Orange is the new President

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 25908
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau » 13 Jul 2018, 22:20

"I'll bet that Italian-American businessman with the thuggish personality had no idea that his sons, accountant, and business partner were all balls deep in the drug trade. And it's a total coincidence that the city council members whose campaigns he supported all turned a blind eye to the police chief's involvement with drugs. No way the old man knew."
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22209
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 13 Jul 2018, 23:07

thoreau wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 22:20
"I'll bet that Italian-American businessman with the thuggish personality had no idea that his sons, accountant, and business partner were all balls deep in the drug trade. And it's a total coincidence that the city council members whose campaigns he supported all turned a blind eye to the police chief's involvement with drugs. No way the old man knew."
And if he said anything suggesting he did know something then that proves he knew nothing, because if he knew anything he wouldn't be dumb enough to admit it.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14162
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen » 13 Jul 2018, 23:11

*shrug* He knew, he didn't know, what's the difference? So long as his fanbase controls the GOP and the GOP controls the Senate, he is safe. Outside of a video emerging showing he was responsible for the death of JonBenét Ramsey (judging by the tabloids, that is an issue that his supporters DO care about), his base is not going to turn against him.

(Shameful confession: I do sometimes watch MSNBC news clips. The desperation with which they try to convince themselves that the latest outrage will somehow turn his fanbase against him is amusing in a sick way.)
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14162
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen » 13 Jul 2018, 23:14

Jennifer wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 23:07
And if he said anything suggesting he did know something then that proves he knew nothing, because if he knew anything he wouldn't be dumb enough to admit it.
Jennifer, I doubt there is anything too dumb for Trump to say. :lol: (Didn't he shoot his legal team in the foot early in the Stormy Daniels affair?)
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 7051
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Shem » 13 Jul 2018, 23:16

thoreau wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 22:20
"I'll bet that Italian-American businessman with the thuggish personality had no idea that his sons, accountant, and business partner were all balls deep in the drug trade. And it's a total coincidence that the city council members whose campaigns he supported all turned a blind eye to the police chief's involvement with drugs. No way the old man knew."
I'm sure Trump just figured that all those Putin-adjacent oligarchs were throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at him because he's such a great guy.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14162
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen » 13 Jul 2018, 23:25

Shem wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 23:16
I'm sure Trump just figured that all those Putin-adjacent oligarchs were throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at him because he's such a great guy.
The scariest part is that Trump may actually think that way.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22209
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 13 Jul 2018, 23:26

Aresen wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 23:14
Jennifer wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 23:07
And if he said anything suggesting he did know something then that proves he knew nothing, because if he knew anything he wouldn't be dumb enough to admit it.
Jennifer, I doubt there is anything too dumb for Trump to say. :lol: (Didn't he shoot his legal team in the foot early in the Stormy Daniels affair?)
I also doubt there's any limits to the stupid thins he'd say (hence my disagreement with Painboy). As for Jason's dismissal of Trump as a childish troll (and I agree Trump most likely is literally childish, in that his lack of self-awareness and filter between his mouth and brain likely rivals a toddler's), that by no means leads to the conclusion "Therefore he can't be capable of corruption, because he's too stupid for that."
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14162
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen » 13 Jul 2018, 23:37

Jennifer wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 23:26
Aresen wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 23:14
Jennifer wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 23:07
And if he said anything suggesting he did know something then that proves he knew nothing, because if he knew anything he wouldn't be dumb enough to admit it.
Jennifer, I doubt there is anything too dumb for Trump to say. :lol: (Didn't he shoot his legal team in the foot early in the Stormy Daniels affair?)
I also doubt there's any limits to the stupid thins he'd say (hence my disagreement with Painboy). As for Jason's dismissal of Trump as a childish troll (and I agree Trump most likely is literally childish, in that his lack of self-awareness and filter between his mouth and brain likely rivals a toddler's), that by no means leads to the conclusion "Therefore he can't be capable of corruption, because he's too stupid for that."
I hate to throw the word 'narcissist' around, because it feels like armchair psychiatry, but I don't think he is capable of applying the concept of 'corruption' to himself. It is like he has taken the whole 'Imperial Presidency' thing and dialed it well past the red zone. My feeling is that his definition of 'good' and 'bad' is little more than 'you support me' and 'you don't support me.' "L'État, c'est moi" is the quintessence of Trump.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 25908
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau » 13 Jul 2018, 23:37

