is objectively awful - and this isn’t disputable. The Right can spin, but they all know - they know - he’s garbage.
BUT - if you’ve convinced yourself Hillary is literally the AntiChrist who will bring about the end times of the republic, you can convince yourself that the End of keeping her out of the Oval Office always justifies the Means of, well, anyone other than the AntiChrist in the Oval Office - including an unfit moron with sociopathic tendencies. And that’s what you get out of the Right these days. Nothing more. No principles. No ideas. No intellectual integrity.
This frothing, irrational hatred of Hillary has gotten us where we are today. We’re in this ditch because of that.
And the great irony is, Trump is doing far more damage to the presidency and American prestige than Hillary - bad as she is - ever would have.
So, in sum, we’re really in this bad position because there is a cemented block of clueless and blindly loyal dopes in this country who can’t operate by logic or reason and bought into this cult of Hillary hatred over the years. It isn’t a huge bloc - but it’s big enough to infect the voting Right in this country and keeps Trump’s approval rating from truly cratering, though it should.
Not sure how we fix it. And to be clear, I’m someone who is more than willing to point out both sides have extremists and weirdos messing up our politics (identity politics, anyone?). But I’ll also say the fringe Right has gone off the deep end with its idiocy in ways the Left has not.
5 Likes
Neither do I, @thunderbolt23.
Surely the Republic will “survive” Trump…but the question is, what will “survival” look like?
For myself personally, I may vent a lot about Trump on this Board; but in my everyday Life, I try to mention the man as little as I can. It’s just too frustrating.
As I’ve said before; people like Trump more often than not end up Self-destructing. It’s all a question of 1) when and 2) who he takes down with him.
We’ll see.
Trump is great because MAGA, liberal tears, Obama was a Muslim who tried taking our guns away and Hillary was literally Hitler. That’s really all you need to know.
Absolutely, 100% true. I really disliked Obama’s foreign policy, and particularly the so called “apology tour”, but Trump is doing lasting damage to our alliances, our global strategy, and in a way Obama couldn’t have managed.
Far beyond simply “speaking his mind” or “talking directly to the people” through Twitter, he has no understanding or care for the responsibilities of the office of the presidency beyond the immediate “get my way” term.
7 Likes
It’s nothing really, just a sitting POTUS being used in Russian propaganda due to his obsessive need to believe anything Putin says.
Is there even a Russian embassy staff in London after the expulsion? I’d have thought the staff was skeletal at best.
These are from the time period, but there may be something about that Russian Disinformation. As in WaPo, Guardian
When they had the conversation later that day, Tuesday the 13th again, the White House put out a report expressing solidarity with the U.K. and stating that “President Trump said that the US was with the UK all the way.” That was followed on Wednesday and Thursday by two statements from the State Department condemning Russia, another from Ambassador Nikki Haley at the United Nations, and above all by a joint statement — from the U.S., the U.K., France, and Germany — that called the poisoning of the Skripals “the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War. It is an assault on U.K. sovereignty and any such use by a State party is a clear violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention and a breach of international law. It threatens the security of us all.” In the middle of all these condemnations both the U.S. and the U.K. announced additional sanctions on Russia.
Or
US President Donald Trump said it “certainly looks like the Russians were behind” the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter in the UK.
“That is very sad,” Mr Trump said about the incident, adding that it was “something that should never, ever happen and we’re taking it very seriously”.
Forget prepared written statements and listen to the man himself. Notice how he completely differently frames the evidence and reluctantly concedes the fact alongside several qualifiers - “it sounds to me they believe it was Russia” etc…
Also, from the article Russians triumphantly quoted:
Donald Trump disputed that Russia was behind the attempted murder of a former Russian spy in a tense call with Theresa May, it has emerged.
Despite the widespread conclusion that Vladimir Putin’s regime was behind the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia last year, the US president is said to have spent 10 minutes expressing his doubts about Russian involvement.
According to the Washington Post, Trump “harangued” May about Britain’s contribution to Nato in a phone call with Britain’s then prime minister in the summer of last year, before disputing Russian involvement in the Skripal case.
“Trump totally bought into the idea there was credible doubt about the poisoning,” said a figure briefed on the call. “A solid 10 minutes of the conversation is spent with May saying it’s highly likely and him saying he’s not sure.”
You are literally taking prepared statements from someone ‘overhearing’ the conversation, while ignoring US positions and statements, and statements on film.
Surely you don’t think POTUS spokesman, UN rep, Sec of State could release condemnation w/o Trump the micro manager approval.
You @loppar are the agent of disinformation. You are refuting his very words on recording.