Trump Thread

[Montmorency]

Trump voters see themselves in Trump.

[Montmorency]

Today in remarkably unhelpful Trump quotes:

"Mr President, how much of your legal work was handled by Michael Cohen?"

Well, as a percentage of my overall legal work, a tiny, tiny little fraction!

So, no privilege claim on Cohen's seized documents.

But Michael would represent me and represent me on some things... He represents me, like with this crazy Stormy Daniels deal, he represented me and uh, from what I see he did absolutely nothing wrong.

So was Cohen authorized on your behalf to make representations or not? If he was, why did you let him set up an invalid contract? And, as always, lie inconsistently about it?

And you look at the corruption at the top of the FBI. It's a disgrace. And our Justice Department, which I try and stay away from, but at some point I won't.

Oh dear.

[HopAlongBunny]

Fox & Friends is friendly territory.
Trump's meltdown, without really any questions directed at him demonstrates why you never consider letting Mueller have a "chat" with him.
On the upside, the interview may be used to buttress a defence of diminished capacity or dementia.

[Beskar]

Macron ideologically opposed Trump in Congress and got a standing ovation.. quite a few in fact.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Today in remarkably unhelpful Trump quotes:



So, no privilege claim on Cohen's seized documents.



So was Cohen authorized on your behalf to make representations or not? If he was, why did you let him set up an invalid contract? And, as always, lie inconsistently about it?



Oh dear.

Are you still trying to operate based on what Trump says? To the PRESS? Trump certainly doesn't....

[Montmorency]

Are you still trying to operate based on what Trump says? To the PRESS? Trump certainly doesn't....

Anything you say can and will be used against you.

[drone]

Fox & Friends is friendly territory.
Trump's meltdown, without really any questions directed at him demonstrates why you never consider letting Mueller have a "chat" with him.
On the upside, the interview may be used to buttress a defence of diminished capacity or dementia.

I think he has a disconnect in his brain, where when he's talking to "friends" he forgets that TV cameras are rolling, and everyone, not just his core audience, can hear his incoherent lies. An interview with Mueller would be a little more constrained (still full of lies, but what can you do ), as he would see the other side of the conversation as an enemy. We will see when he gets deposed in the Daniels civil case.

[Husar]

Are you still trying to operate based on what Trump says? To the PRESS? Trump certainly doesn't....

Well, the prosecutors seem to work with his statements regardless of how he treats them. Isn't that what matters in the end regarding the proceedings about/against him?

[rory_20_uk]

There was an interesting article on demonstrating how those who feel they are sidelined are happy to back liars as long as the liars are doing down the establishment in some way or other. That is all a load of lies is a secondary concern.

Seeing as how a portion of America is feeling disenfranchised that they no longer are an important block for those in power to pander to, having someone who they can back who is against all that is wrong is more important than what he does.

I hope in the Stormy Daniels case the judge in the civil case forces Cohen to testify - if someone takes the 5th on all matters I'd say that by default on the balance of probabilities he's guilty - why else take the 5th? Lock him up for a long time to encourage him to be more cooperative on what other matters he's been withholding.

This whole thing rather feels like the story to the film "Snake Eyes" - the empire of the Trump Clan is best out of the spotlight where no one really looks into all the dodgy deals. Now in the glare, people are investigating all the grey areas and it could all be destroyed.

[Husar]

if someone takes the 5th on all matters I'd say that by default on the balance of probabilities he's guilty - why else take the 5th?

Yeah, that's kinda hilarious, because: https://youtu.be/0Nyl1yUbVHM?t=498

[HopAlongBunny]

Anything you say can and will be used against you.

Apparently Micheal Avenatti thinks of Trump as "the gift that keeps giving".

[HopAlongBunny]

Break out the bourbon ye Trumpkins!
The House Intelligence Committee found "No Collusion!"
The Democrat members of the committee beg to differ:

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/13/59332...ia-conclusions

Real difference or "apples and oranges"?

[HopAlongBunny]

Protecting the Special Counsel.
Some Republicans try to make the case that "really it can't be done"; this stance relies (largely not exclusively) on a dissenting opinion by Scalia in a different case.
The problems with this view are many, but the clearest is, dissenting opinions are not law.
Even if the dissent was not flawed (which it is) it does not have the weight of a decision.
A nice discussion of the problems:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...-mistakes.html

[HopAlongBunny]

Oh poor Michelle Wolf.
The media has (not exclusively but mostly) been pretty negative on her appearance at The White House Correspondents Dinner.
I saw most of it and thought it was hilarious, and pretty spot-on.

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/29/60683...ks-at-d-c-gala

She has always been fairly crude and outspoken in her routines, if they didn't want to hear the truth they should have hired someone else.
It has never been part of Michelle Wolf's comedy to "pull her punches"

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It is Sunday, April 29, 2018 and Putin is still a fascist; and Trump is still an asshat.

[Hooahguy]

Oh poor Michelle Wolf.
The media has (not exclusively but mostly) been pretty negative on her appearance at The White House Correspondents Dinner.
I saw most of it and thought it was hilarious, and pretty spot-on.