All I know for sure is that the Don must be innocent. He had no idea what anyone around him was up to. And if he ever did say something to suggest that it's only because he's an innocent man who says stupid things. Real criminals are too smart to say anything incriminating. The Don is an innocent idiot who has never even been to Sicily.
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 22668
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Mo » 14 Jul 2018, 11:23

Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 18:02
Painboy wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 17:53
I know Trump likes to shoot off at the mouth but that would show an amazing lack of self preservation even by him. Especially someone in no way guaranteed the presidency or other legal cover.
"A guy hoping to be elected -- especially one seeking votes from right-wing 'We love the troops'-types -- would never be stupid enough to publicly insult John McCain for having been a Vietnam POW, right?"

"Surely he wouldn't publicly insult a pretty blonde Fox News anchor by suggesting she must've been menstruating when she annoyed him, right?"

"He'd never be crazy enough to openly claim CNN refused to air his speech while CNN broadcast that very speech live, right?"

"Even if he thought he could murder someone in public and not lose support of his voters, he'd never be dumb enough to say this in public, right?"

"If some of his supporters cited him as their inspiration to beat the shit out of a homeless Latino man, surely he'd be smart enough to condemn this behavior, rather than publicly remark that said supporters were 'passionate' about making America great again?"

"Surely he would know better than to encourage his supporters to be physically violent toward non-supporters at his rallies, right?"

And there are dozens if not hundreds of similar additional examples I could provide, too.
Would any of those implicate him in a conspiracy that could result in him going to jail forever and/or being shot for treason? C'mon.
Not sure he’s clever enough, but he would have skated by on the whole “look forward, not backward” norm where you don’t prosecute political opponents, no matter how brazen they were. That’s why people who illegally tortured people are still employed and the person who destroyed the evidence is CIA director.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22209
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 14 Jul 2018, 14:05

Mo wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 11:23
Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 18:02
Painboy wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 17:53
I know Trump likes to shoot off at the mouth but that would show an amazing lack of self preservation even by him. Especially someone in no way guaranteed the presidency or other legal cover.
"A guy hoping to be elected -- especially one seeking votes from right-wing 'We love the troops'-types -- would never be stupid enough to publicly insult John McCain for having been a Vietnam POW, right?"

"Surely he wouldn't publicly insult a pretty blonde Fox News anchor by suggesting she must've been menstruating when she annoyed him, right?"

"He'd never be crazy enough to openly claim CNN refused to air his speech while CNN broadcast that very speech live, right?"

"Even if he thought he could murder someone in public and not lose support of his voters, he'd never be dumb enough to say this in public, right?"

"If some of his supporters cited him as their inspiration to beat the shit out of a homeless Latino man, surely he'd be smart enough to condemn this behavior, rather than publicly remark that said supporters were 'passionate' about making America great again?"

"Surely he would know better than to encourage his supporters to be physically violent toward non-supporters at his rallies, right?"

