Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 10-16-2019, 06:34 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
Close. It's My New Order.
Thanks for the source.

Quote:
According to a 1990 Vanity Fair interview, Ivana Trump once told her lawyer Michael Kennedy ...
I'm not sure that a decades-old report from an ex-wife's divorce lawyer is compelling evidence of what books might be sitting next to President Trump's bed now, but at least now I know where the claim came from.
  #202  
Old 10-16-2019, 06:38 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
IIRC it's on record that dt keeps Mein Kampf next to his bed.
I doubt that he's read it from cover to cover, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few passages he finds comforting and reads as his daily inspirational.
  #203  
Old 10-16-2019, 06:42 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
I'm not sure that a decades-old report from an ex-wife's divorce lawyer is compelling evidence of what books might be sitting next to President Trump's bed now, but at least now I know where the claim came from.
From the same article:
Quote:
When Brenner asked Trump about how he came to possess Hitler's speeches, "Trump hesitated" and then said, "Who told you that?"

"I don't remember," Brenner reportedly replied.

Trump then recalled, "Actually, it was my friend Marty Davis from Paramount who gave me a copy of 'Mein Kampf,' and he's a Jew."

Brenner added that Davis did acknowledge that he gave Trump a book about Hitler.

"But it was 'My New Order,' Hitler's speeches, not 'Mein Kampf,'" Davis reportedly said. "I thought he would find it interesting. I am his friend, but I'm not Jewish."

Last edited by Skywatcher; 10-16-2019 at 06:43 PM.
  #204  
Old 10-16-2019, 06:45 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
I'm not sure that a decades-old report from an ex-wife's divorce lawyer is compelling evidence of what books might be sitting next to President Trump's bed now, but at least now I know where the claim came from.
Read the original article.

It's not just Ivana. Trump himself confirms, “Actually, it was my friend Marty Davis from Paramount who gave me a copy of Mein Kampf, and he’s a Jew.”

Marty Davis also confirms, “I did give him a book about Hitler, but it was My New Order, Hitler’s speeches, not Mein Kampf. I thought he would find it interesting. I am his friend, but I’m not Jewish.”
  #205  
Old 10-16-2019, 07:37 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Re: dt and Mein Kampf. It was a big item until other things happened and there was just no time. It came from Ivana.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a7639041.html

https://www.businessinsider.com/dona...his-bed-2015-8
  #206  
Old 10-16-2019, 07:38 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
Close. It's My New Order.
My sincere apologies That's better.
  #207  
Old 10-16-2019, 08:24 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
There isn't any "direct evidence". That's painfully obvious at this point. The entire "President Trump is a foreign agent" claim is built on suppositions and guesswork, and feverish, overactive imaginations.
OK I got it.

What if Barrack Obama had gotten a package from Putin in secret 2 years before he announced his run, and no one knew what was in it and he wouldn't say, when he was asked, a year after the election was over, and he had been observedf kowtowing to the russian president in public.

Do you want to say how you would be under those conditions or should we just make our educated guess?
  #208  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:12 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and claims like "Donald J Trump is not a president, he is a puppet put in power by Vladimir Putin" and the damage they cause and the risks they entail need to have more than Trump's (or associates) poor character or as a rationale.
When it comes to national security, this is the reverse of reality.

When we deny top secret security clearance, we do not prove absolutely that a person has been compromised before rejecting their application. If you fail the sniff test, your application is toast because the aim is not proof it's national security. If you have a loan out to some guy in Tibet, we tell you to take a hike. If you had a past as an alcoholic, we say sorry but we don't want to take the risk.

If Vladimir Putin has video of Trump having sex with a 14 year old in a St Petersburg hotel, you're never going to have proof of it, for a hundred years. If that's your measuring stick, even as the President - a man who understands the Internet well enough to Tweet and not much more - spends his free time trying to track down anti-Russian cyber defense data like he doesn't have better things to do, then that is stupid.

If someone points a gun at you and your first thought is, "Well there's no real proof that he'll actually pull the trigger...." That's not a rational way to think. Risk avoidance isn't about proof, it's about odds and the vastness of the worst case scenario. Some situations just aren't worth fucking around with.

The Department of Homeland Security has had the top six positions vacant for something like a year now, and something like half of the sub-departments have no leader either.

No executive effort to protect the 2020 election has been put into place, under Trump's watch, despite every relevant organization in the government - and all of his own appointees - saying that it is a strict necessity.

The 2020 election can be vastly swung by the free choice of China. If they decide that Trump has been useful to them (wittingly or not) they can sign a deal with him just before the election and boost the economy. Elections are all about the economy. If they decide that he's more hassle than he's worth, then they can call off all negotiations just before the election and slap sanctions on more American farms and factories.

Because Trump, for no apparent reason that anyone can explain or envision, decided to tariff Europe and not pull together a global coalition to take on China, China has been cutting deals with Europe and Russia migrating their business over and cutting the US out of all the cheap goods that we used to have access to.

Because Trump - likely, simply to rebuke Obama - axed the TPP we have not established any alternative source of cheap, low quality manufacture to replace nor compete with China.

We have, in essence, done everything in our power in the Trade War to give the battle to China and ask them to have their way with us, at whatever schedule they chose to do so, on the way to taking over the world from us.

We have given Iran free reign to move into Syria. We have rewarded Turkey with a slice of Syria as well, even though they have stopped buying our weapons and started to buy Russian - against our strict warning not to do so. So far as I am aware, there is nothing that Turkey has done special that would make Trump follow their bidding, without question, and certainly they haven't done anything that any advisor to the President would look at and advise that we follow the course of action that we just did.

