Foreign interference in our government?

[Traveler]

I am not a fan of Trump.  I do not believe if Trump is impeached, it is the end of our republic democracy – I think I could endure it.  But there is much more that concerns me about all this.  If I wanted to conquer this nation and people and control this Country’s economy – what would I do?

The best way to conquer is to first divide.  If I was a foreign power – influencing an election would not be an important goal.  The most important influence would be to fuel a political division.  If there was influence in an election – it would have as the primary goal to divide the voters and create any possible faith (support) in those elected.

If any foreign government(s) are attempting to influence anything in this country – it is succeeding in dividing the country and convincing the citizens that nothing in the government (elected or bureaucratic) can be trusted.  I wonder - if our country is facing the greatest crisis of it short history?  Even greater than any war fought?

The question is not so much who is right or who is wrong - the question is - How will we unite such divided political agendas. 

 

The Traveler

[NeuroTypical]

It's a pretty common-sense notion in geopolitics: Nations try to make themselves stronger, and their opponents weaker.  One way to do this, is to weaken a citizenry's faith in their own systems and institutions.   Make them believe that their politicians and judges are biased and corrupt, their votes don't count, their elections are rigged, their rights are gone, their fellow citizens are dangerous fools.  

So yeah, Russia is out there doing that, and has been for a long time.  We do it to other nations too.  All the time.  The world used to be upfront about it, like in this pamphlet that was dropped on my dad in WWII:

(I can't post the other side, because there is a picture of the fat businessman who stayed home, surrounded by naked chicks and money.  Pretty clear message - my dad is off freezing and dying to make that guy rich, so why not just stop fighting?)

A more modern application of this principle: A sizable chunk of anti-vaccination propaganda we idiot Americans put out, isn't put out by idiot Americans after all - it's put out by Russian bots pretending to be idiot Americans.  Take a look: https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304567

So yeah, it's a good self-check to think for a minute - if you hate Trump or despise Biden, how much of that is because you've fallen for Russian propaganda disguised as someone on Twitter, or a news article from some news agency of which you've never heard?

[JohnsonJones]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

So yeah, it's a good self-check to think for a minute - if you hate Trump or despise Biden, how much of that is because you've fallen for Russian propaganda disguised as someone on Twitter, or a news article from some news agency of which you've never heard?

Well, I dislike Trump (as a politician) because of what he said about the disabled, about veterans, about women, and his general antics overall.  I don't credit media with that, but Trump's own actions.

Edited December 17, 2019 by JohnsonJones

[Guest Mores]

4 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Well, I dislike Trump (as a politician) because of what he said about the disabled, about veterans, about women, and his general antics overall.  I don't credit media with that, but Trump's own actions.

That's exactly what the media said about him.  He didn't say any of that.  He said things that can be interpreted that way if you're already of a mindset to expect it.  But to an impartial observer, he didn't criticize any of those categories.  He has criticized individuals who had declared themselves to be his enemy.  But he hasn't said those things about any category of people.

So, I guess we see just how much you have been affected by the media.  And you don't even know it.  Nor will you admit it.

[JohnsonJones]

17 hours ago, Mores said:

That's exactly what the media said about him.  He didn't say any of that.  He said things that can be interpreted that way if you're already of a mindset to expect it.  But to an impartial observer, he didn't criticize any of those categories.  He has criticized individuals who had declared themselves to be his enemy.  But he hasn't said those things about any category of people.

So, I guess we see just how much you have been affected by the media.  And you don't even know it.  Nor will you admit it.

John McCain was obviously so influenced by the Media along with his daughter that they felt similarly to me...apparently.

Trump said many of these things in speeches for the entire world to see, and see them in context of what he was saying.  There is no need for the media to color that when we can see it for ourselves.

[NeuroTypical]

 

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

Well, I dislike Trump (as a politician) because of what he said about the disabled, about veterans, about women
[...]
Trump said many of these things in speeches for the entire world to see, and see them in context of what he was saying.  There is no need for the media to color that when we can see it for ourselves.

Call for references, JJ.  Please provide quotes, and sources for things Trump "said about the disabled, about veterans, about women".