And there are dozens if not hundreds of similar additional examples I could provide, too.
Would any of those implicate him in a conspiracy that could result in him going to jail forever and/or being shot for treason? C'mon.
Not sure he’s clever enough, but he would have skated by on the whole “look forward, not backward” norm where you don’t prosecute political opponents, no matter how brazen they were. That’s why people who illegally tortured people are still employed and the person who destroyed the evidence is CIA director.
Two other possibilities occurred to me (though I have not looked up the Trump-outrage timeline of that summer): one, wasn't his "Hey, Russia, hack my opponents" comment made after chants of "Lock [Hillary] up!" were commonplace at his rallies? He might've been so drunk on that Kool-aid, it never once occurred to him that anything he said or did might be lockup-worthy himself. And two, by the time he made that "hack 'em" speech, hadn't he already successfully violated scads of informal "rules" regarding what presidential candidates should and should not say and do? Making openly racist and comments, refusing to release his tax returns, violating not just "presidential behavior" norms but even "ordinary decent adult behavior" norms.... even if you start out with someone who DOES have an ordinary sense of humility, I imagine that sort of "Holy shit; I'm practically untouchable!" idea might be intoxicating in a bad way. And of course, we didn't start out with someone possessing ordinary humility; we started out with Donald Trump.

I remember, back when "Trump is a narcissist" was an extremely controversial statement to make here, one reason I stuck to that gun was that even when he was officially no-joke running for president, he still had en entitlement complex so oversized, he seemed to think that a wannabe presidential candidate shouldn't have to face tough policy questions at a presidential debate. Clearly, this is not and never was a man acquainted with the notion "The rules apply to me same as everybody else."
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 25908
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau » 14 Jul 2018, 14:21

I think the problem is that people are a bit too enamored of an idea akin to the Efficient Markets Hypothesis. If a rational, self-interested player with perfect information would not incriminate himself that way then it follows that Trump isn't actually incriminating himself, just trolling, because trolling is an effective strategy for him.

But if Trump were a rational player with perfect information then he would be able to hold his team together better than he had. Unless sowing discord and chaos is his optimal strategy.

But whatever is going on here, it is the optimal strategy for a rational and self-interested player with perfect information.
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 22215
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by JasonL » 14 Jul 2018, 14:49

Or people are married to a collusion narrative to a degree nothing else matters.

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22209
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 14 Jul 2018, 15:11

JasonL wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 14:49
Or people are married to a collusion narrative to a degree nothing else matters.
Is it more reasonable to marry the "I'll bet that Italian-American businessman with the thuggish personality had no idea that his sons, accountant, and business partner were all balls deep in the drug trade" narrative instead? Thoreau at least is being ironic when he makes such claims.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 25908
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau » 14 Jul 2018, 15:11

Reread this.
thoreau wrote:A million presumptions? Maybe one or two. But we know that his campaign manager was working with Kremlin allies in Ukraine, and that his Ukraine office manager is tied to Russia intelligence. We know that his son was eager to get aid from Russia. We know that Russia reached out to his sons through business associates with Russian ties. We know about Felix Sater's ties to Russian mobsters. We know that lots of people around Trump lied about their contacts with Russia, including people who got jobs needing security clearances. We know that Roger Stone was in contact with people involved in the Podesta email hack.

We know all this and more.

At this point, you need a whole lot of presumptions to assume that Trump was never aware of any of this, that the guy who now has ultimate responsibility for the national security apparatus was completely unaware of Russian activity in his camp, completely unaware that the team from which he chose people for national security posts was stacked with people who had something to hide concerning Russia.
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3584
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Painboy » 14 Jul 2018, 15:59

thoreau wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 15:11
Reread this.
thoreau wrote:A million presumptions? Maybe one or two. But we know that his campaign manager was working with Kremlin allies in Ukraine, and that his Ukraine office manager is tied to Russia intelligence. We know that his son was eager to get aid from Russia. We know that Russia reached out to his sons through business associates with Russian ties. We know about Felix Sater's ties to Russian mobsters. We know that lots of people around Trump lied about their contacts with Russia, including people who got jobs needing security clearances. We know that Roger Stone was in contact with people involved in the Podesta email hack.

We know all this and more.

At this point, you need a whole lot of presumptions to assume that Trump was never aware of any of this, that the guy who now has ultimate responsibility for the national security apparatus was completely unaware of Russian activity in his camp, completely unaware that the team from which he chose people for national security posts was stacked with people who had something to hide concerning Russia.
You're just playing connect the dots and the image that is coming out of it is one you're already biased to. Even if Trump knew about every move made it still doesn't prove that anything happened other than some shady meetings. Give me a witness or accomplice who flips and we have something. That shouldn't be that hard to find if something did in fact happen. It's not like Trump inspires a whole lot of loyalty. How many allies has he thrown under the bus in the last several years? How many of them have immediately started talking shit about him?

