Former Olympian among those charged with vandalizing Reflecting Pool

rambot · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
Like I said before, it's far more likely he's repeating what was reported to him, rather than he waded out into the pool with a tape measure.

On what basis do you make that assessment?

You think it's beneath him to lie to protect his incredibly fragile ego?

You think he has integrity?

You think someone who, after everything else he's done, fights for him and their entire family to have immunity from tax fraud for the rest of their lives is someone who lives on the up and up?

rambot · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
I have a good understanding of the things he's been accused of lying about.

So which of the "we're almost at a deal" statements about Iran was the one that you believed and what made it convincing?

Servus said:
Reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity") is a method of argument that proves a statement true by showing that its opposite leads to an impossible, illogical, or ridiculous conclusion. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. That didn't happen.

I'm willing to have someone who has a clue on logical fallacies to weigh in here but I'm not sure the purpose in asking all those questions other than to highlight an absurdist point.

LeafByNiggle · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
I'm confident that it's a possibility. The evidence would be the extensive 24/7 surveillance showing footage of people vandalizing the pool.

It's more than a possibility. It is a certainty that 24/7 surveillance would show some people walking by the reflecting pool and putting their hand in the water and drawing out a piece of the polyurea coating. But that alone does not constitute evidence of vandalism. But you did not answer the question of what you consider vandalism. Is it merely drawing out of the water a piece of the polyurea coating that was installed?

Tropical Wilds · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
Snarky is a bad way to start off.

Who’s being snarky?

Servus said:
Time will tell.

I will not hold my breath.

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

LeafByNiggle said:
It's more than a possibility. It is a certainty that 24/7 surveillance would show some people walking by the reflecting pool and putting their hand in the water and drawing out a piece of the polyurea coating.

As someone who viewed surveillance for a sculpture park, which got vandalized on several occasions over the years, my conclusion is that if vandalism took place in the form of putting a long slice into the coating, it most likely took place late at night when nobody else was around. And it would most likely be pretty clear what was taking place. Someone would most likely have to get down on all fours to make the cut.

LeafByNiggle said:
But that alone does not constitute evidence of vandalism. But you did not answer the question of what you consider vandalism. Is it merely drawing out of the water a piece of the polyurea coating that was installed?

If the coating had been sliced, and then someone grabbed a part that was loose from being sliced, and pulled on it to rip it further and increase the damage, I would consider that vandalism.

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

rambot said:
So which of the "we're almost at a deal" statements about Iran was the one that you believed and what made it convincing?

I think probably each time Trump believed they were almost at a deal and then the deal fell through.

rambot said:
I'm willing to have someone who has a clue on logical fallacies to weigh in here but I'm not sure the purpose in asking all those questions other than to highlight an absurdist point.

When the definition of reductio ad absurdum is posted that makes it clear whether it's applicable or not. The point in asking basically the same question a few different ways, was to drive a point home. Because you kept taking my saying I don't listen to Trump a whole lot, as meaning I don't ever hear anything he has to say. As in supposedly being completely ignorant of key things he's said.

Say it aint so · Jun 23, 2026

Meet Trump's pool guy part two.

No bid contract;

Mar A Largo neighbor:

Donated hundreds thousands of dollars to Trump:

Record of fraud:

Convicted felon:

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

Tropical Wilds said:
Who’s being snarky?

Calling me "sweetie" and then "kiddo" comes off as sarcastically demeaning.

LeafByNiggle · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
As someone who viewed surveillance for a sculpture park, which got vandalized on several occasions over the years, my conclusion is that if vandalism took place in the form of putting a long slice into the coating, it most likely took place late at night when nobody else was around. And it would most likely be pretty clear what was taking place. Someone would most likely have to get down on all fours to make the cut.

Someone would also get down on all fours to reach into the pond to pick up a piece of floating polyurea. Are you saying that getting down on all fours constitutes evidence of vandalism?

Servus said:
If the coating had been sliced, and then someone grabbed a part that was loose from being sliced, and pulled on it to rip it further and increase the damage, I would consider that vandalism.

And what if the coating had not been sliced but had just come unbonded because of natural forces? What evidence is there for slicing?

(I agree with you that name-calling of "sweety" and "kiddo" have no place in a debate.)

Tropical Wilds · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
Calling me "sweetie" and then "kiddo" comes off as sarcastically demeaning.

Oversensitive much? I call everybody “sweetie,” “hon,” “babe,” “kiddo,” etc because I don’t know anybody’s name and I have no interest in knowing their names. You should be flattered and take it as a compliment.

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

LeafByNiggle said:
Someone would also get down on all fours to reach into the pond to pick up a piece of floating polyurea.

Someone can just bend over to grab something and yank on it. But cutting a long slice into the surface of the pool would require someone getting down on their hands and knees.

LeafByNiggle said:
Are you saying that getting down on all fours constitutes evidence of vandalism?

As someone who's professionally assessed vandalism being committed by viewing surveillance footage many times, if someone put a long cut into the pool coating, I could tell what they were doing.

LeafByNiggle said:
And what if the coating had not been sliced but had just come unbonded because of natural forces? What evidence is there for slicing?

Forensics can determine whether or not something was cut or came loose.

rambot · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
I think probably each time Trump believed they were almost at a deal and then the deal fell through.

Huh. Sounds like a pretty terrible negotiator if he's that obtuse to the position of his counterpart.
Or
he was lying.

Servus said:
When the definition of reductio ad absurdum is posted that makes it clear whether it's applicable or not. The point in asking basically the same question a few different ways, was to drive a point home.

