Patterico's Pontifications

9/1/2018

The “Off the Record” Trump Comments About Canada to Bloomberg: A Twitter Play in Three Acts

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:11 pm



Act 1:

Act 2:

Act 3:

You can’t go wrong counting on the dishonesty of Donald Trump.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

98 Responses to “The “Off the Record” Trump Comments About Canada to Bloomberg: A Twitter Play in Three Acts”

  1. We still don’t know who else was in the room, and it’s not certain that Trump knew about the leak.

    But that’s the way to bet.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  2. What is “Canadad”? Title fixed.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  3. “Canadad” with a “La_” preceding it maybe a way of mocking Canada as just a paler Latin/Central American country/economy should they not agree to terms.

    urbanleftbehind (67d95e)

  4. Given their respective track records on dishonesty, I believe Bloomberg.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  5. Act 4: Close Twitter

    DejectedHead (dc85ba)

  6. Honestly, it’s not even news anymore when the presidential sippy-cup takes its daily flight…

    Dave (445e97)

  7. Drop a dime, gimmie a byline, John Barron.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  8. If the MSM really had it in for Trump, they would black him out. No interviews, no quotes, no stories about him, no mention of him, whatsoever. They’d have him climbing the walls in a mental asylum in a week.

    nk (dbc370)

  9. Quebec cheese is socialist greed.
    the rest of the country has very little input

    mg (8cbc69)

  10. Isn’t it just as obvious a possibility that Daniel Dale is lying to cover for an ethical violation by Bloomberg’s journalists?

    It’s possible the Bloombergers are in cahoots with Dale and told him what Trump said in “confidence.” Dale then went ahead and published it. Now he’s trying to drag a red herring across his tracks to protect his Bloomberg co-conspirators.

    But, the only way he can do that is to have his so-called “source” come out of the shadows and take personal responsibility, if such a person exists.

    Gone are the days when lying jackals in the media could manufacture a controversy complete with false accusations and dirty smears, then attribute the calumny to an immaginary anonymous source. That crap went out the door with Dan Rather and was confirmed by the despicable race-baiter cabal of JurnoListers.

    Dennis Dale stands accused and so do the Bloombergers Dale put in the spotlights, till the truth comes out. Dale has only himself to blame.

    ropelight (f32cdc)

  11. Dennis Dale stands accused and so do the Bloombergers Dale put in the spotlights, till the truth comes out. Dale has only himself to blame.

    ropelight (f32cdc) — 9/1/2018 @ 6:49 pm

    But he’s accused by infamously disgraced liar Donald Trump. So what?

    As for having himself to blame, you mean he’s to blame for information being available to the American people… kinda the opposite of what Trump seems to want? Again, so what?

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  12. They came here and they got no deal, whereas Mexico has. The tufnel rule applies.

    Narciso (246203)

  13. Anyone watching Alabama skunk Louisville?

    ropelight (f32cdc)

  14. Isn’t it just as obvious a possibility that Daniel Dale is lying to cover for an ethical violation by Bloomberg’s journalists?

    It’s a possibility, but Dale and the Bloomberg folks have career-protecting interests in not exposing or screwing their sources. Trump is under no such compunction. And it still comes down to this: Do you believe a serial liar like Trump or do you believe the journalists who have no interest whatsoever in burning their sources? To me, the question practically answers itself.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  15. He had no business blabbing about things he didn’t want made public in the first place. “Off the record”? Gimme a break! Just shut the f*** up, blowhard!

    nk (dbc370)

  16. Trump, 3 days ago:
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1034783131855998976
    “When you see “anonymous source,” stop reading the story, it is fiction!”

    Davethulhu (fddbc4)

  17. #14, Paul, that’s not an argument, it’s a call to abandon reason and worship at the alter of Fake News. Dennis Dale got his information somewhere, and attributing it to an anonymous source just doesn’t cut the mustard. Till someone who was present and heard Trump’s words comes clean, then it’s on the Bloomburgers.

    ropelight (f32cdc)

  18. ..it’s a call to abandon reason and worship at the alter of Fake News.