Something in this case should have broke by now if there was any real proof of significant wrongdoing. Especially so if you think Trump is so stupid as to order a treasonous act in public. He can't be both a conspiratorial mastermind and a boob who publicly admits to his own conspiracies.

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22209
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 14 Jul 2018, 16:21

Painboy wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 15:59
thoreau wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 15:11
Reread this.
thoreau wrote:A million presumptions? Maybe one or two. But we know that his campaign manager was working with Kremlin allies in Ukraine, and that his Ukraine office manager is tied to Russia intelligence. We know that his son was eager to get aid from Russia. We know that Russia reached out to his sons through business associates with Russian ties. We know about Felix Sater's ties to Russian mobsters. We know that lots of people around Trump lied about their contacts with Russia, including people who got jobs needing security clearances. We know that Roger Stone was in contact with people involved in the Podesta email hack.

We know all this and more.

At this point, you need a whole lot of presumptions to assume that Trump was never aware of any of this, that the guy who now has ultimate responsibility for the national security apparatus was completely unaware of Russian activity in his camp, completely unaware that the team from which he chose people for national security posts was stacked with people who had something to hide concerning Russia.
You're just playing connect the dots and the image that is coming out of it is one you're already biased to. Even if Trump knew about every move made it still doesn't prove that anything happened other than some shady meetings. Give me a witness or accomplice who flips and we have something. That shouldn't be that hard to find if something did in fact happen. It's not like Trump inspires a whole lot of loyalty. How many allies has he thrown under the bus in the last several years? How many of them have immediately started talking shit about him?

Something in this case should have broke by now if there was any real proof of significant wrongdoing. Especially so if you think Trump is so stupid as to order a treasonous act in public. He can't be both a conspiratorial mastermind and a boob who publicly admits to his own conspiracies.
I wonder if that part I bolded and italicized might be the source of confusion here? Because -- speaking at least for me -- no, I do not think Trump is any 12-d chess player or conspiracy genius; if anything, he's most likely the one being played: "all these Russian oligarchs keep giving me sweetheart business deals and I owe them nothing in return, because I'm that awesome!"

That said, I also must express disagreement with this bit you said: "Even if Trump knew about every move made it still doesn't prove that anything happened other than some shady meetings." No; if Trump knew about every move everyone on his team made that proves at minimum that a US presidential candidate and later president knew and said nothing about the fact that many in his inner circle lied about their involvement with agents of a semi-hostile foreign government in order to obtain security clearances. That is a very big deal.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 25908
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau » 14 Jul 2018, 18:01

He isn't a conspiratorial Mastermind. He's a guy going along with what's happening. That's still inexcusable, and impeachable.
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22209
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 14 Jul 2018, 18:11

thoreau wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 18:01
He isn't a conspiratorial Mastermind. He's a guy going along with what's happening. That's still inexcusable, and impeachable.
According to the Stable Genius, if anyone deserves impeachment over this, it should apply retroactively to President Obama. Because Obama was president during Trump's presidential campaign, ergo it was Obama's responsibility to make sure everyone in Trump's campaign was on the up-and-up.


Trump wrote: The stories you heard about the 12 Russians yesterday took place during the Obama Administration, not the Trump Administration. Why didn’t they do something about it, especially when it was reported that President Obama was informed by the FBI in September, before the Election?
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 22668
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Mo » 14 Jul 2018, 18:49

Painboy wrote:
thoreau wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 15:11
Reread this.
thoreau wrote:A million presumptions? Maybe one or two. But we know that his campaign manager was working with Kremlin allies in Ukraine, and that his Ukraine office manager is tied to Russia intelligence. We know that his son was eager to get aid from Russia. We know that Russia reached out to his sons through business associates with Russian ties. We know about Felix Sater's ties to Russian mobsters. We know that lots of people around Trump lied about their contacts with Russia, including people who got jobs needing security clearances. We know that Roger Stone was in contact with people involved in the Podesta email hack.

