The Trump Presidency 13: The (James) Baker's Dozen

[phiwum]

The question is 'why?'

Because people are easily diverted to defend what they actually said rather than to focus on the thrust of their point. When someone tells us that we're wrong, we react defensively rather than evaluate what they mean and see whether it's a point to defend.

This is greatly exacerbated when the attacker doesn't make clear what he's criticizing. "Trump never promised such-and-such," by itself, is not clear that the correspondent means "Trump said but did not promise such-and-such." A correspondent may say the former, so that his attack seems stronger than it is and he can always fall back on the latter if needed. It's an effective way to appear to rebut a claim when it is actually quibbling over a minor point rather than addressing the issue at hand: Trump said he'd do X and he didn't.

 

[phiwum]

Cohen says the RNC took illegal donations from foreign nationals, including China, and he has the receipts.

If this is true, Cohen might be about to explain the GOP’s subservience to Trump.

We should, of course, be cautious about what Cohen says. I reckon the investigators will be.

 

[Stacko]

Remember that news cycle kicked off by Rep. Ilhan Omar suggesting American Jews had dual loyalties.

Saturday, speaking to an audience comprised primarily of American Jews, Trump said he “stood with *your* prime minister at the White House,” and warned that Democrats’ “very well could leave Israel out there all by *yourselves*.”​

Going to be fun riding this new cycle because the first one certainly wasn't done in bad faith with ulterior motivations.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Remember that news cycle kicked off by Rep. Ilhan Omar suggesting American Jews had dual loyalties. <snip>

No.

Next time at least use a question mark for a loaded question.

 

[phiwum]

Anyways, here's a slightly different topic to have fun with. What are the things that Trump has done or caused that you all are happy about?

I like this guy's list as a good place to start.

1. Trump created a new generation of Democratic Socialists.

I'm not counting that as a good thing so far.

2. The Democrats finally kicked their obsession with perfection.

This would be good if I believed it were true.

3. Trump destroyed the careers of people I hate.

Trump destroyed the careers of people I didn't really hate before Trump, for the most part. (Sessions is an exception. I certainly didn't hate Manafort before Trump, but I would've had I known who he was.)

4. At long last, Trump killed the evangelical influence on our politics.

Ha! (4) is less plausible than (2).

5. Trump destroyed the Bush legacy.

In what sense? If the author means Bush looks worse due to Trump, the opposite is true. If he means that Trump is undoing what Bush did, I don't really see it.

6. Trump shattered our complacency.

Mixed blessing. He shattered complacency by making things so much worse than before. That's like saying the good thing about accidentally shooting my hunting partner is that from now on, I'll treat a gun with more care.

7. Democrats learned how to fight. Hard.

(7) isn't all that good to me. Far better would be that both sides return to civility and compromise. Given that the Republicans won't, I'm ambivalent about the Democrats following their lead. There's some practical benefits in the short term.

8. The GOP is now the party of Trump, and it’s going down with him.

If'n he goes down, the GOP will suffer. Let's wait and see. It's not obvious that Trump will be forced out or lose in 2020.

 

[phiwum]

No.

Next time at least use a question mark for a loaded question.

It wasn't, I'm sure, intended as a loaded question. You may dispute whether Omar suggested such a thing, but certainly many people thought so and it was reported as such. I think that's all that Stacko meant, although he might correct me.

 

[Stacko]

It wasn't, I'm sure, intended as a loaded question. You may dispute whether Omar suggested such a thing, but certainly many people thought so and it was reported as such. I think that's all that Stacko meant, although he might correct me.

You're correct.

 

[Leftus]

I think the point was, the job of the IRS is to determine whether you paid taxes on money that you earned, not whether that money was earned in a legal manner.

If you're a hitman, and you write on your tax form: Killed someone, income: $10000, the IRS would only care that you paid your taxes on that $10,000. They would not have the authority to contact your local police department and say "This tax form says he earned money from killing someone... maybe you should look into it".

That is true for normal taxpayers. Certain federal employees are held to a higher standard per IRM 4.8.4.2.4.3. Among those subjected to this higher standard are the President and VP (and IRS employees). The president and VP are treated exactly the same as IRS employees, with the exception that they are always audited.

 

[Belz...]

I'm not missing the point, I don't agree with it. Seriously, why is it so hard to understand Trump is an exception?

I already explained why. You say you're not missing the point but you keep ignoring the point when it's stated!

