Thanks for the source.
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.
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.
From the same 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.”
Re: dt and Mein Kampf. It was a big item until other things happened and there was just no time. It came from Ivana.
My sincere apologies That’s better.
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?
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.
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.
:rolleyes:
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.
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.
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.
Or as Nancy Pelosi supposedly said at a meeting with Trump today.“All roads with you lead to Putin”.
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:
Oh, and do remember to laugh, lads. It’s important.
You keep using the term “conspiracy theory”. I don’t think that phrase means what you think it does.
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.
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.
For starters, the whole Mein Kampf thing is bullshit.
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.
nm
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?
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.
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.
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.