We know all this and more.

At this point, you need a whole lot of presumptions to assume that Trump was never aware of any of this, that the guy who now has ultimate responsibility for the national security apparatus was completely unaware of Russian activity in his camp, completely unaware that the team from which he chose people for national security posts was stacked with people who had something to hide concerning Russia.
You're just playing connect the dots and the image that is coming out of it is one you're already biased to. Even if Trump knew about every move made it still doesn't prove that anything happened other than some shady meetings. Give me a witness or accomplice who flips and we have something. That shouldn't be that hard to find if something did in fact happen. It's not like Trump inspires a whole lot of loyalty. How many allies has he thrown under the bus in the last several years? How many of them have immediately started talking shit about him?

Something in this case should have broke by now if there was any real proof of significant wrongdoing. Especially so if you think Trump is so stupid as to order a treasonous act in public. He can't be both a conspiratorial mastermind and a boob who publicly admits to his own conspiracies.
None of us know what Mueller has or doesn’t have. Also, based on what evidence or prior example. should this already been broken by now. Ken White has said that as far as federal prosecutions go, this one has moved really quickly. As someone who has sat on both sides of a federal investigation and has been pretty fairminded about the law, I trust that judgement.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14162
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen » 14 Jul 2018, 19:21

Jennifer wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 18:11
thoreau wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 18:01
He isn't a conspiratorial Mastermind. He's a guy going along with what's happening. That's still inexcusable, and impeachable.
According to the Stable Genius, if anyone deserves impeachment over this, it should apply retroactively to President Obama. Because Obama was president during Trump's presidential campaign, ergo it was Obama's responsibility to make sure everyone in Trump's campaign was on the up-and-up.


Trump wrote: The stories you heard about the 12 Russians yesterday took place during the Obama Administration, not the Trump Administration. Why didn’t they do something about it, especially when it was reported that President Obama was informed by the FBI in September, before the Election?
I wonder what has happened to the rate of hospital admissions caused by violent facepalming over the last three years. :D
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12014
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Eric the .5b » 15 Jul 2018, 01:14

thoreau wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 14:21
I think the problem is that people are a bit too enamored of an idea akin to the Efficient Markets Hypothesis.
Bluntly, I'm looking back through the last several pages, and I'm lost as to what claim you're trying to advance and what position you actually think you're arguing against.

You keep snarking as if you're trying to suggest, against violent and irrational doubt, that Donald Trump knew the country of Russia existed before he was elected.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 15708
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by lunchstealer » 15 Jul 2018, 01:15

Painboy wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 15:01
lunchstealer wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 14:12
JasonL wrote:
13 Jul 2018, 14:05
It looks like trolling?
I know TDS is a thing on both sides of the aisle, but ... Can't quite tell if serious.
Because a better answer is...he was publicly conspiring with the Russians? That seems a lot more far fetched than he was trolling.
Ah. I was reading Jason's comment as 'It looks like [Russia was] trolling' rather than 'It looks like [Trump was] trolling'.

Overall, I feel a bit like trolling or not trolling almost shouldn't make a difference. If you're willing to say something untrue to antagonize someone, why should I give you the benefit of the doubt? Hyperbole is a different thing. Joking is a different thing. But trolling is... I just don't really believe that most habitual trolls REALLY disagree with anything they say.

Trump wanted Russia to fuck with Hillary. It was good for him. I don't see how anyone could dispute that. Normal politicians might be perfectly happy to take advantage of that sort of thing, but they'd be SUPER circumspect about saying anything about it. At this point I don't think we can deny that he's either a high-functioning narcissist or a high-functioning psychopath (ASPD and NPD co-present pretty regularly, so probably both). But way lower functioning than regular pols.