Trump kept Sessions around for a year and a half because he was told to do so by the Republicans in Congress. He has stayed in Afghanistan for the entirety of his presidency to today at the advice of his military advisors. He allowed his administration to get all sorts of involved with protecting democratic government in Venezuela. Any argument that he doesn't take the advice of those around him, that he's genuinely hostile to "forever wars" or interfering in other countries sovereignty, or that he's big into micromanaging and giving top-down mandates regularly and widely has no support.

So, again, why did we leave Syria when Turkey asked us to?

There's a reason that we're in Afghanistan and not in Syria. That reason is either dice rolls or...?

Any answer has to explain why Syria and not Afghanistan, not Venezuela, why Sessions had a "long" career at the White House, etc.

You have to explain all the facts, not just a few. Blackmail can do it. I can't think of anything else that does.
  #209  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:37 AM
Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
I believe that Ale can speak for himself.
Yes I can, so why did you put words in my mouth?
Max S was right and you were wrong, the Dossier only proves that Trumps opponents used foreign agents to dig (and make up) dirt on Trump to affect the 2016 election; which is what Trump gets accused of doing and toes in to my first post in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip View Post
Any competing theory you care to offer, then, that explains all of the behavior he just mentioned? Assuming it wouldn't "literally tear our country apart," of course. That would be bad.
I think Ulfreida has it right:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfreida View Post
I don't think Putin is paying Trump, at least. He's getting what he wants for free, apparently. I think Trump's personality -- erratic, revengeful, self-absorbed, lacking in any curiosity whatsoever about facts needed for his job, pathetically worshipful of raw brutal power wherever it is in evidence -- is explanation enough for what is observably going on.
There's plenty of material to work with there, but for some reason, and again I'll point out my first post in this thread as possibility, there has been an extreme fixation on the notion that Trump is a puppet of Russia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
What evidence is there that trump is not in thrall to putin?


And that is why, in part, you don't seem to understand what makes a Conspiracy Theory. ISTM that you think that line of argumentation has validity, it doesn't, you are displaying significant flaws in logic when you say things like that.
IMO, it's no wonder you don't recognize a conspiracy theory if you are operating under such parameters.

I'll bring up Obama again to see if it helps you understand, what evidence is there that he isn't a secret Muslim working for, I don't know, the Nation of Islam?
Would you be satisfied with someone using that absence of evidence to support a CT about Obama?

I don't know if you like Obama or not, substitute for whoever you like.

The important thing about this is that, I presume, you would not accept a "there's no evidence insert-person-you-like-here isn't evil" as an argument against the character of that person, so what that would boil down to is that you accept such flawed arguments against Trump on the basis that you don't like the guy and if you are going to pin your arguments on something like that you will never convince someone who likes Trump of anything you accuse him of.

If people don't buy what you are peddling you need to look into whether you are presenting arguments in an unconvincing manner or that perhaps your understanding of the situation is wrong.
  #210  
Old 10-17-2019, 02:15 AM
Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
When it comes to national security, this is the reverse of reality.

When we deny top secret security clearance, we do not prove absolutely that a person has been compromised before rejecting their application. If you fail the sniff test, your application is toast because the aim is not proof it's national security. If you have a loan out to some guy in Tibet, we tell you to take a hike. If you had a past as an alcoholic, we say sorry but we don't want to take the risk.

If Vladimir Putin has video of Trump having sex with a 14 year old in a St Petersburg hotel, you're never going to have proof of it, for a hundred years. If that's your measuring stick, even as the President - a man who understands the Internet well enough to Tweet and not much more - spends his free time trying to track down anti-Russian cyber defense data like he doesn't have better things to do, then that is stupid.

If someone points a gun at you and your first thought is, "Well there's no real proof that he'll actually pull the trigger...." That's not a rational way to think. Risk avoidance isn't about proof, it's about odds and the vastness of the worst case scenario. Some situations just aren't worth fucking around with.

The Department of Homeland Security has had the top six positions vacant for something like a year now, and something like half of the sub-departments have no leader either.

No executive effort to protect the 2020 election has been put into place, under Trump's watch, despite every relevant organization in the government - and all of his own appointees - saying that it is a strict necessity.

The 2020 election can be vastly swung by the free choice of China. If they decide that Trump has been useful to them (wittingly or not) they can sign a deal with him just before the election and boost the economy. Elections are all about the economy. If they decide that he's more hassle than he's worth, then they can call off all negotiations just before the election and slap sanctions on more American farms and factories.

Because Trump, for no apparent reason that anyone can explain or envision, decided to tariff Europe and not pull together a global coalition to take on China, China has been cutting deals with Europe and Russia migrating their business over and cutting the US out of all the cheap goods that we used to have access to.

Because Trump - likely, simply to rebuke Obama - axed the TPP we have not established any alternative source of cheap, low quality manufacture to replace nor compete with China.

We have, in essence, done everything in our power in the Trade War to give the battle to China and ask them to have their way with us, at whatever schedule they chose to do so, on the way to taking over the world from us.

We have given Iran free reign to move into Syria. We have rewarded Turkey with a slice of Syria as well, even though they have stopped buying our weapons and started to buy Russian - against our strict warning not to do so. So far as I am aware, there is nothing that Turkey has done special that would make Trump follow their bidding, without question, and certainly they haven't done anything that any advisor to the President would look at and advise that we follow the course of action that we just did.

Trump kept Sessions around for a year and a half because he was told to do so by the Republicans in Congress. He has stayed in Afghanistan for the entirety of his presidency to today at the advice of his military advisors. He allowed his administration to get all sorts of involved with protecting democratic government in Venezuela. Any argument that he doesn't take the advice of those around him, that he's genuinely hostile to "forever wars" or interfering in other countries sovereignty, or that he's big into micromanaging and giving top-down mandates regularly and widely has no support.

So, again, why did we leave Syria when Turkey asked us to?

There's a reason that we're in Afghanistan and not in Syria. That reason is either dice rolls or...?

Any answer has to explain why Syria and not Afghanistan, not Venezuela, why Sessions had a "long" career at the White House, etc.

You have to explain all the facts, not just a few. Blackmail can do it. I can't think of anything else that does.
I'm sorry because you must have spent a while writing that wall of text, but again, that's CT bread and butter I don't understand something, therefore conspiracy

Ulfreida's outline of Trump's personality is more than enough to explain the way he does things.

The CT's about Obama didn't stop him getting re-elected, it boggles the mind to see how the tables have turned. I know Trump was (is?) pushing the Obama birth certificate stupidity, but here's the kicker, if you would hold that against his character, and also go along with this outlandish CT about him being a Russian asset you'll never beat him on principles. It's a losing strategy to go to an electorate and tell them to vote against someone because, for instance, he did that thing while at the same time doing the same thing times a hundred.
  #211  
Old 10-17-2019, 03:05 AM
steatopygia's Avatar
steatopygia is online now
Experimental FOC Test Pilot
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North Idaho mostly
Posts: 1,884
Ulfrieda's outline of Trump's personality is accurate but it doesn't explain his policy moves. He has repeatedly gone against US interests in an effort to help Putin.

Multiple attempts to remove sanctions against Russia. That was the very first thing Trump's transition team (who are pretty much all disgraced or in jail) went to work on.

Trying to pull the US out of NATO. The only explanation (that makes any sense) is to help Putin.

At an international press conference, held with Putin, Trump said he disagreed with every American agency that said Russia interfered in the elections. Trump said he believed Putin.

"In May 2017, Trump met in the Oval Office with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador to the United States and disclosed classified information from an Israeli source (which confused and antagonized Israeli allies). Later, he confirmed the source of intelligence he disclosed to the Russians. There’s no punchline here — this is obviously behavior more simpatico to Russian interests than American interests."
Think Progress

In July 2017 Congress (including Republicans) distrusted Trump so much in regards to Russia that when it imposed new sanctions on Russia it specifically added language that said Trump could not veto the bills.

"Admiring" Putin doesn't really explain these and many other attempts to strengthen Russia's interests at the expense of America. Additionally, as Ulfreida points out, Trump is a narcissistic idiot. He is incapable of trying to help anyone except himself. Someone is telling him what to do.
  #212  
Old 10-17-2019, 03:16 AM
steatopygia's Avatar
steatopygia is online now
Experimental FOC Test Pilot
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North Idaho mostly
Posts: 1,884
Or as Nancy Pelosi supposedly said at a meeting with Trump today."All roads with you lead to Putin".
  #213  
Old 10-17-2019, 05:20 AM
mjmlabs's Avatar
mjmlabs is offline
A Rather Dubious Fellow Indeed
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: The Last Green Valley
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
And when "evidence" is presented saying that Trump is a child sex trafficker, I am not going to dignify it with a response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
I don't know what you mean about sex trafficker" Is that coming down the pike?
I'll just leave these here for you folks.

I'll just point out that this bit (from link #3 above) sounds very much like Stormy Daniels/Stephanie Clifford's story about receiving a threat in a parking lot, and that it appears extremely unlikely that either woman could have been aware of the other's account at the time they made their claims:
Quote:
In November 2016, just days before the presidential election, Bloom suddenly announced a press conference with Jane Doe had been canceled, saying Doe had become frightened after receiving death threats. Two days later, Doe's lead attorney, Thomas Meager, filed to dismiss the case. Jane Doe has not been heard from since.
Oh, and do remember to laugh, lads. It's important.

Last edited by mjmlabs; 10-17-2019 at 05:21 AM.
  #214  
Old 10-17-2019, 07:18 AM
Grim Render is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
I'm sorry because you must have spent a while writing that wall of text, but again, that's CT bread and butter I don't understand something, therefore conspiracy

Ulfreida's outline of Trump's personality is more than enough to explain the way he does things.

The CT's about Obama didn't stop him getting re-elected, it boggles the mind to see how the tables have turned. I know Trump was (is?) pushing the Obama birth certificate stupidity, but here's the kicker, if you would hold that against his character, and also go along with this outlandish CT about him being a Russian asset you'll never beat him on principles. It's a losing strategy to go to an electorate and tell them to vote against someone because, for instance, he did that thing while at the same time doing the same thing times a hundred.
You keep using the term "conspiracy theory". I don't think that phrase means what you think it does.
  #215  
Old 10-17-2019, 08:18 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
Yes I can, so why did you put words in my mouth?
Max S was right and you were wrong, the Dossier only proves that Trumps opponents used foreign agents to dig (and make up) dirt on Trump to affect the 2016 election; which is what Trump gets accused of doing and toes in to my first post in this thread.
I didn't put words in your mouth. I asked you to clarify your position.

Are you saying that the Steele Dossier has been proven to be made up?

That's pretty bonkers.
  #216  
Old 10-17-2019, 10:01 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
All the way up to the election, no one thought he would win, including him.

Okay, but it's hard to explain why he got so mad at Sessions for recusing himself\, unless he believed that Sessions was there to defend him, just as a starter.


I don't see how it is too general, it is a very simple question, but lets go with a specific. Do you think that he would endanger our allies and relationships by holding up military aid to a country that is currently fighting against a country that we have a strained-at-best-relationship with in exchange for assistance in his re-election campaign?

Briefly on the "too general" idea: I could imagine him selling out the country for gain in some cases, and not in others. It depends on what those consequences are for the country. There is no one answer. So thanks for the specific question, and to answer it...