Mores' claim: "He has criticized individuals who had declared themselves to be his enemy.  But he hasn't said those things about any category of people."  But you are accusing Trump of saying things about entire classes of people.  If you are correct, you should be able to give reliable links to specific quotes.   If you are not correct, you won't be able to do it.

 

Edited December 18, 2019 by NeuroTypical

[anatess2]

4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

John McCain was obviously so influenced by the Media along with his daughter that they felt similarly to me...apparently.

Trump said many of these things in speeches for the entire world to see, and see them in context of what he was saying.  There is no need for the media to color that when we can see it for ourselves.

John McCain sold this country long ago to line his pockets.  He has cashed in on that war hero status much longer than it was worth giving him undue credibility to wage war after war costing thousands of American lives and chaos to sovereign countries while doing everything else he thinks will endear him to the leftist mainstream press.  His daughter knows this but will continue to defend his father's astrocities even when he publicly calls her mother a c*** because, after all, she is riding on the McCain name.

4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Trump said many of these things in speeches for the entire world to see, and see them in context of what he was saying.  There is no need for the media to color that when we can see it for ourselves.

Pick one incident.  I'll start.  Let's see if you're going to "continue to persist with the lie when confronted with facts" as the researcher in the video states.

 

Edited December 18, 2019 by anatess2

[Guest Scott]

On 12/18/2019 at 8:15 AM, NeuroTypical said:

 

Call for references, JJ.  Please provide quotes, and sources for things Trump "said about the disabled, about veterans, about women".

Mores' claim: "He has criticized individuals who had declared themselves to be his enemy.  But he hasn't said those things about any category of people."  But you are accusing Trump of saying things about entire classes of people.  If you are correct, you should be able to give reliable links to specific quotes.   If you are not correct, you won't be able to do it.

 

It was more than his enemies; he has made comments towards many women that weren't his enemies.

Take this for example:

I view that a person who is flat-chested is very hard to be a 10. It has been extraordinary, you have to have the face of Vivian Leigh to be a 10 if you are flat-chested.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/07/25/did-donald-trump-really-say-those-things/

This was not about one of his enemies and is derogatory to all women.

You may point out that a lot of men say similar things and you would be correct, but that doesn't change the fact that it is derogatory.   Trump has made several similar comments, but I am not going to link them here because they would be inappropriate.    They are not hard to find.  
 

Edited December 19, 2019 by Scott

[Guest Mores]

1 hour ago, Scott said:

I view that a person who is flat-chested is very hard to be a 10. It has been extraordinary, you have to have the face of Vivian Leigh to be a 10 if you are flat-chested.

He gave his opinion on what makes a woman attractive.  Is he wrong to have an opinion on attractiveness?

I'll agree it's probably not a polite thing to say.  But this is not a statement of character.  It's his opinion on what he considers attractive.

Quote

Trump has made several similar comments, but I am not going to link them here because they would be inappropriate.    They are not hard to find.  

I'd like to see them.

Quote

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-laziness-is-a-trait-in-blacks/

Conclusion from Snopes: Whether he said that is uncertain.  And your link even goes over that.

The "Putting a wife to work" comment was about his wife specifically who transformed from a gentle, loving woman, into a tyrant who had to yell at her subbordinates to get them to do their jobs.  He was not against women in the workplace in general.  He's always treated his female employees quite well.  So, that should go against your narrative.

He realized the necessity of having to be that tough person as an executive.  But he missed the gentleness in the woman he once knew before.  I can't blame him for that.  Additionally, you have to remember that this was said in 1994.  Liberals have done/said worst things more recently, yet the media has no problem just dismissing it as "a long time ago." (Blackface Trudeau).

Comment about Mexico sending people across the border was misquoted.  He did not say "all of them".  He said "many of them".  There is actual documented proof that a great majority of women and girls crossing the border have been raped by the men they are crossing with.  So, why would you want to support that?  To say that he was describing the entire category is ludicrous.  Obviously, if the women are being raped, they are not rapists. He even qualified his statement by adding "And some, I assume, are good people."

Just think about the accusation before you levy it.

1) Apparently fabricated.
2) Out of context and 25 years ago
3) Misquoted.
4) A matter of personal opinion that has no bearing on anything but himself.

Edited December 19, 2019 by Mores

[Guest Scott]

15 minutes ago, Mores said:

But this is not a statement of character.