    Well, that just seems like hyperbole to me, given the motivations of the respective parties. And I’ll just note that your default position is that Trump is being truthful, despite the body of evidence otherwise.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  19. Paul, you’re off your rocker. What say we give this another try tomorrow?

    ropelight (f32cdc)

  20. Trump: “Today’s Fail Safe code is Kellyanne32B and the countersign is Melania36C but that’s off the record, okay?”

    nk (dbc370)

  21. At least the dear departed Fred Thompson had those 32Bs when they were firm.

    urbanleftbehind (01dcd1)

  22. Trump has no trouble denying with a straight face that he said something he just said two minutes ago on live national TV, so why didn’t he do his usual denial of Fake News and imaginary sources this time but instead, by condemning the breach of the sacred “off the record”, implicitly confirmed that he did indeed say what he was said to have said? My guess is that Patterico is right here – Trump wanted the comment to be leaked.

    But not just to give himself a chance to blast the “dishonest” media. Trump is proud of himself for his belittling and bullying attitude toward Canada and just couldn’t bear the thought of keeping this choice bit to himself, he leaked the comments he made about Canada so that his sycophants could applaud his japery and join in the laughter and tell him what a manly man he is for beating up on little girls.

    Jerryskids (702a61)

  23. Sandy left a lot of debris.

    mg (8cbc69)

  24. Oh, ropelight, even die-hard Trump supporter streiff at Red State thinks Trump leaked it. In fact, streiff loved it:

    The question, of course, is who leaked the comments. Cui bono, as they say, who benefits? Bloomberg certainly doesn’t benefit by showing they can’t be trusted and I’d guess that most of Bloomberg’s reporters want a NAFTA deal, regardless of their feelings about Trump. That sort of leaves one logical suspect: John Barron.

    Realistically, the comments by Trump aren’t going to hurt him at home with anyone who doesn’t already hate him. It you can’t abuse Canadians what’s the purpose of being American? It fits with the tough dealmaker image Trump likes to project. Canada may be pissed off but they are going to have to make a deal and if Trump can humiliate Trudeau, making any deal look like abject surrender by Trudeau, then Trudeau gets screwed politically. This is a manifestly good thing.

    No links for Red State from me. Google it if you want the link.

    DRJ (15874d)

  25. GET EVEN!! GET EVEN!! Get EVEN!!

    That should be Trump’s 2020 campaign slogan.

    DRJ (15874d)

  26. Zeke Miller
    @ZekeJMiller
    Lara Trump at NC fundraiser introduces her father-in-law as “The savior of our country”
    __ _

    Jon Passantino
    @passantino
    Imagine if Obama’s kids had said this
    __ _

    Stephen Miller
    @redsteeze
    They didn’t have to. The press said it for them.

    __ _

    https://mobile.twitter.com/sarainitaly/status/1035919274337095680/photo/1
    __ _

    BearNJ
    @jimbearNJ
    Did you include the halo shots?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/chim0m/status/1035951414772682754/photo/1

    harkin (0f0199)

  27. Is zeke immune to embarrassment, after the matter with the churchill bust?

    Narciso (525eb7)

  28. Mexico was smart to make a deal first. Now Canada is going to be forced to make concessions to its largest trading partner while the USA has no real urgency. Canada is a drop in the bucket to the US, Trudeau is a twit and Freeland is in over her head.

    Take Trump out of the equation and just look at how the team Wilbur Ross has built is performing using US economic power and yes; threats, to force changes and lower/remove trade barriers to US goods.

    Its hardball though. “Nice little economy sector you got there. Be a shame if our little tariff ruined it and put all those wonderful people out of a job”

    steveg (a9dcab)

  29. At Patterico’s Act 2 above, he raised the “possibility” that Donald Trump himself authorized the leak…

    And, in my comment at #10 I pointed out another possibility: the Bloomburgers in cahoots with Dennis Dale could also be responsible, and were the most likeky suspects.

    Subsequent commenters seemed to jump straight from the issue of acknowledging various ‘possibilities’ to denying the culprit could be other than Trump himself, or an alter ego.