So as long as he didn't think he could get caught, or could plausibly deny, I see no reason to believe that he wouldn't openly signal that that was how he'd like their support to manifest by 'joking' on the national news. The Chait article does a pretty good job of laying out all the probable connections between Trump and the Soviet/Russian political machine (and thus the security machine). The other article linked here or elsewhere does a pretty good job of laying out the fact that too much of Chait's article is true for the connection not to be real. Trump isn't a Russian sleeper agent, but they've definitely got a couple tentacles wrapped around him. He has to know it, although he might think that he's taking advantage of them, not the other way 'round. But either way, I couldn't necessarily prove it in a court of law, but it is stupidly naive to think that his "Russia should find Hillary's emails" isn't a genuine wish on his part, and that Putin's people took it that way and acted on it, although it's possible that they would've acted that way anyway, eventually.

And Putin's timing of that, and the lengths that he DIDN'T go to hide it suggests that he was perfectly comfortable with the collusion being obvious-but-not-provable precisely to undermine Trump's legitimacy and do just a bit more damage to liberal Western democracy that he sees as a threat to Russian greatness.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14162
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen » 15 Jul 2018, 10:36

lunchstealer wrote:
15 Jul 2018, 01:15
And Putin's timing of that, and the lengths that he DIDN'T go to hide it suggests that he was perfectly comfortable with the collusion being obvious-but-not-provable precisely to undermine Trump's legitimacy and do just a bit more damage to liberal Western democracy that he sees as a threat to Russian greatness.
Yep. I have no doubt it was a win all around for Vlad. It worked out better than he expected, due to a fluke in the US electoral system, but even if Clinton had won, she would have been considerably discredited.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3584
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Painboy » 15 Jul 2018, 12:47

Mo wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 18:49
Painboy wrote:
thoreau wrote:
14 Jul 2018, 15:11
Reread this.
thoreau wrote:A million presumptions? Maybe one or two. But we know that his campaign manager was working with Kremlin allies in Ukraine, and that his Ukraine office manager is tied to Russia intelligence. We know that his son was eager to get aid from Russia. We know that Russia reached out to his sons through business associates with Russian ties. We know about Felix Sater's ties to Russian mobsters. We know that lots of people around Trump lied about their contacts with Russia, including people who got jobs needing security clearances. We know that Roger Stone was in contact with people involved in the Podesta email hack.

We know all this and more.

At this point, you need a whole lot of presumptions to assume that Trump was never aware of any of this, that the guy who now has ultimate responsibility for the national security apparatus was completely unaware of Russian activity in his camp, completely unaware that the team from which he chose people for national security posts was stacked with people who had something to hide concerning Russia.
You're just playing connect the dots and the image that is coming out of it is one you're already biased to. Even if Trump knew about every move made it still doesn't prove that anything happened other than some shady meetings. Give me a witness or accomplice who flips and we have something. That shouldn't be that hard to find if something did in fact happen. It's not like Trump inspires a whole lot of loyalty. How many allies has he thrown under the bus in the last several years? How many of them have immediately started talking shit about him?

Something in this case should have broke by now if there was any real proof of significant wrongdoing. Especially so if you think Trump is so stupid as to order a treasonous act in public. He can't be both a conspiratorial mastermind and a boob who publicly admits to his own conspiracies.
None of us know what Mueller has or doesn’t have. Also, based on what evidence or prior example. should this already been broken by now. Ken White has said that as far as federal prosecutions go, this one has moved really quickly. As someone who has sat on both sides of a federal investigation and has been pretty fairminded about the law, I trust that judgement.
While I guess there's an outside possibility Mueller has been able to keep a lid on things, generally speaking the government leaks like a sieve. Especially if the information is of the "game changing" type that could unseat a president. Also there have been signals by Mueller that the investigation is winding down. That doesn't sound like someone about to wrap up an investigation into a wide conspiracy resulting in a whole bunch of arrests.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests