Well I don’t think the alleged golden showers were allegedly homosexual in nature. But I think video of the president being peed on would have a pretty serious impact. Besides, I thought the hypothetical was clear that it could be anything as long as it is damning.
Golden Showers… Homosexuality… Sex Tourism… Sadism… Sex with Animals… Fucking Machines… The whole of the Krafft-Ebing Catalogue is pretty much all the same now. Basically, no-one cares, least of all liberals, who pushed the whole Acceptance thing. One of the most popular sights for tourists in America is the Folsom Street Fair with nearly half a million watchers over three days. It’s just ordinary Americana to the rest of the world by now.
The only real taboos left are children and plural marriage. For now.
Really the only blackmails left are financial and murder. I doubt Trump, or Obama, committed murders before becoming president — and anything financial he is rich enough to recover from.
I don’t get this line of thinking.
How is Trump different than any other president of the US in this regard?
If it was within the power of the Russian government (or any other government) to hold over the head of a US president that either he or members of his family would meet a terrible fate if they didn’t act in accordance with their wishes, then they could do this regardless of whatever ties the president had or didn’t have to them.
Other presidents have enough integrity that they would not go along with it, or at the very least, inform relevant heads of security and intelligence. They would have many many options other than capitulating to the demands of the extortionists.
Trump, on the other hand, has alienated everyone and all the agencies that would be tapped to deal with such an issue, he sees himself standing alone, and will have very little reason to stand up against threats to his person, his family, or his business interests.
Speaking of which, there’s a big difference between the so-called president and presidents of the past, they generally had divested themselves of their business interests long before running, so that those interests could not be held over them.
I don’t see how Trump can convince the Russians he’s not concerned about being impeached. The fact that he accepted their aid (assuming your hypothetical is correct) shows how much he wants to be President. He’d be bluffing with somebody who’s seen the cards in his hand.
Many sources saying that Trump’s disinclination to criticize Russia is suspicious and that it may point to collusion between Trump and Putin. Of course the fact is that if Trump had anything to hide and there were such collusion Trump would be doing just the opposite and to allay suspicions he would be criticizing Russia every chance he got knowing that Putin would be aware of the game he was playing.
The fact that he is going easy on Putin is the strongest evidence that there is nothing sinister to this. He (and Putin) are not idiots.
Boy, you sure hate them degenerate liberals don’t you? Trust me, if there was a pic of Trump fucking a goat the public reaction would not be “live and let live”. At the very least, PETA would be all over him. This dose of reality is free of charge but I’ll have to start charging you eventually.
This is like saying that doing business with the mob is the same as not doing business with them. Great theory. Until reality intervenes. You get into bed with things and they can get out of control. The mob doesn’t usually pick random people to put the touch on.
It’s been said by other posters, but donnie could be blackmailed by anything that would make him crazy: pride, his attitude towards his voters on tape, who knows what else. He is driven crazy very easily.
Donald Trump is a classic dupe.
I think Trump just wouldn’t want anyone to see him shirtless.
Does this not include the collusion that has already been proved to have occurred between the administration’s team and russia, or are you saying that there will be no further collusion.
I wasn’t sure where you were getting this idea from, until I got to your last sentence, where you made an erroneous assumption. I don’t know about Putin, but the so-called president is most certainly an idiot.
The allegation I read was that Trump watched Russian prostitutes urinate on each other in a bed in which the Obamas slept.
But that has nothing to do with whether the Russians have kompromat or not, which is what we’re discussing here.
Once the issue is death threats, then kompromat is completely irrelevant.
I’m not quite seeing the fun here.
Nor how it would affect/insult the Obamas. Maybe the chambermaids…
May not be the issue that is being dealt with in the thread as a whole, but is a direct response to your post.
You said " he or members of his family would meet a terrible fate", which sounded much more like you were talking about death threats than blackmail. If you are saying that you just meant that blackmail material might get out, you should have used less hyperbolic language.
There is a whole spectrum of possibilities, from Russia releasing his valentine’s call to his mistress to the Russian mob killing him and all of his family. Just because there are possibilities on the far side of the spectrum does not make the embarrassing, unethical or illegal activities of which russia may have proof any more comfortable for him to be released to the public.
Hell, maybe some of these “leaks” are actually from the russian side, as the so-called president is not falling in line quickly enough with moscow’s directives.
You need to reread the thread to understand the context. Among other things, the “hyperbolic” language you quote was not (originally) mine.
Actually, no I don’t.
The “context”, as it were was in you responding to a comment about a russian who was killed under “mysterious circumstances”, with that poster implying that the next could be the so-called president.
You responded by saying you didn’t understand why the current so-called president would be more vulnerable to such threats than any other previous. I responded by explaining that other presidents would not have alienated their intelligence agencies in such a way that would have left them to fact these threats alone.
Oh, you were not the original one to post “he or members of his family would meet a terrible fate”? I searched out other posts that contained that hyperbolic language, and came up empty. Unless you can show who you cribbed it from, and why you put it into your quote without attribution, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that that language was in fact, originally yours.
I see you’ve still failed to understand the context. I’m going to explain it, but only once.
The topic of this thread is Russian kompromat on Trump. Someone suggested they would call in loans. Someone else countered Trump would just not pay them. Someone then responded that if so, either Trump or his family would meet the same fate as Sergei Krirov, he being a guy who was apparently murdered by having his head smashed in.
My response to that was that if there’s a possibility that a president could be influenced by threats of the president or his family being killed ala Krirov, then this would be possible without the loans or any other kompromat.
This is a very simple matter, and I don’t anticipate explaining this further if you persist.
Pathetic.
In my original post, I quoted the relevant language. You yourself referenced it. The language I was referring to was “Trump or a member of his family meets the same fate as Sergei Krivov”. That was not my language. Krirov was a guy who had his head smashed in and died. When I replayed this I changed “the same fate as Sergei Krirov” to “a horrible fate”, but I wouldn’t think anyone would quibble with the notion that having one’s head smashed in and dying is a “horrible fate”, and “horrible fate” is not any more hyperbolic than saying “having their heads smashed in”.
[I can’t imagine what you’re up to with this, but I’m not inclined to play along.]
No, I understood perfectly, I think it was you who had difficulty understanding my point.
Trump has alienated the intelligence agencies. He is in opposition to them. If he were a normal president, with no potential blackmail over his head, he could direct those agencies to investigate any threats against him, and feel fairly safe in the US’s competence in preventing harm from coming to the most important officeholder in our land.
As he does not trust the agencies, and so will not work with them, then that puts him at risk, not just for blackmail, but for physical threats against his person or family.
Pretty unnecessary, I would say. If you had actually comprehended my answer to your plaintive question, then you would not need to be tossing about such weak insults.
I don’t know what is so hard to understand about a person putting themselves into a compromised position being in a more compromised position than someone who has not put himself into a compromised position.
You specifically asked what was different between him and a president without such blackmail ties, I answered. You may not like the answer, but to imply that I am pathetic and do not understand the context of my question assumes a bit too much on your part.
OK, whatever.
I am glad to have answered your question.
One last time.
First, have a president who is above reproach. He gets a threat against him or his family. He hands it over to the secret service or NSA or whoever, and they make sure that nothing happens. (well to the president, whoever sent the death threat may not be doing so well.)
Second we have a president with secrets, embarrassing, unethical, illegal, or all three. He gets a threat against him or his family. He does not hand it over to security agencies, because in investigating the threat, they may turn over other dirt on him. So, he instead capitulates to the demand, rather than take the risk of harm to himself or his family.
Does that make any sense to you? Why a compromised president is in more danger than one who is not?