    Now, it may turn out that Trump did authorize the leak, but as yet the question is still open and the Bloombergers are still the most likely ‘anonymous source.’

    ropelight (9e309a)

  30. Canada is a drop in the bucket to the US, Trudeau is a twit and Freeland is in over her head.

    Canada is our 3rd largest trading partner after the EU and China (link). Trudeau is most certainly a twit, but Trump is behaving like a twat with his “no concessions” business.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  31. I still think Mexico has Cruz’ polling vulnerability to thank, as ersatz as that may turn out to be.

    urbanleftbehind (01dcd1)

  32. Josh Greene got trumps pollster story completely wrong, consequently he was given
    a book contract so he could misunderstand Steve bannon.

    Narciso (525eb7)

  33. Now, it may turn out that Trump did authorize the leak, but as yet the question is still open and the Bloombergers are still the most likely ‘anonymous source.’

    ropelight (9e309a) — 9/2/2018 @ 8:25 am

    To believe this, you have to believe Dale lied when he said his source was not Bloomberg. Trump lies about things that affect his job, but that doesn’t mean everyone does.

    Do you think everyone lies as part of their job, ropelight? If so, I pity your boss and/or employees.

    DRJ (15874d)

  34. Isn’t it just as obvious a possibility that Daniel Dale is lying to cover for an ethical violation by Bloomberg’s journalists?

    No.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  35. And I’ll just note that your default position is that Trump is being truthful, despite the body of evidence otherwise.

    And I’ll just note that my default position is that Trump is being untruthful, due to the body of evidence supporting that position.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  36. Sounds like the @#%%$”^$$%$ quote, designed to scuttle the daca agreement.

    Narciso (525eb7)

  37. Who gains or at least fights another day from a scuttled Canadian trade agreement? There’s Stab me Now, the 2 Minnys, Heitkamp, Tester, Baldwin, on the northern prairies at least.

    urbanleftbehind (847a06)

  38. The sole purpose for saying that stuff about Canada was to have it leak. To take Trump at face value is to believe that he is stupid enough to entrust one of his sainted deals with the “Enemy of the People.”

    That doesn’t mean the source isn’t Bloomberg. But it’s hard to figure what they gain from the leak. Trump, on the other hand, can bask in his victimisation, while being bombastically macho all at the same time. Mission accomplished.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  39. #33, DRJ, I maintain that it’s ‘possible’ that Dale (and the Bloomburgers) are lying, despite the apparent omniscience of our esteemed host, no disrespect intended.

    And, no, I don’t think everyone lies as part of their job. Additionally, you’ll be relieved to know I have no boss nor employees for you to pity. I’m retired.

    Patterico, you say there’s a body of evidence supporting the position Trump lies, but you neglect to acknowledge an even larger and rapidly growing body of evidence which demonstrates rather conclusively that a vast left-wing media conspiracy in cahoots with Democrat leaders and renegade Intelligence Community officials targeted Donald Trump for personal destruction using lies, fabrications, frame-ups, a phony dossier, perverse legal proceedings, spies, coerced informants, and every other form of illegal dirty dealing so far short of assassination to drive Trump from office.

    So, if we weigh the evidence with Trump on one side and the cabal’s strange bedfellows on the other there’s little doubt who’s heart Anubis would prefer.

    ropelight (9e309a)

  40. At least you are not bitter. That comes with age for some.

    DRJ (15874d)

  41. Trump doesn’t like it when people lie to him? I am of the “All Lies Matter” philosophy. Whether he is the pot or the kettle doesn’t much matter.

    noel (96c84f)

  42. I had a classmate in high school who never ceased being a BS-er. It got old but we also became accustomed to it. The other day it occured to me how similar he was to our current President. All of the psychoanalysis aside, maybe it’s a mistake to overthink this. Donald Trump is a BS-er and that’s about all he is. We’re just getting used to it…. just like we did with Chuck.

    noel (96c84f)

  43. ropelight 39,

    Patterico’s blog was first noticed for his fact-checking of the LA Times, chiefly for its left-wing bias, so it is hilarious and ironic for you to lecture him for not recognizing media bias that hurts Trump. IMO you only care about Trump.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  44. noel,