...yes. You could have been more specific and just stated flat out that you are referring to the Ukraine debacle. But here's the thing: Trump very well might have not considered the consequences of holding up military aid. I don't know what is knowledge of Ukraine/USA/Russia relations are. Let's assume his mindset was, I'll hold up the funds, get what I want, and then release them. It shouldn't take that long, Ukraine can get its money, Biden will be destroyed in the process, and I get re-elected. I can easily buy this and think this is most likely what happened. If instead, Trump thought that his actions were very likely to lead to Russia invading Ukraine and possibly drawing the US into a military action, I would bet he would not do it just to get re-elected. I am always loathe to try to read Trump's mind, but this is my best guess.

As for the other two things, Trump bailing out as I described it seems reasonable to me, but your theory is as good (or bad) as mine in the end, because both require mind-reading. Same thing for the DoJ part.
  #217  
Old 10-17-2019, 10:07 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
An example of a conspiracy theory, through and through. While not completely detailed and formulated here, there is no other term for this.
For starters, the whole Mein Kampf thing is bullshit.

Quote:
Donald Trump said reading "Mein Kampf" in college had a profound effect on him and he has tremendous respect for Adolf Hitler as a leader.

...

False.
  #218  
Old 10-17-2019, 10:11 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
My post was a citation in responce to your questions about why dt is in thrall to putin.

You said it was doubtful that putin could communicate corrupt wishes to dt. Therefore it would be a CT to wonder what's up with that shit. But vp has been communicating secretly with dt for 6 years or more.

dt has had conversations, as the US president, with putin, that have been kept private from US citizens and officials. It is a matter of record. Something else to ignore I guess?
Thanks for explaining.

This letter is one instance. What supports the "6 years or more", of I assume, direct communication between them? By that I mean, the implication seems to me that they have been regularly communicating, not just a few time over 6+ years. And if you don't mind, stop with the snarks. I'm not ignoring anything.
  #219  
Old 10-17-2019, 10:25 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
nm

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 10-17-2019 at 10:26 AM.
  #220  
Old 10-17-2019, 10:47 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Briefly on the "too general" idea: I could imagine him selling out the country for gain in some cases, and not in others. It depends on what those consequences are for the country. There is no one answer. So thanks for the specific question, and to answer it...

...yes. You could have been more specific and just stated flat out that you are referring to the Ukraine debacle.
But I was asking in general, and the Ukraine debacle is just the most recent and possible most egregious example. But there are also his sharing of Israeli intel with Russians, having foreign interests rent out suits of his properties and never stay in them, appointing people based on their loyalty to him, rather than their qualifications, even having the SS pay his properties in order to secure him as the president. The list goes on about things that he has done that benefit him at the expense of the country.

What cases could you imagine him selling out the country, and where do you think that line is?
Quote:
But here's the thing: Trump very well might have not considered the consequences of holding up military aid. I don't know what is knowledge of Ukraine/USA/Russia relations are. Let's assume his mindset was, I'll hold up the funds, get what I want, and then release them. It shouldn't take that long, Ukraine can get its money, Biden will be destroyed in the process, and I get re-elected. I can easily buy this and think this is most likely what happened. If instead, Trump thought that his actions were very likely to lead to Russia invading Ukraine and possibly drawing the US into a military action, I would bet he would not do it just to get re-elected. I am always loathe to try to read Trump's mind, but this is my best guess.
Even in your best case scenario there, he is still using funds that are not his to use in order to get personal benefit. He is still extorting another country in order to get them to interfere in the election. Even if everything went smoothly, and no one ever found out and it never caused any greater issues, that's still pretty damning, in my eyes.

Your defense is that he is too stupid to realize that doing such a thing may have consequences to national security and global stability. And I do not agree that he would put keeping us out of a war over getting re-elected. Maybe, just maybe he may avoid total global thermal nuclear war over losing the election, but I wouldn't count on it.
Quote:
As for the other two things, Trump bailing out as I described it seems reasonable to me, but your theory is as good (or bad) as mine in the end, because both require mind-reading. Same thing for the DoJ part.
It may need mind reading to tell what is in his heart of hearts as to his true motivations, but intent is established legally in many cases without mind readers, and that is done through analysis of actions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
For starters, the whole Mein Kampf thing is bullshit.
I'm not sure which claims you are refuting there, but the claims that have been made in this thread about Trump's reading habits are backed by your cite.

Last edited by k9bfriender; 10-17-2019 at 10:49 AM.
  #221  
Old 10-17-2019, 11:00 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
For starters, the whole Mein Kampf thing is bullshit.
The cite you link to says that the claim that Donald Trump said ‘Mein Kampf’ Had a ‘Profound Effect’ on him is false. That doesn't mean that the, "The whole Mein Kampf thing is bullshit."

Other posts in this thread show three sources confirming that Trump owned a book of Hitler speeches. One of those sources is a quote from Trump himself identifying, possibly mistakenly, the book as Mein Kampf.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Read the original article.

It's not just Ivana. Trump himself confirms, “Actually, it was my friend Marty Davis from Paramount who gave me a copy of Mein Kampf, and he’s a Jew.”

Marty Davis also confirms, “I did give him a book about Hitler, but it was My New Order, Hitler’s speeches, not Mein Kampf. I thought he would find it interesting. I am his friend, but I’m not Jewish.”
Not that it really matters what book he owns, but the point is that debunking one claim about Hitler and Mein Kampf does not magically erase Trump's own words on the topic.

This pretty clearly illustrates what has been going on throughout this thread. Fiddle Peghead gives a lot more weight to posts that support his viewpoint and barely notices posts that don't.

FP: I haven't seen any evidence that Trump is being blackmailed.

A: Here's some evidence.
B: And here's some.
C: And more evidence.

FP: But I haven't seen any evidence of crimes.

A: You asked about blackmail, but here's some evidence of crimes.
B: Blackmail doesn't require crimes, but here's some crime evidence.
C: And more evidence.

