Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk

Political Talk Political Talk Forum - Discuss and debate politics


Thanks Tree44Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 23rd, 2017, 01:06 PM   #61
Spud
 
foundit66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: California
Posts: 5,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
Again, as I've said before, and as Trump just explained, he NEVER claimed that he himself had tapes. The bluff was that a third party might have tapes, which Trump probably still thinks is a possibility. Then when people started asking if HE had then, he got all theatrically suspenseful, which was stupid.
First off, that's like the a guy saying "We better hope nobody has a bomb for this flight" at the airport, and then trying to defend the statement by insisting "but I didn't say I had the bomb".

Secondly, you realize that the red portion is completely undermined by the blue portion.
The fact that he didn't explicitly claim he had tapes is poor in the first place. Later refusing to admit that is doubling down on stupid, not where it started to get stupid.

All things considered, it's idiotic. Like a man telling his wife that she better hope there is no video-recording of their sex acts.
How else would a video-camera get in the room in the first place???

Are we expected to believe that Trump, now acting as POTUS (doing so poorly, admittedly) , still has legitimate fears that somebody else is wiretapping him?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
But he did tell reporters they were going to be disappointed when they found out the truth because he knew reporters were hoping he had turned into some sort of Nixon clone, which he hadn't.
Do you appreciate how that description essentially puts Trump as a troll?
He starts rumors for which he has absolutely no evidence, refusing to elaborate on descriptions knowing how normal people (not just reporters) would react to the comment...
And you think that reflects on the reporters...

More like
Reporters were "disappointed" to see a POTUS acting like an idiot.
(did I say "like an idiot" ...)
Thanks from tristanrobin and Clara007

Last edited by foundit66; June 23rd, 2017 at 01:16 PM.
foundit66 is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2017, 01:41 PM   #62
Senior Member
 
Bookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
First off, that's like the a guy saying "We better hope nobody has a bomb for this flight" at the airport, and then trying to defend the statement by insisting "but I didn't say I had the bomb".
I understand how a bomb can be a threat. So how is a tape recording a threat? The only way it would be considered a threat is if the person who fears the tape is lying, and then the tape would be threatening the liar with the truth. Is that what the worry is here? That Trump was threatening Comey with the truth? That's the only real threat I can think of Trump making. Trump was figuring that any tapes made by the unknown third party would show Comey to be a liar.

Quote:
Secondly, you realize that the red portion is completely undermined by the blue portion.
The fact that he didn't explicitly claim he had tapes is poor in the first place. Later refusing to admit that is doubling down on stupid, not where it started to get stupid.
Fair point. His flair for the dramatic made people suspect him far more than his initial statement warranted. Whether that is "doubling down" or just "single" stupid, I know know, Both are on the stupid spectrum.

Quote:
All things considered, it's idiotic. Like a man telling his wife that she better hope there is no video-recording of their sex acts.
How else would a video-camera get in the room in the first place???
It wouldn't be so idiotic if you suspected the previous owners of your home to have hidden video devices in various places, and you didn't know if any were still around.

Quote:
Are we expected to believe that Trump, now acting as POTUS (doing so poorly, admittedly) , still has legitimate fears that somebody else is wiretapping him?
I think we absolutely can believe that. He believes certain people are out to undermine his presidency. From what I have heard, there are a lot of people who are "resisting" him. Do you deny that?
Bookworm is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2017, 02:03 PM   #63
Spud
 
foundit66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: California
Posts: 5,714
Bookworm?
Let's try something simple.
A conversation took place between Trump (President) and Comey (FBI Director).
* It should be obvious that Trump's statements were not intimating Comey taped the conversation.
* WHO ELSE would have possibly recorded these conversations other than Trump (either directly or indirectly) or Comey?

And wouldn't it be rather alarming to think anybody else could have recorded these conversations with neither party knowledgeable of the recording?

So let's stop with this crap where we pretend it's too much to assume that Trump (if we assume he was not just plain lying) was referencing HIMSELF (either directly or indirectly) taping the conversation...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
I understand how a bomb can be a threat. So how is a tape recording a threat? The only way it would be considered a threat is if the person who fears the tape is lying, and then the tape would be threatening the liar with the truth. Is that what the worry is here? That Trump was threatening Comey with the truth? That's the only real threat I can think of Trump making. Trump was figuring that any tapes made by the unknown third party would show Comey to be a liar.
That's cute.
I never said threat, so the follow-on rambling is taking my apple to you talking about an orange and then orange juice and orange slices...

That Trump was "threatening" Comey with the truth should be understood. (Although it's a bit like an alcoholic threatening a regular person with a beer.)