    That may be, but your classmate doesn’t have the powers Trump has. It’s helpful to understand what motivates powerful people, not so we can empathize with them but so we can predict what they will do.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  45. Maybe there’s a cahoots between DJT and the replacement Ford brother, though that speaks poorly of Ford courting suffering between now and October of 2019.

    urbanleftbehind (fea0b4)

  46. I see. Some of you don’t want to believe me? People who are BS-ers will tell you, to your face, things that you know are absolutely and provably false and expect you to believe them. For instance…. that their 67-story tower is a 78-story building knowing full well that you can count to 100.

    noel (96c84f)

  47. It’s not whether I believe you. It would be nice if Trump were merely a BSer but his behavior seems more than puffery. What you see as a BSer, I see as a narcissist or a sociopath/psychopath. The differences matter.

    DRJ (15874d)

  48. George Washington may be the only President we’ve had who was not a BSer. Everyone else I can think of was. Even the patron saint of my state.

    What I don’t understand is how people can like Trump!!!1! It totally boggles my mind. To see him or to hear him (and it’s only been electronically or in print) makes my skin crawl, and I’m a person who is not bothered by spiders in my living room.

    nk (dbc370)

  49. #43, DRJ, I’m aware of Patterico’s early focus on the LA Times, in fact he was once part of a blog (Oh, That Liberal Media, if memory serves) where I commented for a while before I followed him here, quite a while ago.

    I don’t consider my remarks at #43 addressed to Patterico ‘a lecture.’ I both like and respect him and as an indication of the sincerity of that statement, I offer my lengthly record of attendance here, such as it is.

    My intent at #43 was to confront Patterio with overwhelming evidence his personal crusade against Trump inhibits his ability to fairly weigh the evidence in the issue before us. By making his prejudice obvious in this small example, I hoped to encourage a more general self-awareness leading to a more balanced perspective.

    ropelight (3d15df)

  50. I guess Trump should consider owning slaves so as to earn some respect.

    Munroe (13e024)

  51. Sorry, DRJ. I wrote that while you were posting. Not referring to you but Trump supporters in general.

    noel (96c84f)

  52. My intent at #43 was to confront Patterio with overwhelming evidence his personal crusade against Trump inhibits his ability to fairly weigh the evidence in the issue before us. By making his prejudice obvious in this small example, I hoped to encourage a more general self-awareness leading to a more balanced perspective.

    Ok. You don’t call that a lecture? Self-awareness goes both ways.

    DRJ (15874d)

  53. He is a necessary implement, an imperfect vehicle admittedly, I don’t detect much balance in the evaluation of his policies or his person,

    Narciso (966230)

  54. noel,

    Please don’t apologize. It’s fun to talk to you.

    DRJ (15874d)

  55. Humble politico figures, I’ve seen few, one is who has been airbrushed out of the historical record, because her initial sponsor had no shame.

    Narciso (966230)

  56. Now one might think this a,provocative act,

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/09/u-s-defunds-unrwa.php

    But no one for 70 years has had the will to do I it

    Narciso (966230)

  57. narciso 53:

    I don’t detect much balance in the evaluation of his policies or his person,

    Narciso (966230) — 9/3/2018 @ 9:41 am

    Of course not, because you are a fan. People who are not fans think his supporters lack balance, too.

    The point is (or should be) that Trump is President so he is the focus of public interest, concern, support, and criticism. He won, so get over the need to constantly defend him. Hillary lost, so who cares about her … except to wonder why Trump decided not to investigate her many, many questionable acts when she was in government.

    DRJ (15874d)

  58. And you seem to care very little about the means employed to shield her, and go after him.

    Narciso (966230)

  59. I care when they use government. I don’t care that the media hurts his feelings, any more than I care that the Gateway Pundit and Fox News bend over backwards not to hurt his feelings. Apparently you haven’t fallen for media bias. Do you think you are smarter than other Americans and they are clueless? Americans vote for the values they believe in.