FP: I still haven't seen any evidence that Trump is being blackmailed.
  #222  
Old 10-17-2019, 11:27 AM
HMS Irruncible is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
FP: I still haven't seen any evidence that Trump is being blackmailed.
Furthermore... let's look back to the subject of the OP. "Is Trump an Asset of Russia"? Nothing about this question requires that a blackmail arrangement exists, so it's a bit of a motte-and-bailey tactic to pose an argument and constantly switch to the more easily argued form of the question.

Trump is behaving in the interest of himself and hostile foreign powers that he does business with, at the expense of American interests. He is absolutely an asset of these powers. There are many reasons he could be an asset - ranging from incompetence to avarice to extortion to other arrangements. There's evidence in favor of all those reasons. The discovery process is in motion and Trump is trying his hardest to obstruct it it at every turn.

So I find the blackmail scenario likely, but this whole line of inquiry "is Trump an asset" hardly turns on the blackmail question.

Last edited by HMS Irruncible; 10-17-2019 at 11:27 AM.
  #223  
Old 10-17-2019, 11:32 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by steatopygia View Post
Trying to pull the US out of NATO. The only explanation (that makes any sense) is to help Putin.
To answer just one of your examples, he did not try to pull the US out of NATO. He made the claim that NATO was "obsolete", and he complained that they weren't paying their fair share, that the US was footing more than our share of the bill. Yes, he brought up the idea, but he didn't do it. I see this example all the time, and I ask you: how did NOT pulling out of NATO help Putin??
  #224  
Old 10-17-2019, 11:50 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
To answer just one of your examples, he did not try to pull the US out of NATO. He made the claim that NATO was "obsolete", and he complained that they weren't paying their fair share, that the US was footing more than our share of the bill. Yes, he brought up the idea, but he didn't do it. I see this example all the time, and I ask you: how did NOT pulling out of NATO help Putin??
Disparaging NATO allies
Calling NATO obsolete
Demanding NATO allies go above and beyond agreed upon defense spending
Suggesting that the US might not fulfill its article five obligations
etc

All of these things make NATO membership less attractive. This is exactly what Putin wants.
  #225  
Old 10-17-2019, 11:50 AM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
To answer just one of your examples, he did not try to pull the US out of NATO.
Julian Barnes and Helene Cooper at the New York Times reported on Tuesday (15 January) that in 2018, Trump said several times that he wanted to remove the US from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization...

The fact that he did not only shows that somebody managed to talk him out of it.

Last edited by Skywatcher; 10-17-2019 at 11:53 AM.
  #226  
Old 10-17-2019, 11:51 AM
HMS Irruncible is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
To answer just one of your examples, he did not try to pull the US out of NATO. He made the claim that NATO was "obsolete", and he complained that they weren't paying their fair share, that the US was footing more than our share of the bill.
Quote:
Yes, he brought up the idea, but he didn't do it.
"He didn't do it" is a nonsequitur to the assertion "he tried to pull the US out of NATO".

If you want to rephrase what he actually did, he made statements that seriously call into question the US commitment to NATO. Russia does not require NATO to be disbanded; they also benefit richly from NATO members being uncertain about whether the US will meet its treaty obligations. If individual members drop out, that also helps Russia.

Literally yesterday Trump threatened to "destroy the economy" of Turkey, a NATO ally. The US military would now like to remove 50 nuclear weaopns from Turkey, but cannot do so because it would confirm the deterioration of the US relationship with a NATO-allied country.

Trump has acted in furtherance of Russia's interests with regard to NATO, to the detriment of US interests.
  #227  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:03 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
But I was asking in general, and the Ukraine debacle is just the most recent and possible most egregious example. But there are also his sharing of Israeli intel with Russians, having foreign interests rent out suits of his properties and never stay in them, appointing people based on their loyalty to him, rather than their qualifications, even having the SS pay his properties in order to secure him as the president. The list goes on about things that he has done that benefit him at the expense of the country.
Ah, I just thought you were being coy, and I apologize for interpreting it as specific to Ukraine. But my answer about Ukraine still stands. Now you bring up other specifics. If I haven't made it clear, I fully acknowledge that Trump is capable of looking out for himself over the country at times.

Quote:
What cases could you imagine him selling out the country, and where do you think that line is?
What I said about being loathe to try and read his mind stands. No offense, but I have no desire to get into that.

Quote:
Even in your best case scenario there, he is still using funds that are not his to use in order to get personal benefit. He is still extorting another country in order to get them to interfere in the election.
I agree completely. I clearly said I think he would withhold funds in order to harm Biden.

Quote:
Your defense is that he is too stupid to realize that doing such a thing may have consequences to national security and global stability. And I do not agree that he would put keeping us out of a war over getting re-elected. Maybe, just maybe he may avoid total global thermal nuclear war over losing the election, but I wouldn't count on it.
A minor nitpick, but I am not defending Trump. I'm telling you what I think he would do. I made no claim to absolutely know Trump is that stupid. If I'm wrong, I would fully accept that. As for nuclear war, I don't know you so I'm merely giving you my honest first impression, but when you say that, you sound a bit like a lunatic. Again, no offense. But really?


Quote:
I'm not sure which claims you are refuting there, but the claims that have been made in this thread about Trump's reading habits are backed by your cite.
Drad Dog said Trump kept Mein Kampf by his bedside.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 10-17-2019 at 12:04 PM.
  #228  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:03 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
I'm sorry because you must have spent a while writing that wall of text, but again, that's CT bread and butter I don't understand something, therefore conspiracy
A conspiracy theory is using bad evidence to say that I have proven something. I have no evidence and I have proved jack doodle.

It is entirely possible that there are behind-the-scene reasons for Trump's unexplainable actions which we would accept as reasonable if we knew about them. I am not saying nor declaring otherwise.

I'm saying that if someone has a gun pointed at your face, is ranting their head off, and their eyes are all bloodshot, you are stupid to decide that they will probably not shoot.