THE VALIDITY of the threat and the pretense that Trump was taping the conversation is the point that I was making.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
Fair point. His flair for the dramatic made people suspect him far more than his initial statement warranted. Whether that is "doubling down" or just "single" stupid, I know know, Both are on the stupid spectrum.
I would change "flair for the dramatic" to "propensity to be dishonest".


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
It wouldn't be so idiotic if you suspected the previous owners of your home to have hidden video devices in various places, and you didn't know if any were still around.
So Trump being stupidly paranoid (even though the people who would have placed those devices there should have informed Trump they weren't there long time ago) is basically an excuse for him being dishonest?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
I think we absolutely can believe that. He believes certain people are out to undermine his presidency. From what I have heard, there are a lot of people who are "resisting" him. Do you deny that?
I deny there is any intelligence to any belief that somebody else is actively wiretapping Trump, without a [b]MAJOR[\b] breach.

But to put the shoe on the other foot, a bunch of people were resisting Obama too, correct?
So then would it have been just a logical leap for Obama to talk about people wiretapping him with absolutely no proof?



And on another note, does it get tiresome trying to lay down smoke-screens for Trump's idiocy?
Thanks from Clara007
foundit66 is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2017, 02:10 PM   #64
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,837
Is he so paranoid that he can't believe that the various security agencies responsible for sweeping his "area" for various spy devices are either incompetent or actively against him that they wouldn't report them or remove them?

If so, he's even sicker than I thought.

So again, Occam's razor says he's just a pathological liar who lies when telling the truth would be to his benefit.
RNG is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2017, 04:21 PM   #65
Senior Member
 
Bookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Bookworm?
Let's try something simple.
A conversation took place between Trump (President) and Comey (FBI Director).
* It should be obvious that Trump's statements were not intimating Comey taped the conversation.
* WHO ELSE would have possibly recorded these conversations other than Trump (either directly or indirectly) or Comey?
The existence of the conversation is established. The assumptions come into play when dealing with what each of the parties were thinking during the conversation. You say it's obvious Trump wasn't intimating Comey taped it. How is that obvious? Trump had earlier accused the FBI of wiretapping during the election. He obviously didn't think the FBI was above wiretapping him. Trump knew that if the FBI WAS taping him, those tapes would prove Comey to be lying.

Quote:
So let's stop with this crap where we pretend it's too much to assume that Trump (if we assume he was not just plain lying) was referencing HIMSELF (either directly or indirectly) taping the conversation...
I'm just taking at face value the statements of Trump himself regarding his thoughts while having the conversation. You are making the assumption that Trump must have been thinking something other than what Trump claims he was thinking. How about you stop with THAT crap.



Quote:
That's cute.
I never said threat, so the follow-on rambling is taking my apple to you talking about an orange and then orange juice and orange slices...

That Trump was "threatening" Comey with the truth should be understood. (Although it's a bit like an alcoholic threatening a regular person with a beer.)

THE VALIDITY of the threat and the pretense that Trump was taping the conversation is the point that I was making.
The minute you brought up the bomb on the plane, I thought that was an apple to oranges comparison. Earlier, RNG had spoken of the tapes as being a threat, so I thought maybe it was that previous conversation with him which you were referencing. I couldn't see any other connection to the statements I have been making. We've all heard of people who've made jokes about bombs when they didn't actually have one themselves. Saying, "I hope there isn't a bomb on the plane" is NOT normally something said by a person who actually brings a bomb on the plane. A "joke" like that also does not mean that the joker honestly suspects someone else might be bringing the bomb on the plane. The whole plane-bombing analogy has no comparison with the conversation-taping situation, in my opinion, unless you making a comment about the tapes being a threat.

Quote:
I would change "flair for the dramatic" to "propensity to be dishonest".
Well, I wouldn't. Those statement are two different things. Perhaps with some overlap, but still two different things.

Quote:
So Trump being stupidly paranoid (even though the people who would have placed those devices there should have informed Trump they weren't there long time ago) is basically an excuse for him being dishonest?
Dishonest how? If he truly believes himself to be wiretapped, then he is not being dishonest by wondering if there are tapes.

Quote:
But to put the shoe on the other foot, a bunch of people were resisting Obama too, correct?
Yeah. I didn't like that either. The Republicans sure set themselves up for some opposition to their president, but it seems to be getting excessiver and excessiver.
Quote:
So then would it have been just a logical leap for Obama to talk about people wiretapping him with absolutely no proof?
Oh, he had a different logical leap. Democrats would accuse the Republicans of opposing Obama just because he was black, and they had no proof of that accusation.