    DRJ (15874d)

  60. I’m inclined to believe some of the women who have accused Trump of sexual impropriety, but its never been proven that I know of. Same goes for Bill Clinton and the women who say he assaulted them or raped them. I’m inclined to believe them but don’t really know whats true and whats not.
    I do know that athletes, celebrities, politicians etc attract gold diggers in spades

    I realize that finding out your abuser is running for office is a triggering event and my heart goes out to them, but I don’t know exactly who deserves my empathy unless they’ve followed through with law enforcement. FYI ladies showing up in the tow of Gloria Allred or a sleaze like Avenatti, is actually a good way to lose any empathy I may have had.

    There was also the woman in Alabama who claimed Brooks was after her as a 14 year old and I was on her side until I found out she’d altered her yearbook. I still was/am inclined to believe her, but that made me go officially neutral on her.

    steveg (a9dcab)

  61. All Trump cares about is the game, narciso.

    DRJ (15874d)

  62. @59 Narciso

    From the article title:
    “Commie-loving, former KGB agent’s home (Ernest Hemingway’s)”

    Now that’s a spicy take.

    Davethulhu (fddbc4)

  63. They tell it the way they see it. Hemingway like Herbert Matthews was upset the republic lost.

    Narciso (d573e4)

  64. #52, DRJ, no, as I stated previously I wouldn’t call my remarks to Patterico ‘a lecture.’ However, I won’t quibble, you may characterize them how you will.

    As for self-awareness, I’m reminded of an insight from my college days, it’s a variant of something attributed to Oscar Wilde.


    It’s a shallow man that knows himself.

    ropelight (a560e8)

  65. 55, hah! Maybe Joni Ernst or those of the GreaT Plains, Noem or Fischer. Now you got the 2 broke hoochie starter set that can go to either side.

    urbanleftbehind (fea0b4)

  66. So when everyone from Comey Brennan and,lynch conspire to set this web of deceit and lawfare, you say what exactly.

    Narciso (d573e4)

  67. They are in the government and should be investigated, narciso. Too bad America failed to elect a President who has the intelligence and the guts to investigate the establishment.

    DRJ (15874d)

  68. Why do you think they want after general Flynn, forced a phony recusal from sessions, it’s of a piece, how many reporter’s were paying bureau personnel,

    Narciso (d573e4)

  69. Of course Trump must simply give up in the face of that opposition, narciso. No one really thought he had what it takes to drain the swamp, apparently even his supporters.

    DRJ (15874d)

  70. Wilde was an aesthetic who believed decadence, duplicity and beauty were central to art, ropelight. That reminds me of Trump.

    DRJ (15874d)

  71. Being famous and appearing clever as you play the game of life is all that matters to people like that. You’ve never struck me that way. I guess I was wrong.

    DRJ (15874d)

  72. Correction: I hope I was wrong. I picture you as someone who cares about substance and deplores decadence. Do you?

    DRJ (15874d)

  73. Wilde was an aesthetic who believed decadence, duplicity and beauty were central to art,

    As ad hominem has come up here so frequently in the past, I’d like to take the opportunity to point out that this is a text book ad hominem argument. At least in regard to the value of the statement “It is a shallow man who knows himself”. Irony? Well, that’s another matter entirely.

    Skorcher (ab89b7)

  74. I don’t consider my remarks at #43 addressed to Patterico ‘a lecture.’ I both like and respect him and as an indication of the sincerity of that statement, I offer my lengthly record of attendance here, such as it is.

    My intent at #43 was to confront Patterio with overwhelming evidence his personal crusade against Trump inhibits his ability to fairly weigh the evidence in the issue before us. By making his prejudice obvious in this small example, I hoped to encourage a more general self-awareness leading to a more balanced perspective.

    I often see accusations of this type: that I am “biased” against Trump. That’s a fairly ridiculous claim, in my view. My view of Trump is based on observation of his public conduct over a long period of time. Based on that, I have formed an extraordinarily negative opinion of him. Is this “bias”? That would be like saying a jury was “biased” against a defendant based on the overwhelming evidence of his guilt.

    “Bias” *should* be used to describe a pre-existig animus against a person, based not on his conduct but on some characteristic unrelated to the judgment that one is making about the individual. If you know that a person dresses unfashionably, and you’re being asked to determine whether he ran a traffic light, his lack of fashion sense should have no effect on your judgment — and if his lack of fashion sense offends you so much that you want to rule against him on unrelated issues, you are biased. But if you are presented with evidence that he routinely runs traffic lights, that might be relevant to the question. Similarly, a judgment about a particular characteristic of a person such as his morality, based on evidence of his poor morality, is not bias.