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/29/60683...ks-at-d-c-gala

She has always been fairly crude and outspoken in her routines, if they didn't want to hear the truth they should have hired someone else.
It has never been part of Michelle Wolf's comedy to "pull her punches"

This conservative site I think has a pretty spot-on assessment on what happened:

On his way to the White House, Trump mocked women, Hispanics, the disabled, and anyone who publicly chose not to support him unconditionally. Granted he did so without the skill of a practiced comedian so his digs were juvenile and repetitive, mostly consisting of calling people stupid, calling them losers, or mocking the fact that they aren’t as rich as he is.
...

Many of those supporters are undoubtedly perturbed by Michelle Wolf’s attempt at comedy but fail to recognize the cognitive dissonance inherent in those feelings. You can’t complain about the level of discourse if you actively helped lower it yourself.

[Gilrandir]

It is Sunday, April 29, 2018 and Putin is still a fascist; and Trump is still an asshat.

What abou Kim? Any change in his ideological affiliation/mental capacities?

As for Putin, he just wants justice and truth.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/616334...cartographers/

[rory_20_uk]

Oh poor Michelle Wolf.
The media has (not exclusively but mostly) been pretty negative on her appearance at The White House Correspondents Dinner.
I saw most of it and thought it was hilarious, and pretty spot-on.

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/29/60683...ks-at-d-c-gala

She has always been fairly crude and outspoken in her routines, if they didn't want to hear the truth they should have hired someone else.
It has never been part of Michelle Wolf's comedy to "pull her punches"

An event that celebrates the First Amendment... but only so far. I am not familiar with her work but if it is in line with everything else she performs it seems rather moronic to then criticise her for doing it. Asking her to submit her skit for the Propaganda Board to have a check over seems to miss the point!

In Korea over the years there have been 5 or so very weighty documents signed on all sorts of things which have made little progress (proponents might claim they have prevented things worsening). I would be amazed if Kim would trade his regime's only card to prevent take over based on what amounts to a pinkie promise from Trump - a man who has spent most of his life breaking every promise he possibly can. Not to mention Kim probably wants to be where he is - or at least living a good life somewhere - for the next 30 years or so whereas Trump will be out of office in 7 years or less.

[Husar]

This conservative site I think has a pretty spot-on assessment on what happened:

A site that wants me to fill out a captcha for "security purposes" because I'm a filthy foreign barbarian has to be trustworthy on such issues.
That aside, there is a difference between a president and a comedian. If comedians are supposed to debate political issues on the level of discourse you would expect form a president, then they're not funny anymore, like all the conservative comedians that I never heard of I guess.

That's assuming they're saying Wolf lowered it and not Trump, it appears unclear now, just going by your quoted part. No, I won't do the captcha monkey thing to get context.

[Montmorency]

Pearl-clutchers can suck it, they brought this upon us and they're still doing it. Also, the hard-right especially:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Korean rhetoric doesn't promise much different than post-Soviet collapse, or post-9/11, or post-Iraq... Watching and waiting recommended.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

What abou Kim? Any change in his ideological affiliation/mental capacities?...

I don't pay as much attention to him as our media and as the administration does.

To the extent that I do, I would note that Kim is a Stalinist fascist. He is an egotist -- but that is hardly rare among world leaders of any stripe as elected or not it goes with the territory.

I have denigrated the metal capacity of NONE of the aforementioned. Putin is clearly shrewd (fascism does not preclude intelligence), Trump demonstrably sharp (asshats need not be stupid), and Kim has allowed South Korea to maneuver him exactly where he wants to be (Stalinist fascists pretty much have to be shrewd, and amoral, and vindictive...or they end up dead at the hands of their loving subjects).

[HopAlongBunny]

Will it never end!?
Stormy goes for the throat:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...or-defamation/

Gee can't a president even bad-mouth a plebe these days...
Go Stormy!

[Montmorency]

Trump demonstrably sharp

Is he though?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Is he though?

Too effective at deals and business management not to be. Not a genius or near genius (the claims of a 151 IQ have been debunked), by any means, and his 'pit everyone against each other' management style is causing trouble, but he isn't stupid.

[Montmorency]

Too effective at deals and business management not to be. Not a genius or near genius (the claims of a 151 IQ have been debunked), by any means, and his 'pit everyone against each other' management style is causing trouble, but he isn't stupid.

Is he effective at deals and business management? Well, we can see that he is effective at branding...

(As an aside, I would be suspicious in principle of any linearization of "success" with "intelligence", since it's routinely used by the powerful to excuse themselves.)

It's not just his words and spech... I can't recall even temporary political advantage resulting from something Trump has clearly initiated himself (even narrowly defined among Trump's base) as opposed to being a course of action announced by his administration (where his advisors and cabinet and the last person to speak t o him are often reported to be more influential in timing and content). (Here's Hitler at least sounding coherent.)

