Trump's expected reaction

Discussion of the recent unfolding of history.

Trump's expected reaction

Postby omar » Mon Sep 03, 2018 1:03 am

Why is it that people are grilling DJT for what is the only reasonable reaction he could have? "He should denounce Russia"...and undermine his own election? Place an asterisk by it? Taint for posterity his greatest achievement?
Technically, it might be illegal, but only technically. For example, had Jr. gone to a meeting with a Fusion GPS type outfit he might have gotten the same kompromat without the crisis this has created. Russians targeted certain voters...without breaking any laws really-- they simply used the freedom built-in the internet.
His opponents have latched on on this Russian connection, but even the worst case scenario I saw today (that he knew of the Trump Tower meeting) only amounts to the same bullshit the Democrats were doing through Steele= gain dirt on a political opponent. Would he be indebted to Putin? If all of it is true, then he already IS. How has that benefitted Russia so far? They're still facing sanctions. Somewhere down the line, and precisely using the same rationalization used by Obama on Russia, Trump, or someone else, will lift sanctions on Russia. The Cuban Revolution that made Cuba our enemy was never defeated through sanctions-- neither will Russia. We lifted those sanctions with no pretense to a victory, to anything gained in return.
Critics have many reasons to oppose Trump, as I do, but they are wrong to demand of him to go against his own self-interest. I didn't fault Clinton for lying about Monica-- it was what I expected any man to do. Russia is not this crisis it has been trumped up to be. What changed the election was not Russian meddling but James Comey's meddling-- simple as that. Come handed the WH to carrot top. Too late for buyer's remorse. He was investigating both candidates-- felt only strong enough to curb the chances of winning for only one. He may have acted in good faith, with good intentions, but as they say, the road to hell...
omar
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3316
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Where Crocs thrive

Re: Trump's expected reaction

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Mon Sep 03, 2018 1:56 am

Omar, I like you and I think of you as an honest seeker of the truth..
but in this case, you are wrong and not a little wrong...…

you are wrong about this question of the "Russian" question and
you are wrong about IQ 45 denying his best interest....

let us take the first question, that of Russia...…..

the fact that Russia did interfere with our elections is not
in dispute...…. and regardless if that is a crime or not, it is,
but the fact that, as a democracy our fundamental right in
a democracy is to vote.... and if that vote is interfered with,
regardless of who interferes with it... (and this includes the GOP
attempts to limit voting rights to only white middle class and up by
both redistricting, gerrymandering, and voting laws is wrong because
it violates the basic principle that the fundamental right of Americans
is to vote) it is the question of interfering with our elections regardless
of who the Russians favored, be it Clinton or IQ45.... his presidency is
tainted.. simple as that...… outside influences tried to manipulate
the election... it actually doesn't even matter if not a single vote
was changed... (which is a doubtful proposition) because any type of
manipulation of any election must be viewed seriously......let us create an example...

as I have stated previously, I ran Cross-country and track in High School...
now what if, in a race, some outside force attempted to manipulate a race
in an attempt to get me to win... say, bribe an official... it doesn't matter
if I win or not, the very fact at an manipulation of the race makes the
race illegitimate..... you must have an impartial race from start to finish,
to avoid any claim of manipulation... and we did not have an impartial presidential
race in 2016...……… it was influenced by outside forces.... just as any attempt
to bribe my track race was an attempt to influence the race and thus is illegitimate....

now the second part which is IQ45 need to pursue his self interest....
that is not a legal question but a moral one...…

think of the leaders you know or have read about...… the true leaders,
the real leaders are the ones who do an action even if, even if it isn't
in their best interest...…… Lincoln for example, I can easily see him
acting for the best interest of the country but not necessarily in his
best interest...….that is a sign of a true leader...… Gandhi and MLK
both were arrested multiple times while protesting their respective
causes and they were often arrested doing action that they KNEW
would get them arrested..... it wasn't in their best interest to get
arrested, but it was in the interest of their causes that they got
arrested...….

they acted morally and responsible and we should hold every
president/leader to the higher moral clause instead of the lower one....
yes, IQ45 should have put the country's best interest over his own
but he is a terrible leader and a terrible president.....

at all times, IQ45 put his interest first and the nations interest
second...and that boys and girls is shitty leadership


Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6761
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Trump's expected reaction

Postby omar » Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:45 am

Hello Peter

the fact that Russia did interfere with our elections is not
in dispute...….

Never said that it was in the dispute, BUT what exactly was their effect? What exactly did they do? Did they hack some voting machine? Did they set up our electoral college? Did they help a gerrymandering campaign? Did they force Americans to support a racist? Further, from what I'm getting the main charge is that they were plastering negative ads against Clinton on the internet, funding the campaign even. But who ran the biggest negative campaign against Clinton? The Russians or Comey?

as a democracy our fundamental right in
a democracy is to vote.... and if that vote is interfered with,
regardless of who interferes with it... (and this includes the GOP
attempts to limit voting rights to only white middle class and up by
both redistricting, gerrymandering, and voting laws is wrong because
it violates the basic principle that the fundamental right of Americans
is to vote) it is the question of interfering with our elections regardless
of who the Russians favored, be it Clinton or IQ45.
.

Was anyone denied the right to vote by the actions of the Russian smear campaign? Or was it merely a choice by many to stay home because no matter how much make up she could put on, (like she did for halloween) she never could be a Barrack Obama. Hillary lost for many reasons: She did not campaign in swing states, Benghazi was a painful reminder that harked back to her support of going into Iraq, Comey not only investigated her in a very public manner, but her husband tainted the process. Which of these, fatal perhaps in themselves, was effected by the Russian campaign? Unless Comey was a foreign agent, then I don't see the how. The Russians interfered in ways that raise questions because of the source, not the methods. It isa flawed system that was exploited for its weaknesses.

.. his presidency is
tainted.. simple as that...… outside influences tried to manipulate
the election... it actually doesn't even matter if not a single vote
was changed... (which is a doubtful proposition) because any type of
manipulation of any election must be viewed seriously......let us create an example...


Again, how did they "tried" to manipulate the election? Did they rigged the voting machines? No. They bought fake ads, fake news, targeted a certain slice of the population....but isn't that what other campaigns do already with super-pacs' money? What is the difference between "outside" versus "inside" influences? You think that oil companies are benign? What I mean is that the ulterior motives (not just free speech) is what motivates the funding of X or Y campaign. Foreign or domestic will not matter when the overall effect in both cases is a policy that is dictated by lobbyist of some kind. The system was/is already broken. This was just an expression of how it can be manipulated. Worse, there is no action which will prevent further "attacks" on our elections. And I placed quotations marks because, since the effects are the same, to me, lobbying, super-pacs etc constitute already an attack which was welcomed by our SC. Had the money and the fake news attacks come from the Koch Brothers, would we be having this conversation? Worst, would we consider the election tainted as a result? No we wouldn't, BUT, shouldn't we???

as I have stated previously, I ran Cross-country and track in High School...
now what if, in a race, some outside force attempted to manipulate a race
in an attempt to get me to win... say, bribe an official... it doesn't matter
if I win or not, the very fact at an manipulation of the race makes the
race illegitimate..... you must have an impartial race from start to finish,
to avoid any claim of manipulation... and we did not have an impartial presidential
race in 2016...……… it was influenced by outside forces.... just as any attempt
to bribe my track race was an attempt to influence the race and thus is illegitimate....


But did they bribe James Come? No. So that's not a good analogy. We don't have impartial races. Campaign finance is an issue precisely because it taints the concept of impartiality. What if, using your analogy, You were less well funded than your opponents. Thus, you have to work a normal job and train for the run, while they have the money to concentrate solely on the race. Perhaps your gifts are such that you will win anyway, but if you lose, wouldn't the initial disparity serve a block to the legitimacy of the race itself? And that is without adding that the referee was investigating all runners for possible doping violations but only revealed such efforts about you, thereby poisoning the idea that you won by your own gifts, tainting your legitimacy--

think of the leaders you know or have read about...… the true leaders,
the real leaders are the ones who do an action even if, even if it isn't
in their best interest
.
You could just have mentioned McCain during his debate with Obama. He did the unexpected, and it is to his credit. But my point is that not everyone is a McCain and there is nothing wrong with that. Secondly, the situations do not lend themselves for easy comparison. W. Bush was lucky that Gore didn't push for an investigation which would have placed a question mark on the legitimacy or W's win. But never mind that because when you look at the question of legitimacy, Hilary walked in with a question mark above her's (and Bernie can be added to the reason she lost by barely supporting her, thus creating a de facto third party). Just as Hilary was silent about the questionable super-delegate fiasco (and other shit they did to Bernie that may have cost him the nomination and placed hers under the shadow of illegitimacy) so has Trump sought to quiet the circumstances that places a question mark on his legitimacy. He is no McCain, no, but neither was she.

they acted morally and responsible and we should hold every
president/leader to the higher moral clause instead of the lower one....
yes, IQ45 should have put the country's best interest over his own
but he is a terrible leader and a terrible president.....


Clinton was not a moral bastion; ask Bernie-- and neither was her husband, a sitting President that lied under oath because it was in his best interest. In his mind, I would believe from such a narcissist, he is doing what is best for the country, and like it or not, despite unmasking the Russian agenda for the whole world to see, many, perhaps too many, agree with his own assessment.

I believe that he is a terrible person and a terrible leader, but not because of the Russian thing. Not at all. If there was no Russian thing, you have to admit this, he probably would have won the election, and STILL would be considered by me a rotten leader.
omar
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3316
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Where Crocs thrive

Re: Trump's expected reaction

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:37 pm

omar wrote:Why is it that people are grilling DJT for what is the only reasonable reaction he could have? "He should denounce Russia"...and undermine his own election? Place an asterisk by it? Taint for posterity his greatest achievement?
Technically, it might be illegal, but only technically. For example, had Jr. gone to a meeting with a Fusion GPS type outfit he might have gotten the same kompromat without the crisis this has created. Russians targeted certain voters...without breaking any laws really-- they simply used the freedom built-in the internet.
His opponents have latched on on this Russian connection, but even the worst case scenario I saw today (that he knew of the Trump Tower meeting) only amounts to the same bullshit the Democrats were doing through Steele= gain dirt on a political opponent. Would he be indebted to Putin? If all of it is true, then he already IS. How has that benefitted Russia so far? They're still facing sanctions. Somewhere down the line, and precisely using the same rationalization used by Obama on Russia, Trump, or someone else, will lift sanctions on Russia. The Cuban Revolution that made Cuba our enemy was never defeated through sanctions-- neither will Russia. We lifted those sanctions with no pretense to a victory, to anything gained in return.
Critics have many reasons to oppose Trump, as I do, but they are wrong to demand of him to go against his own self-interest. I didn't fault Clinton for lying about Monica-- it was what I expected any man to do. Russia is not this crisis it has been trumped up to be. What changed the election was not Russian meddling but James Comey's meddling-- simple as that. Come handed the WH to carrot top. Too late for buyer's remorse. He was investigating both candidates-- felt only strong enough to curb the chances of winning for only one. He may have acted in good faith, with good intentions, but as they say, the road to hell...

But can you not see the triviality of the accusation, which requires blackmailing dozens of high career people with prison sentences to get anywhere at all, compared to the enormous successes Trump is booking for the USA?

Just enjoy it man.
It may come crashing down soon enough, if the Trump voters see their president taken down by the openly criminal kartel they had finally cut off from executive power, I predict democracy will be down for the count.
Before the Light - Tree of Life
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7777
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships


Return to Current Events



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users