    Now: having formed an unbiased opinion about Trump’s honesty and character, do those judgments sometimes factor into my analysis of news stories? For sure — in particular stories that require me to judge a claim by Trump against a claim by someone else with a better track record for honesty (which is almost everyone) — but that also is not evidence of “bias.” Again analogizing to a trial, if you are given unmistakable evidence that a witness is commonly dishonest, it is not “bias” to use that information as part of your judgment as to his honesty in a different context. The witness could end up being honest in his current testimony — and I have seen that happen many times — but you’re going to want a lot of corroboration before you trust that witness’s current testimony.

    So these accusations of “bias” are silly.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  75. I am most distressed at the way Trump’s supporters embrace his love of decadence in his lifestyle and his morals. It is childish to love celebrity decadence. Of course, we all do it now and then — when we envy owning a fancy sportscar or daydream about luxury homes/vacations — but we realize attaining those things can corrupt one’s soul. We used to seek out character in our leaders to avoid corruption, because holding government power makes one prone to corruption. Now we embrace decadance and corruption in both Parties.

    DRJ (15874d)

  76. Skorcher, I stand convicted of having a low opinion of Wilde, although he was very clever. He is a good example of the difference between intelligence and cleverness. As for “It is a shallow man who knows himself,” IMO that is something a narcissist would say to appear humble. We know who and what we are.

    DRJ (15874d)

  77. You realize Wilde was an aesthetic, right? My description is how he would have described himself. If that is ad hominem, so be it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  78. Excellent comment, Patterico.

    Remember when we used to talk about jury nullification? I fear a lot of people today think they know so much about everything that they would refuse to follow a judge’s instructions if it led to a result they disliked.

    DRJ (15874d)

  79. as opposed to electoral nullification on spurious means, and if they succeed they have made it clear that pence is next in their crosshairs,

    narciso (d1f714)

  80. I’m curious, Skorcher. I understand wanting someone to address substance instead of making an ad hominem attack. I thought I was addressing substance by noting Wilde was an aesthetic who embraced decadence as a positive value and who also valued cleverness. Those are things traditional society would label as shallow, so his famous quote may have been a response to that. But it is a description of his values and history, just like calling Obama a liberal or McCain a maverick. Is describing someone’s outlook ad hominem to you?

    DRJ (15874d)

  81. I never take anything Skorcher says seriously because he is a very unintelligent person who knows the phrase ad hominem but does not know what it means. As for Oscar Wilde, he was a fat pederast with rotten teeth who was so stupid that he sued himself into prison. His quips may have amused the Victorian London leisure class but there is no reason to think that he was anything more than a smart-ass, in no way wise or profound.

    nk (dbc370)

  82. Hillary was Trump’s target, narciso. I thought what his supporters like about him is that he will do and say anything to get power. Do you expect less of his opponents?

    DRJ (15874d)

  83. yes, but what of the rest of the Bloomsbury set, gay and intellectual set, well that’s never happened before,

    narciso (d1f714)

  84. Patterico, I might be a little more receptive to your argument (not really) had it’s origins not arisen in the fierce give and take of spirited debates here during the GOP Primary campaigns. Your support for Ted Cruz was forceful, passionate and unyielding.

    So much so that perhaps you’ve yet to fully recover from the double dog disappointments of Cruz’s loss and the stubborn opposition to Cruz that morphed eventually into enthusiastic support for Trump. Likely you felt somewhat betrayed. One sympathizes.

    #74, DRJ, I do care about substance and I abhor decadence in all it’s ghastly forms. So much so that I change the channel every time some talking head pastry chef swoons over his latest excessively gooey triple chocolate concoction. For me, the word denotes kitch kulture, a lack of both values and intelligence, gilding the lily, and all such ways of making oneself ridiculous.

    ropelight (a560e8)

  85. So irony it is then.

    Skorcher (ab89b7)

  86. Triple chocolate cake is tasty. You haven’t sworn that off, have you?

    DRJ (15874d)

  87. Patterico, I might be a little more receptive to your argument (not really) had it’s origins not arisen in the fierce give and take of spirited debates here during the GOP Primary campaigns. Your support for Ted Cruz was forceful, passionate and unyielding.