Comey's impression of Trump's intelligence:

“I don’t buy this stuff about him being mentally incompetent or early stages of dementia,” Comey said. “He strikes me as a person of above average intelligence who’s tracking conversations and knows what’s going on. I don’t think he’s medically unfit to be president. I think he’s morally unfit to be president. A person who sees moral equivalence in Charlottesville, who talks about and treats women like they’re pieces of meat, who lies constantly about matters big and small and insists the American people believe it, that person’s not fit to be president of the United States, on moral grounds. And that’s not a policy statement. Again, I don’t care what your views are on guns or immigration or taxes.”

You still have someone with a demonstrable inability to connect causes with consequences, or at least a lack of intellectual flexibility to match behavior to desirable or undesirable consequences. In the triad of impairment, disability, and dysfunction (sometimes handicap), Trump is objectively dysfunctional behaviorally and arguably cognitively. The other categories are more difficult to establish, but this much is blatant.

Intelligence is a frighteningly slippery concept, but in what confidence could you place this guy if you know him? Not with your money, not with sweeping your floors...

You could claim that he has an instinct for hurting or manipulating people, but as the above suggests on a large scale this is more a byproduct of his flailing than a calculated effort. His one and only sensitivity, gathered from all the secondhand reports about how he acts in a room of people: he's perceptive about power dynamics and relationships between individuals, in the sense that it's salient to him when he isn't the center gravity. He hones in on what people like about it, while more or less eliding what they dislike. He knows how to wield favor and humiliation in his circles. He's conscious of his paradoxical role to the news media overall, that symbiosis. I don't know what you call it.

In other words, he's a troglodyte. I think he's closer to your standard idiot than idiot-savant.

He is definitely not more intelligent than an "average" person, assuming I have a good baseline for average people.

[Husar]

Too effective at deals and business management not to be.

Where do you take this from? Why did his casino go bankrupt if he is such a great manager? And what are the awesome deals he made so far?
To me he looks more like the proof that any idiot can become richer if he is born with the right privilege and completely ruthless.

IIRC he lied to the Forbes people to get onto their list and then proved his wealth with that fake statistic to get loans from banks. I don't think anyone can do that and having had the name Trump and the wealth of his father in his back is probably what made people not check this thoroughly enough. If my name showed up in the top 50 Forbes list of richest people tomorrow, I kinda doubt a bank would accept that as proof of my wealth. Just as I doubt Forbes would fall for my lies in the first place. In his case he lied to a Forbes reporter telling him the entire wealth of his father was now his.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...=.112a24583203

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Lying effectively and gaming a system effectively, Husar, are not signs of intellectual shortcomings but, as Monty alluded to using Comey's quotation, moral and ethical shortcomings.

I am unwavering in my assessment of Trump as an asshat, I merely refuse to fall down the "I think he is an asshat so everything he is and has ever done must be evil, all of his ideas must be stupid, all of his supposed successes must have been faked, etc." rabbithole. It is akin to Stalin lifting Trotsky out of all the photos in order to make a fabrication real and far too much of here's what I think so now let's interpret everything based on my view is a "given." Look at each action and effort item by item and credit what is done well and damn what is done poorly. There are more than enough of the latter in my opinion.

Trump should be assessed on what he does in the office and how well he does it. Reviews, so far, are mixed at best.

I have supported the GOP with few exceptions since the 1970s. I have to actively consider voting for whatever yahoo the Dems put up -- who will likely be a big government is the only way crazy, given the current polarization in our politics -- to keep the asshat from demeaning the office further. Galling.

[Montmorency]

Lying effectively and gaming a system effectively, Husar, are not signs of intellectual shortcomings but, as Monty alluded to using Comey's quotation, moral and ethical shortcomings. I am unwavering in my assessment of Trump as an asshat, I merely refuse to fall down the "I think he is an asshat so everything he is and has ever done must be evil, all of his ideas must be stupid, all of his supposed successes must have been faked, etc." It is akin to Stalin lifting Trotsky out of all the photos in order to make a fabrication real. Look at them item by item and credit what is done well and damn what is done poorly.

Trump should be assessed on what he does in the office and how well he does it. Reviews, so far, are mixed at best.

But what has he done well (holistically in life)? He lies by volume, not effectiveness.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

But what has he done well (holistically in life)? He lies by volume, not effectiveness.

I edited my post. You were too quick and are responding to the abridged version.

Nothing he has ever done is right, nothing worked, he always was wrong, it was all given too him, he only knows how to shout louder whether it is whining or crying, he is the font of all evil, the bastard is responsible for us losing the Vietnam war, he was probably the thug in the crowd hired by the Pharisees to get them stirred up enough for Pilate to crucify Jesus.

With that mantra we can now close the thread. Why bother going through the particulars when the decision is cast in stone already.

[Montmorency]

I understand it is difficult to conceive of any particulars, but that is what I'm asking.

Although an aside again: why would you support the Republicans if you don't like "big government is the only way"? Any alleged distinction against the Democrats here is so marginal that without considering any other factors you would be obliged to give Republican and Democratic candidates an equal hearing.