Trump 'offered Assange pardon....

[rambot]

Would you like me to take it back?



One thing I've learned is to wait till I hear the full story before I believe anyone that might have the slightest connection to Trump bashing.

The insulting expected from Trump will do what exactly to convince anyone?

 

[stevil]

Your point?

You said "You mean like you are not comfortable with NOT criticizing Trump every chance you get, and for no other reason than you lost the election?"

So you were saying that my reason for criticising Trump is because "you lost the election"
How do I lose an election? I didn't vote.

 

[Tom 1]

I wonder how long it'll take before the usual 'but Obama did X' post...

Or maybe there will just be flat denial.

A common approach I’ve noticed is a kind of eventual ‘Ok Trump did it but he didn’t really do it because the person who accused him once voted for Obama’. There’s a kind of strange dialectic whereby even if Trump did do whatever it is, this is somehow nullified by the accuser’s suspected political affiliation. Alongside that there is a definite acceptance (with justifications that this isn’t what they’re doing) that Trump essentially is the law, which usually goes with convoluted attempts to make his behaviour seem legitimate and even wise, as opposed to demonstrating the kind of grifter’s cunning he clearly does have.

 

[lasthero]

You said "You mean like you are not comfortable with NOT criticizing Trump every chance you get, and for no other reason than you lost the election?"

So you were saying that my reason for criticising Trump is because "you lost the election"
How do I lose an election? I didn't vote.

Give him some slack. He has to wait for the spin.

 

[rambot]

It will be nice when we can write in history books that Trump carelessly flaunted the rule of law.

Because then we don't have to be witness to it or those who turn their back on vile, patterned behaviour.

 

[TLK Valentine]

A common approach I’ve noticed is a kind of eventual ‘Ok Trump did it but he didn’t really do it because the person who accused him once voted for Obama’. There’s a kind of strange dialectic whereby even if Trump did do whatever it is, this is somehow nullified by the accuser’s suspected political affiliation. Alongside that there is a definite acceptance (with justifications that this isn’t what they’re doing) that Trump essentially is the law, which usually goes with convoluted attempts to make his behaviour seem legitimate and even wise, as opposed to demonstrating the kind of grifter’s cunning he clearly does have.

The problem with being a follower is that after a while, you lose whatever moral compass of your own that you may have possessed, and need to look to your leaders for moral/ethical guidance.

That's sad enough in and of itself, but when those leaders aren't exactly shining examples of virtue themselves, you turn towards your enemies and say, "Aha! If they can do that, then I'm a good person as long as I'm a little better than them..."

This leads to a moral code which is nothing but "What can I get away with?" ... such a moral code is nothing at all.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Rohrabacher's defense is halfway to a confession.

"At no time did I talk to President Trump about Julian Assange. Likewise, I was not directed by Trump or anyone else connected with him to meet with Julian Assange," he said in a statement.

Mr Rohrabacher said he was acting on his own "fact-finding mission".

He said he told the Wikileaks founder that if he could provide evidence of who passed on the DNC emails, he would then call on the president to pardon him.

So at the very least, he was dangling pardons for information.

 

[whatbogsends]

From: "I love Wikileaks" being repeated at every rally he held.
To: "I know nothing about Wikileaks. It's not really my thing."
While: Offering a pardon to Assange to misrepresent the facts.

 

[Kenny'sID]

You said "You mean like you are not comfortable with NOT criticizing Trump every chance you get, and for no other reason than you lost the election?"

So you were saying that my reason for criticising Trump is because "you lost the election"
How do I lose an election? I didn't vote.

By your choice of candidates losing?

 

[Kenny'sID]

The insulting expected from Trump will do what exactly to convince anyone?

Not sure I understand the comment.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I'm not a USA person, never been there. I didn't vote in the USA election and had no skin in the game.

You aren't acting here like you have no skin in the game. I mean most pope don't randomly run others down without a reason....most people.

 

[Speedwell]

You aren't acting here like you have no skin in the game. I mean most pope don't randomly run others down without a reason....most people.

The United States is a military and economic superpower. Everyone in the world has "skin in the game."

 

[TLK Valentine]

The United States is a military and economic superpower. Everyone in the world has "skin in the game."

Indeed. The current administration might be pursuing extreme isolationism, but such a policy is unfeasible.

The act of building (literal and figurative) walls and cowering behind them affects others.

 

[whatbogsends]

You aren't acting here like you have no skin in the game. I mean most pope don't randomly run others down without a reason....most people.

People aren't "randomly running" Trump down. They appropriately criticize him for corrupt, unethical and immoral actions.

It's not about "my side lost" for me, either. I wasn't (and still am not) a Hillary supporter, or even a Democrat. That doesn't preclude me from looking at Trump's actions in office and seeing quite clearly that he's dishonest, unethical, and corrupt.

 

[hislegacy]

Anything that isn’t gossip?

 

[stevil]

You aren't acting here like you have no skin in the game. I mean most pope don't randomly run others down without a reason....most people.

There are lots of reasons to be critical of Trump.
The media aren't criticising him because they are sad that "they lost the election"
They criticise him because there is very good reason to do so, a lot of things Trump does is concerning.
If a Democrat president were doing what Trump does, the Democrat would be getting constant criticism too.

These aren't "normal" times. USA's democratic future is under assault from this president. He is taking over departments that are usually apolitical and making them his own political tools.
It is fascinating to watch, but very concerning too. It is amazing how quickly USA is becoming a dictatorship and how it is happening without a violent coup. Just by a leader who is used having no rules or laws or ethics applied to him and who is used to having yes men loyalists willing to do anything he tells them. The USA vaunted laws, constitution and checks and balances aren't working.

You can't see it, presumably because you trust Trump and don't trust non far right wing media. You don't believe what you are seeing, you don't believe what you are hearing.

It is only what right wing media or Trump himself, what they say, that you believe.

 

[stevil]

By your choice of candidates losing?

I didn't choose any candidates.

 

[Cimorene]

It will be nice when we can write in history books that Trump carelessly flaunted the rule of law.

Because then we don't have to be witness to it or those who turn their back on vile, patterned behaviour.

That's already in history books. A lot of history textbooks today aren't like the ones in the past where you had to wait for it all to be written up & published on paper, then distributed. They're ebooks that get updated in real time. + there's other books documenting his lifetime history of vile patterned behaviour. It was predicted b4 he even got elected that he'd be impeached bc of that history of flouting the rule of law & decency. I'm friends irl w/ Ella, stanfordella from on here we went to Stanford's OHS together. She wrote a paper back in 2016 about how Trump would be impeached bc of his history of being a scofflaw. She grew up next to his golf course in So Cali, she knows about all those lawsuits from there bc of his majorly unethical & illegal behaviour. He cheated & mistreated so many ppl including children, widows. She decided to write the paper predicting the impeachment b4 he was elected, after a thread on here, lol. There'd been this diehard Trump fan who'd been majorly giddy & made this thread to brag about how this political science professor at AU who'd correctly predicted the outcome of every election since the 80s had predicted Trump would win. The fan here was so proud of that. Trump was too, he sent the prof a letter thanking / congratulating him. But neither the fan here or Trump read the whole article bc the prof had ALSO in that same article as predicting that he'd win the election bc of the EC predicted that he'd be impeached in term 1 bc of his lifetime history of flouting the rule of law. He knew Trump would continue the same pattern of behaviour he had his whole life. He then in 2017 published a book on compelling reasons for impeaching Trump, 2 yrs b4 Trump actually got impeached.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Remember kids, the scandal is not that the DNC rigged the Democratic primary in favor of Hillary Clinton. The scandal is that the rigging of the Democratic primary was exposed!

...still waiting on Putin's Pulitzer Prize.

 

[rambot]

Not sure I understand the comment.

Yeah. That wasn't my most clear post.

What I meant was;. How is Trump insulting and lying again going to convince you of something? Or more precisely, why would you believe someone who lies frequently and stunningly transparently?