You are betting the future and security of our nation on this man. Do you have any reason to think that he's trustworthy?
  #229  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:17 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Ah, I just thought you were being coy, and I apologize for interpreting it as specific to Ukraine. But my answer about Ukraine still stands. Now you bring up other specifics. If I haven't made it clear, I fully acknowledge that Trump is capable of looking out for himself over the country at times.
Right, and that is what I am concerned about.
Quote:

What I said about being loathe to try and read his mind stands. No offense, but I have no desire to get into that.
It wold take mind reading to tell exactly where that line is. It does not need to be pinned down that thoroughly, mere observation can how that he's already crossed the line that most of us find acceptable.
Quote:

I agree completely. I clearly said I think he would withhold funds in order to harm Biden.
And that, IMHO, is a direct abuse of power.
Quote:


A minor nitpick, but I am not defending Trump. I'm telling you what I think he would do. I made no claim to absolutely know Trump is that stupid. If I'm wrong, I would fully accept that.
Well, it is not you that needs to accept the consequences so much as other people who are currently being slaughtered because of his actions. But it is good that you are willing to say that you would admit it if you were wrong about how stupid Trump is.
Quote:
As for nuclear war, I don't know you so I'm merely giving you my honest first impression, but when you say that, you sound a bit like a lunatic. Again, no offense. But really?
I specifically said that he might not go that far. And I'm not saying that he'll launch nukes because someone offers him a payment for it. But I am saying that he will do things in his selfish and shortsighted fashion that will increase the chances of a nuclear exchange breaking out.
Quote:


Drad Dog said Trump kept Mein Kampf by his bedside.
Yeah, and that has been litigated and cited in this thread as to exactly where that information came from, and how much credence it should have. To try to call it a conspiracy theory is either a complete misunderstanding of the exchange in the thread, or a different use of the term than is typical.

Last edited by k9bfriender; 10-17-2019 at 12:17 PM.
  #230  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:34 PM
HMS Irruncible is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
A conspiracy theory is using bad evidence to say that I have proven something. I have no evidence and I have proved jack doodle.
Conspiracy theories are a specific kind of circular reasoning. i.e.
"They're covering up XYZ conspiracy. Here's a piece of evidence"
"But this other piece of evidence contradicts your evidence."
"Aha! It's bigger than we thought!"

The Trump blackmail theory does not take the disproof of other evidence as evidence of the coverup. It is rather a case of accumulating circumstantial evidence (not least of which is Trump's very public efforts to obstruct access to possibly exculpatory evidence). Contrary to what Matlock may have told us, circumstantial evidence is valid if there is enough of it and it agrees.

Last edited by HMS Irruncible; 10-17-2019 at 12:35 PM.
  #231  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:54 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Thanks for explaining.

This letter is one instance. What supports the "6 years or more", of I assume, direct communication between them? By that I mean, the implication seems to me that they have been regularly communicating, not just a few time over 6+ years. And if you don't mind, stop with the snarks. I'm not ignoring anything.
Not snark, I think posters here might feel ignored on some points. But OK.

Given that it would be a delicate matter for the russian pres to exercise control over an asset if he's the US pres, why would you expect there would be a lot of paper, or E stuff, or a trail at all, after vlad gave him the "diplomatic pouch"?

It could have had a disc, drive, or even just a phone number. After that if you want to give dt a security clearance (!?) you're going to be out there on your own hoping for the best for your country. Good luck with that.
  #232  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:55 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
The cite you link to says that the claim that Donald Trump said ‘Mein Kampf’ Had a ‘Profound Effect’ on him is false. That doesn't mean that the, "The whole Mein Kampf thing is bullshit."
I agree. For convenience, drad dog said this:

Quote:
This is a third way for this: That dt has had an ambition towards populist power, has read the books on it, esp Mein Kampf, which he has on his bedside table, and is going to follow the path of power by his understanding. That's basically fascism. So he is in a room with vlad and he knows they are brothers in "power." But when the press is there he is obsequious. This leaves too much unexplained to be satisfying.
I said this was a conspiracy theory. He asked why I thought so, so I linked to snopes to show that Trump did not in fact keep MK by his beside. That is all I wanted to say. I did not in any way mean to say that everything that has ever been brought up about Trump and Hitler and all the rest is bullshit. I repeat, Trump keeping MK by his bedside is bullshit. I hastily included a quote, but I should not have, because it had nothing to do with what I wanted to say to drad dog. I see how you would have interpreted this as you did though. I should have quoted this from snopes:

Quote:
As the evidence stands, no strong case exists for the claim that Trump read or admired Hitler’s Mein Kampf. A quote attributed to him in which he supposedly lauded Mein Kampf and its author was clearly fabricated. It appears, on the other hand, that Trump did (and perhaps still does) own a collection of Hitler’s speeches that a friend presented to him as a gift. According to Vanity Fair, Ivana Trump told her lawyer that her husband kept the book near his bedside and occasionally read from it. Also according to Vanity Fair, however, Trump insisted he had never read it, nor would he.
Quote:
This pretty clearly illustrates what has been going on throughout this thread. Fiddle Peghead gives a lot more weight to posts that support his viewpoint and barely notices posts that don't.
You are wrong about me not noticing posts that don't support my viewpoint. A while ago I missed drad dog's link about the Putin letter. I've probably missed a few others, but for the most part I have tried to read every link and every response, and I have responded to numerous posts. I read them all and actually, yes that's right, actually think about what they say and what they do or do not support. I constantly try to look at both sides of issues discussed here. Just because I haven't reached the same conclusions as you or others does not mean I don't give arguments equal weight. The fact that I am a progressive/liberal through and through might at least lend some weight to what I've just said. I don't just jump in on the liberal side and support it. On occasion, I'll take the other side's viewpoint and argue it, if I think it has merit.
  #233  
Old 10-17-2019, 12:57 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
For starters, the whole Mein Kampf thing is bullshit.
Hm. SO what do you take out of that cite? You don't believe he had either book? I don't read it that way.
  #234  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:00 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
Yes I can, so why did you put words in my mouth?
Max S was right and you were wrong, the Dossier only proves that Trumps opponents used foreign agents to dig (and make up) dirt on Trump to affect the 2016 election; which is what Trump gets accused of doing and toes in to my first post in this thread.