    So much so that perhaps you’ve yet to fully recover from the double dog disappointments of Cruz’s loss and the stubborn opposition to Cruz that morphed eventually into enthusiastic support for Trump. Likely you felt somewhat betrayed. One sympathizes.

    My argument that I find Trump repulsive based on observations of his public behavior is not credible because…I strongly supported a different candidate in the primaries?

    In what world does that remotely make any sense?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  88. Well robertico is embarrassing, his press coverage is more So, I’m surprised he’s not in vogue, yes I know who is, birch.

    It’s rather clear that Paul singer marshalled forces against Cruz and trump, and we know who he backed.

    Narciso (c99e1e)

  89. Patterico, it really seems like a lot of folks are thinking reactively. That is, they are rightfully angry with the press for being jackwagons (and they are), so the negative target of the press must be….good. No matter what that target says or does.

    It’s all reactive and oppositional thinking. And because most folks have their ego or self-concept involved in their thinking on this topic, much of the vitriol and bizarre hypocrisy is understandable.

    I mean, look at the Left. Folks with utterly no understanding of science at all, let alone climatology, will say that folks who disagree with them—even if the folks who disagree have training in science—are stupid, and wrong, and “antiscience.” Yet watch how those same people react to GMOs.

    And the Right does much the same thing on some issues, as you have to deal with often.

    So here we are: cheerleaders for two awful teams, who I believe call each other thieves while picking one another’s pockets. It takes both cheerleader teams to some very over the top and weird places. Some folks are reduced to stating that “their” team is “less crappy” than the other. Sigh.

    I think that each political party ought to state very clearly what they believe in, and what they will not tolerate. In simple words. And be held to those standards.

    The Big Boys and Big Girls who think they run the political world might be surprised how little support they get.

    As for here and now, I think that Trump supporters ought to state directly what would be a “bridge too far” for them. It would be interesting watching them do the limbo about it later. One can’t claim that DJT appoints great people, and then slam those people, as a simple example.

    After, of course, they accuse me of supporting HRC. Sigh.

    Just like middle school.

    Simon Jester (9d733c)

  90. That leaves a whole lot of context, agw is practically religious dogma, challenging it well ask mark steyn, and they have doctrinated a generation like the cobalt worshiping mutants in planet of the apes, Australia and the UK are swelterincag under thus figment. Steyn used to be in the telegraph and the sun times, Barclays and astor did away with that, ditto for the spectator, even national review decided not to make any ways. Yet there isn’t any evidence worthy of a hypothesis much less a theory.

    In a similar vein, the notion that there is some doubt to musllers case is verboten in the up, and similarly dogma. We can’t inquire how this whole crazy chzinletter came to be, Cambridge analytical helped it trump in some cavity, it must be destroyed kind of like Arthur andersen, come to thank of it.

    narciso (d1f714)

  91. Objectively what has actually happened the military has been expanded even the second fleet has been reactivated if we ever needed to go head to head with Russia, their premier fighting force was decimated on the Syrian plains. We have had not one but two airstrikes against Syria. Sanctions have been imposed on Russian appendages in Latin America and their middle east partners.

    narciso (d1f714)

  92. The irony is that you object to ad hominem arguments while labeling me shallow. Wilde loved devious duplicity like that because it made him feel superior. Et tu?

    DRJ (15874d)

  93. As for here and now, I think that Trump supporters ought to state directly what would be a “bridge too far” for them. It would be interesting watching them do the limbo about it later. One can’t claim that DJT appoints great people, and then slam those people, as a simple example.

    I asked that in one thread. Those who bothered to answer (very few) ultimately said by pursuing different policies. I don’t remember a single one citing a moral failing. I guess they worried too much that they might one day be reminded what they said once Trump crossed that line too.

    Patterico (115b1f)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.0709 secs.