View Single Post
Old 10-15-2019, 05:51 PM
drad dog is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
But here is an Occam's razor argument. I just came up with it quickly. Show me where I am wrong though.

Occam's razor says the argument with the least assumptions is usually best. My Occam's razor argument, as briefly as possible, involving myriad crimes Trump is supposed to have committed:

Trump has committed illegal acts. He believes Putin has information on these acts. He acts in favor of Putin so Putin won't expose him.


Trump has committed illegal acts. Putin has information on these acts. Putin communicates to Trump to act in his favor, that is, he is actively blackmailing him. Trump acts the way he does so Putin won't expose him.

The first case is therefore the most plausible. ETA: Now, mind you, this is just an example based on other "stuff" people have mentioned, namely that Trump has committed crimes. To be clear, I don't necessarily believe he has.
What trunp "believes" is based on private conversations wth Putin with no other officials present. So are you saying that Putin doesn't mention it in the convos, but trump feels compromised by just being in his presence?

Occams razor in that situation would say that vlad let him know by some means.

Occams razor for donald is a little different. We have a lot of data and we don't need to start with a blank slate.