I think Ulfreida has it right:



There's plenty of material to work with there, but for some reason, and again I'll point out my first post in this thread as possibility, there has been an extreme fixation on the notion that Trump is a puppet of Russia.





And that is why, in part, you don't seem to understand what makes a Conspiracy Theory. ISTM that you think that line of argumentation has validity, it doesn't, you are displaying significant flaws in logic when you say things like that.
IMO, it's no wonder you don't recognize a conspiracy theory if you are operating under such parameters.


I'll bring up Obama again to see if it helps you understand, what evidence is there that he isn't a secret Muslim working for, I don't know, the Nation of Islam?
Would you be satisfied with someone using that absence of evidence to support a CT about Obama?

I don't know if you like Obama or not, substitute for whoever you like.

The important thing about this is that, I presume, you would not accept a "there's no evidence insert-person-you-like-here isn't evil" as an argument against the character of that person, so what that would boil down to is that you accept such flawed arguments against Trump on the basis that you don't like the guy and if you are going to pin your arguments on something like that you will never convince someone who likes Trump of anything you accuse him of.

If people don't buy what you are peddling you need to look into whether you are presenting arguments in an unconvincing manner or that perhaps your understanding of the situation is wrong.
OK so you are unable to articulate what a CT is, nor what about my post might be one. (Hint: A CT has got to have more than one sentence in it for starters) And your explanation is just more "You don't know what I know" stuff?
  #235  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:02 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Disparaging NATO allies
Calling NATO obsolete
Demanding NATO allies go above and beyond agreed upon defense spending
Suggesting that the US might not fulfill its article five obligations
etc

All of these things make NATO membership less attractive. This is exactly what Putin wants.
Of course. Good God. You should not have even needed to say this.
  #236  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:09 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Ah, I just thought you were being coy, and I apologize for interpreting it as specific to Ukraine. But my answer about Ukraine still stands. Now you bring up other specifics. If I haven't made it clear, I fully acknowledge that Trump is capable of looking out for himself over the country at times.



What I said about being loathe to try and read his mind stands. No offense, but I have no desire to get into that.



I agree completely. I clearly said I think he would withhold funds in order to harm Biden.



A minor nitpick, but I am not defending Trump. I'm telling you what I think he would do. I made no claim to absolutely know Trump is that stupid. If I'm wrong, I would fully accept that. As for nuclear war, I don't know you so I'm merely giving you my honest first impression, but when you say that, you sound a bit like a lunatic. Again, no offense. But really?




Drad Dog said Trump kept Mein Kampf by his bedside.

In RE: dts state of mind. That is the subject of your thread: if you are speaking of crimes, which being an asset would be. State of mind is part of any criminal investigation or charge. Participating in a blackmail is also a crime. If you refuse to address his state of mind I think people might be upset with you here, and rightly so.

In RE: Mein Kampf: So why not say that drad dog is wrong? dt seems to have read hitler and, well, he sems to be the problematic populist president we have right now. Nothing to see?

Last edited by drad dog; 10-17-2019 at 01:13 PM.
  #237  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:15 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
...tactic...
I don't use "tactics". I make my argument and try to support it.

Quote:
Trump is behaving in the interest of himself and hostile foreign powers that he does business with, at the expense of American interests. He is absolutely an asset of these powers. There are many reasons he could be an asset - ranging from incompetence to avarice to extortion to other arrangements. There's evidence in favor of all those reasons. The discovery process is in motion and Trump is trying his hardest to obstruct it it at every turn.

So I find the blackmail scenario likely, but this whole line of inquiry "is Trump an asset" hardly turns on the blackmail question.
I started the thread concentrating on blackmail, sure. But it is no doubt true that Trump has done things to benefit other countries that go against the interests of the US. And no, it doesn't require blackmail for him to have done these things. I myself in this very thread have said as much.
  #238  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:20 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Disparaging NATO allies
Calling NATO obsolete
Demanding NATO allies go above and beyond agreed upon defense spending
Suggesting that the US might not fulfill its article five obligations
etc

All of these things make NATO membership less attractive. This is exactly what Putin wants.
Fine, I'll accept this as something Putin would want. I was going for something way more substantial though. I mean, using this type of low standard, you could take anything Trump says or does and come up with something, some way to tie it to Putin.
  #239  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:23 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
In RE: dts state of mind. That is the subject of your thread: if you are speaking of crimes, which being an asset would be. State of mind is part of any criminal investigation or charge. Participating in a blackmail is also a crime. If you refuse to address his state of mind I think people might be upset with you here, and rightly so.
Not rightly so, and I don't care if anyone is upset with me. But to address this specifically, I agree with this. Sure. But I'm talking about reading his mind in order to decide what he would actually do, in real life.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 10-17-2019 at 01:27 PM.
  #240  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:28 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,885
"Is Trump an asset of Russia?" is a question being debated contemporaneously with the US bombing its own military bases to deny Russia military secrets as the Russians overrun those same bases.

But, yeah, this is ALLLLLLLL coincidence! We need proof greater than military movements and taken-over bases to even consider the question.

Last edited by JohnT; 10-17-2019 at 01:28 PM.
  #241  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:41 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Not rightly so, and I don't care if anyone is upset with me. But to address this specifically, I agree with this. Sure. But I'm talking about reading his mind in order to decide what he would actually do, in real life.
I would like to have understood your response to this point. But I don't.


Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
All kidding aside, on this board the key things to pay attention to are:

1. Overuse of asking for cites,
2. Fixation on the use of a particular word, such as asking for precise definitions and then quibbling with them,
3. If someone provides ten points in favor of an idea or whatever, proceeding to nitpick the hell out of one in order to "disprove" the other nine,
4. Altering the basics of the debate or moving the goalposts of a standard of proof, forcing others to essentially go back to square one,
5. An extreme focus on the process of a debate, rather than the main point (e.g., if someone says the sky is blue, the troll/sealioner will focus discussion individually/serially on the words, meaning, and standard of proof for "sky," "is," and "blue" rather than coming out with a competing argument that the sky is a different color.

This is definitely a phenomenon that is hard to see at first because it is subtle, but once you notice it, it becomes obvious. One question to keep in mind is, "Is this poster just making others do a lot of work/citing/arguing without contributing a similar degree of effort?"
  #242  
Old 10-17-2019, 01:43 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
"Is Trump an asset of Russia?" is a question being debated contemporaneously with the US bombing its own military bases to deny Russia military secrets as the Russians overrun those same bases.

But, yeah, this is ALLLLLLLL coincidence! We need proof greater than military movements and taken-over bases to even consider the question.
Hey! You must be new here. Yes we do...I mean you do. I got to go.
  #243  
Old 10-17-2019, 02:05 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Fine, I'll accept this as something Putin would want. I was going for something way more substantial though. I mean, using this type of low standard, you could take anything Trump says or does and come up with something, some way to tie it to Putin.
"I'll concede that he's weakening NATO, but I haven't seen any reason to believe that weakening weakening NATO."
  #244  
Old 10-17-2019, 02:47 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
"I'll concede that he's weakening NATO, but I haven't seen any reason to believe that weakening weakening NATO."
I did not concede that Putin is weakening NATO. I agreed that Putin would want to make NATO less attractive. Now, if you want to make the argument this weakens NATO a great deal, fine. To me, that's weak. That's what I meant by something more substantial. For instance, countries actually pulling out. But I'm fine with your interpretation. Just don't make up stuff and pretend I said it.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 10-17-2019 at 02:48 PM.
  #245  
Old 10-17-2019, 02:54 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I did not concede that Putin is weakening NATO. I agreed that Putin would want to make NATO less attractive. Now, if you want to make the argument this weakens NATO a great deal, fine. To me, that's weak. That's what I meant by something more substantial. For instance, countries actually pulling out. But I'm fine with your interpretation. Just don't make up stuff and pretend I said it.
The antecedent to the pronoun 'he' in my post was Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is weakening NATO. He hasn't done enough yet to get any countries to actually pull out, but he has, and continues to, weaken NATO.

I thought you were saying, "Sure Donald Trump is weakening NATO, but he's not weakening weakening NATO." Honestly, I still think you are saying that.
  #246  
Old 10-17-2019, 03:07 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
But it is good that you are willing to say that you would admit it if you were wrong about how stupid Trump is.
Okay, thanks I suppose, but I don't think of myself as being "good" doing that, just honest. I'm not sure if you think I think Trump is stupid or not from that, but believe me, I know he is.

Quote:
I specifically said that he might not go that far. And I'm not saying that he'll launch nukes because someone offers him a payment for it. But I am saying that he will do things in his selfish and shortsighted fashion that will increase the chances of a nuclear exchange breaking out.
Thanks for the clarification. For the record, I didn't really think you would think Trump essentially fine with nuclear war just so he could get a hotel built, it just came off that way.

Quote:
Yeah, and that has been litigated and cited in this thread as to exactly where that information came from, and how much credence it should have. To try to call it a conspiracy theory is either a complete misunderstanding of the exchange in the thread, or a different use of the term than is typical.
When I said drad dog had created a CT in my comment, okay, that was too far. It wasn't a full on CT, but it I would suggest it was a pretty good start. The whole "brothers in power" thing. In any case, I withdraw the CT theory.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 10-17-2019 at 03:08 PM.
  #247  
Old 10-17-2019, 03:23 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
The antecedent to the pronoun 'he' in my post was Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is weakening NATO. He hasn't done enough yet to get any countries to actually pull out, but he has, and continues to, weaken NATO.

I thought you were saying, "Sure Donald Trump is weakening NATO, but he's not weakening weakening NATO." Honestly, I still think you are saying that.
On that note:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...orld-war-three
  #248  
Old 10-17-2019, 03:24 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
The antecedent to the pronoun 'he' in my post was Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is weakening NATO. He hasn't done enough yet to get any countries to actually pull out, but he has, and continues to, weaken NATO.

I thought you were saying, "Sure Donald Trump is weakening NATO, but he's not weakening weakening NATO." Honestly, I still think you are saying that.
To clarify, I responded to the first part of that sentence, and not the "weakening weakening" part, because I don't know what you mean. Does it mean "really weakening NATO" or what? But your use of the word "honestly" suggests to me you think I'm being less than truthful. I don't do that sort of thing.
  #249  
Old 10-17-2019, 03:27 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
"Is Trump an asset of Russia?" is a question being debated contemporaneously with the US bombing its own military bases to deny Russia military secrets as the Russians overrun those same bases.

But, yeah, this is ALLLLLLLL coincidence! We need proof greater than military movements and taken-over bases to even consider the question.
I can't help but think this is a snark directed to me. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Anyway, Trump can certainly be an asset of Russia even if he is not being blackmailed.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 10-17-2019 at 03:30 PM.
  #250  
Old 10-17-2019, 03:43 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
But your use of the word "honestly" suggests to me you think I'm being less than truthful.
That's not what 'honestly' means. That's bizarre.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017