I didn't ask a question but I challenged you on your statement. It appears you listenned to Trump JUUUUUUUUUUUST enough to give creedence to everything he says, but not enough to be critical of anything he says.

Servus said:
Because you kept taking my saying I don't listen to Trump a whole lot, as meaning I don't ever hear anything he has to say.

"I don't listen to Trump a whole lot". Either you have heard enough from Trump to establish trust in the man or you have not. I find it hard to believe that after 5 years as leader of a country and 10 years in the political arena (to say NOTHING of DECADES of being in the cultural zeitgeist) there are people who haven't developed an opinion on his trustworthiness.

Servus said:
As in supposedly being completely ignorant of key things he's said.

When I hear the phrase "I don't listen to Trump a whole lot" and you demonstrate a lack of knowledge around his integrity and truth telling, I'm not sure how else you'd expect me to understand that phrase.

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

Tropical Wilds said:
Oversensitive much? I call everybody “sweetie,” “hon,” “babe,” “kiddo,” etc because I don’t know anybody’s name and I have no interest in knowing their names. You should be flattered and take it as a compliment.

Baloney.

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

rambot said:
Huh. Sounds like a pretty terrible negotiator if he's that obtuse to the position of his counterpart.
Or
he was lying.

I didn't ask a question but I challenged you on your statement. It appears you listenned to Trump JUUUUUUUUUUUST enough to give creedence to everything he says, but not enough to be critical of anything he says.

"I don't listen to Trump a whole lot". Either you have heard enough from Trump to establish trust in the man or you have not. I find it hard to believe that after 5 years as leader of a country and 10 years in the political arena (to say NOTHING of DECADES of being in the cultural zeitgeist) there are people who haven't developed an opinion on his trustworthiness.

When I hear the phrase "I don't listen to Trump a whole lot" and you demonstrate a lack of knowledge around his integrity and truth telling, I'm not sure how else you'd expect me to understand that phrase.

You're so full of bias against the guy and you're getting what I say wrong so much, I really can't continue with this. I feel like you're pretty much just using me as a sounding board to rant against Trump whom you obviously bitterly despise to the nth degree.

sjastro · Jun 23, 2026

Speaking from my own experience as a forensic engineer, I have had to examine cases in the automotive industry of polyurethane sealer failures in windscreens.
A correctly bonded windscreen provides structural reinforcement and there have been cases of occupants having their skulls crushed in vehicle rollovers when the windscreen separated from the body.
In all cases when failure occurred was the result of adhesive failure with complete separation of the polyurethane and primer from the glass. Another type of failure is cohesive failure where the polyurethane fails but remains on the glass and body.

If the polyurethane coating in the Lincoln Memorial pool came off in sheets this is classic adhesive failure caused by poor surface preparation or a failure in the primer (if one was used).
Polyurethanes whether used as windscreen sealants or as coatings are designed to fail cohesively.
If the polyurethane coating met the design and quality requirements it would be impossible to pull off the coating as a sheet.

DaisyDay · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
I hope some of you have never served jury duty and never will.

Servus said:
You would have to be actively involved in the investigation to know for a fact that there's no evidence. The arrests are a fairly good indication so far that a crime did take place.

The fascinating aspect of this is how logic and reason have been suppressed in certain people's minds. I find that more interesting than the actual situation.

No presumption of innocence.

These arrests highlight the problem of Trump first announcing the verdict, that vandalism caused damaged to the pool, then arresting people for touching the garbage in the pool - hopefully, there will be an investigation sometime before the sentencing. Then maybe, just maybe, the results of the investigation will be disclosed.

This is the authoritarian, governmental overreach approach - guilty verdict pronounced, then look for people to pin it on, then look for evidence they did it.

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

DaisyDay said:
No presumption of innocence.

These arrests highlight the problem of Trump first announcing the verdict, that vandalism caused damaged to the pool, then arresting people for touching the garbage in the pool - hopefully, there will be an investigation sometime before the sentencing. Then maybe, just maybe, the results of the investigation will be disclosed.

This is the authoritarian, governmental overreach approach - guilty verdict pronounced, then look for people to pin it on, then look for evidence they did it.

The US Park Police determined that a crime of vandalism was committed and arrested those they determined committed the crime. That's how it works. Law enforcement determines a crime took place, then they determine who committed the crime, and then they arrest them.

As I said, that's an indication that a crime took place. Not proof that that a crime took place. In no way am I insisting that a crime took place or insisting those who were arrested must be guilty.

Whereas others are insisting that no crime took place. And insisting people were falsely arrested. And insisting that Trump is lying about what happened. And insisting that the department of the interior is in collusion with Trump in perpetrating falsehood. There's no maybe or probably being taken into consideration. All other possibilities have been adamantly rejected by them.

durangodawood · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
You're so full of bias against the guy......

You clearly are confusing a well founded negative judgement with bias.

We have seen enough to know that this man is unacceptably self-serving and dishonest.

essentialsaltes · Jun 23, 2026

Servus said:
Whereas others are insisting that no crime took place

We are insisting that no evidence of a crime has been presented. This is not like an event that occurred in Fort Knox; this is a very public place, crawling with tourists and media with cameras looking for a story.

Servus · Jun 23, 2026

durangodawood said:
You clearly are confusing a well founded negative judgement with bias.
We have seen enough to know that this man is unacceptably self-serving and dishonest.

I'm going by the hyperbolically vitriolic condemning language being used. The hostility is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

Former Olympian among those charged with vandalizing Reflecting Pool

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Queen of Cups

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Queen of Cups

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Well-Known Member

re Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Well-Known Member

Similar threads