Quote:
And on another note, does it get tiresome trying to lay down smoke-screens for Trump's idiocy?
The tiresome thing is dealing with the liberals attempts to take every. little. thing. the president says or does and make it an issue of lying or idiocy.
Thanks from Sabcat
Bookworm is offline  
Old June 27th, 2017, 06:25 AM   #66
Senior Member
 
Hollywood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Memphis, Tn.
Posts: 18,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabcat View Post
There is no need to. People who are reading this understand and the others (like you) who do not will continue to look foolish. I'm sure it's mostly a generational thing. My grandpa still gets excited by what he sees on the TV too, granted we can show him the same thing again in like 20 min and get the same reaction. Its cute.
Sure kid, sure.
Hollywood is offline  
Old June 27th, 2017, 08:41 AM   #67
Senior Member
 
Clara007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,949
Quote:
And on another note, does it get tiresome trying to lay down smoke-screens for Trump's idiocy?
The tiresome thing is dealing with the liberals attempts to take every. little. thing. the president says or does and make it an issue of lying or idiocy.
Every.Little.Thing.?? Really? Maybe that's because Trump lies about Every.Little.Thing.

It's a big issue and anyone who doesn't think so is in denial...creating smoke screens...for the little dictator.
Shall we start posting the lies, going back decades? Shall we post the fraudulent 'art of the deals'? Shall we post quotes, videos, audio of all the lies??

What most of us don't understand is WHY anyone would trust this man?? His reputation is despicable. He is dishonest to the core. Selfish. Irresponsible. Careless. Undependable. Reckless. Insulting. A man of NO character. AND yet, he is defended day after day.

WHY?
Clara007 is offline  
Old June 27th, 2017, 06:57 PM   #68
Senior Member
 
Bookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara007 View Post
Every.Little.Thing.?? Really? Maybe that's because Trump lies about Every.Little.Thing.
I suppose if he said he had pancakes for breakfast, you would consider him to be lying. Or you would think it was idiotic for him to have pancakes. I mean, there has to be something about pancakes to criticize Trump about. He can't do anything right after all.

Quote:
It's a big issue and anyone who doesn't think so is in denial...creating smoke screens...for the little dictator.
Shall we start posting the lies, going back decades? Shall we post the fraudulent 'art of the deals'? Shall we post quotes, videos, audio of all the lies??
And what would be the point? Does admitting he lied in the past mean he is no longer president? Does admitting he still lies mean he is no longer president? Even if all "smoke screens" disappeared, he would still be president.

Quote:
What most of us don't understand is WHY anyone would trust this man?? His reputation is despicable. He is dishonest to the core. Selfish. Irresponsible. Careless. Undependable. Reckless. Insulting. A man of NO character. AND yet, he is defended day after day.

WHY?
Maybe because he is attacked day after day.
Thanks from Sabcat
Bookworm is offline  
Old June 27th, 2017, 07:11 PM   #69
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
I suppose if he said he had pancakes for breakfast, you would consider him to be lying. Or you would think it was idiotic for him to have pancakes. I mean, there has to be something about pancakes to criticize Trump about. He can't do anything right after all.

And what would be the point? Does admitting he lied in the past mean he is no longer president? Does admitting he still lies mean he is no longer president? Even if all "smoke screens" disappeared, he would still be president.

Maybe because he is attacked day after day.
So, are you saying all of the attacks against him are unwarranted, some of the attacks against him are unwarranted, or that most of the attacks against his are warranted but he's supposed to get a pass because he is president?
Thanks from Clara007
RNG is offline  
Old June 27th, 2017, 09:09 PM   #70
Senior Member
 
Bookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
So, are you saying all of the attacks against him are unwarranted, some of the attacks against him are unwarranted, or that most of the attacks against his are warranted but he's supposed to get a pass because he is president?
What does "get a pass" mean? Should everything he says be considered a lie in order to not give him a pass? He explained his thought process in the Comey conversation. It seems reasonable to me that his explanation actually was his thought process at the time. Now, having the conversation itself was stupid. Trump is reckless, immature, and egotistical, and I didn't vote for him, but I'm not going to jump on every action he takes or every word he says as being nefarious.
Thanks from Sabcat
Bookworm is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk

Tags
tapes, trump



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where Are the Ukrainian Air Traffic Control Tapes excalibur Current Events 10 July 25th, 2014 06:05 PM
More Nixon tapes to be made public CNN Current Events 2 June 23rd, 2009 09:41 AM
CIA destroyed 92 interview tapes intangible child Political Talk 5 March 3rd, 2009 04:13 PM
Papers: 92 interrogation tapes destroyed by CIA CNN Current Events 1 March 2nd, 2009 05:51 PM
Bush: 'No recollection' of tapes CNN Current Events 1 December 8th, 2007 06:14 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.