If you make an exception, how do you justify it, and how do you justify it in a way that other exceptions, for example yourself, wouldn't also be made?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If you give no reason to believe that you had much idea about what was being said, of course I won't care. Seriously, threatening me with "How about I make a list of how ignorant and crappy Republicans are?" is pretty hilarious, just about no matter how I look at it.

It wasn't a threat. It was a hypothetical example to illustrate how insulting your list was.

 

[Belz...]

Yup, nothing suspicious.

What's really frustrating is that you have a good number of posters here who are so invested in nay-saying the other team that they can't even admit to blatant and evident things like this. Trump has something very bad to hide about his financial dealings. The man's been getting away with metaphorical murder all his life, and now he sees the piper in the distance.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Democrats will 'never' see Trump's tax returns

https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...y-democrats-will-never-see-trumps-tax-returns


Mick Mulvaney says Democrats will never get to see Trump's tax returns,

"Nor should they. That’s an issue that was already litigated during the election. Voters knew the president could have given his tax returns, they knew that he didn’t, and they elected him anyway,

First of all, Trump said he would release his tax returns, in exchange for Clinton's mail or the end of the audit, whatever comes first. Getting elected is not the same as getting pardoned.

Second, it is fascinating that this is the hill Trump wants to die on - Dems have a much weaker legt to stand on with regards to Collusion after Barr's sabotage.
But we have Congressional Testimony that Trump committed tax fraud - refusing to release them to Congress is Obstruction.

 

[Belz...]

Trump doesn't want his school records, his tax records or the Mueller Report revealed to the public. You'd think a man (and I use that term loosely) who brags about going to Wharton, being a billionaire, and being "completely exonerated" by the M. Report, would want these publicly seen. I'm at a complete loss as to why he's fighting so hard not to release them.

You'd like to think so, wouldn't you?

I appreciate Captain Swoop providing them here as I don't have a Twitter account nor will I follow the Big Orange Baby's account.

I think you can still view the tweets without an account.

I like the fact that Captain Swoop post Trumps tweets, because he really tends to only post thea really, really stupid ones.

I agree, though he should provide a link at the same time, imo.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I already explained why. You say you're not missing the point but you keep ignoring the point when it's stated!

Please stop with this idiotic claim. Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they didn't hear or didn't understand. Surely you understand that concept.

If you make an exception, how do you justify it, and how do you justify it in a way that other exceptions, for example yourself, wouldn't also be made?

If you don't think Trump is an exception because of the corruption, criminality and mental illness that drips from his pores, nothing I am going to say will make a difference.

 

[Belz...]

Remember when the leftists claimed that conservatives could not do comedy?

Now they are in complete pants wetting mode because Our President retweeted a hilarious video of Biden rubbing Biden's shoulders.

They are?

Don't do what Travis does, please. Don't find the most ridiculous idiots on the other side and then paint everybody else in their colours. People are responsible for their own words and actions.

 

[Belz...]

Please stop with this idiotic claim.

It's not a claim; it's a fact. You have sidestepped said point since the beginning.

If you don't think Trump is an exception because of the corruption, criminality and mental illness that drips from his pores, nothing I am going to say will make a difference.

How do you establish his criminality before making the exception to get the evidence? Don't you see the danger here?

You are wrong. Stop digging yourself in further.

 

[Belz...]

His tweets are not official statements, just ******** rubbish.

According to the White House, you are wrong.

Trump condo sales to Russians are not money laundering conspiracies just overpriced cash sales (and in the big picture not that much money or that much overpriced).

The two are not mutually exclusive. Do you know how money laundering works?

The meetings with Russians, including at Trump Tower, were just bungling amateurs feeling out the options.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Belz...]

Someone is unclear on the concept of law.

Would that be me or Ginger?

Because there is no possible basis that the frauds in the House need them other than to harass the Executive.

That doesn't answer the question: if there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

the law is on Trump’s side.

Stop kissing up to him; it's pathetic.

Trump Retweeted

"I like positive things, okay?"

 

[Belz...]

Looks at list, notices the complete absence of the word promise in any quote.

Gets accused of quibbling.

Well, yes, he does get accused of quibbling because it's a quibble. If you lent money to someone and they said "I will absolutely pay you back" and they don't, you'd say they broke their promise.

You're only making an exception now because we're talking about your beloved dear leader.

 

[varwoche]

From the alternate facts department: When Bush Sr said "Read my lips. No new taxes." he did not make a promise concerning taxes. That's because he didn't use the word "promise".