I'd have to disagree.  It is a statement of character, especially when said to the public.

Quote

I'd like to see them.

Then Google it.   I'm not going to post those type of comments here and won't believe you if you say you can't find them.

Quote

Liberals have done/said worst things more recently

And yet it is still wrong.

Quote

Just think about the accusation before you levy it.

I only quoted one thing on that particular link and it isn't disputed as to what was said.  

[Guest Mores]

25 minutes ago, Scott said:

I'd have to disagree.  It is a statement of character, especially when said to the public.

Whatever. Not convincing.

Quote

Then Google it.   I'm not going to post those type of comments here and won't believe you if you say you can't find them.

I've heard many things.  And every single one of them proved to be wrong.

Quote

And yet it is still wrong.

And yet you don't hold them against the wall for it.

Quote

I only quoted one thing on that particular link and it isn't disputed as to what was said.  

So, you don't have a problem with the others.  Just the one that is expressing a personal opinion.  Boy!  I'm sold.  I'll start denouncing his estimation of a woman's attractiveness today.  While I'm at it, your wife is ugly too.  Not really, I have no idea what your wife looks like.  But you really want to judge a person for his opinions that only affect himself? Isn't that hypocritical?

If Trump doesn't like Bratwurst, I'm never going to vote for him.  Next?!

Edited December 19, 2019 by Mores

[Guest Scott]

33 minutes ago, Mores said:

I've heard many things.  And every single one of them proved to be wrong.

The ones that have been recorded either by sound or video can't be proven wrong.    I don't believe that you can't find other videos with voice recordings. 

Quote

And yet you don't hold them against the wall for it.

So, answering someone's request who requested a quote and source is holding him (Trump) to the wall?  Although it was JJ who was quoted, I would think that anyone could answer the request.

Here was a request:

Please provide quotes, and sources for things Trump said....about women.

Quote

So, you don't have a problem with the others.

I'd have a problem with anyone who says similar things.    As I said, Trump isn't the only one who has ever made similar comments.   I work with a bunch of construction workers all summer so I hear plenty.   

If I said those things, would it bother you?  If you (or anyone else) said such things, I'd be at least a little bothered, even if I didn't say anything about it.    Being bothered by a comment isn't the same as looking for offense (and I agree with you that some people do this).  

Quote

But you really want to judge a person for his opinions that only affect himself?

No matter who says them, comments such as a women isn't beautiful unless she meets certain physical criteria affect more than the person saying them.   This is especially true when said in public by a public figure whether or not someone is offended by them.

We all make judgements on physical beauty (unfortunately) whether we admit it or not.  We probably shouldn't, but we do and it's all of us and in our human nature.   But that's different than making the comments that were made in a public setting.        

Edited December 19, 2019 by Scott

[Guest Scott]

49 minutes ago, Mores said:

Not really, I have no idea what your wife looks like.

She looks like this and everyone loves her:

[Guest MormonGator]

25 minutes ago, Scott said:

If I said those things, would it bother you?  If you (or anyone else) said such things, I'd be at least a little bothered, even if I didn't say anything about it.    Being bothered by a comment isn't the same as looking for offense (and I agree with you that some people do this).  

Great point. If a member of the church said these things, we might feel differently. 

[anatess2]

30 minutes ago, Scott said:

No matter who says them, comments such as a women isn't beautiful unless she meets certain physical criteria affect more than the person saying them.   This is especially true when said in public by a public figure whether or not someone is offended by them.

We all make judgements on physical beauty (unfortunately) whether we admit it or not.  We probably shouldn't, but we do and it's all of us and in our human nature.   But that's different than making the comments that were made in a public setting.        

Trump owned Miss Universe.  It is a Beauty Pageant where women are judged by their Physical Beauty as well as their Intelligence and Talents.

[Guest MormonGator]

@Scott you bring up an interesting point. Almost all heterosexual guys are going to comment about women at some point in their lives. If this is a surprise to any woman over 18, sorry I spoiled it for you.  It's part of male sexual nature, and we have to be taught that it's not appropriate to make really vulgar comments. My problem with the Trumpers is the double standard many of them have. If Trump says this or that about women, it's dismissed as "boys being boys" or "locker room talk." If their son said that, they'd ground him. It's because Trumpers place a higher value on his (Trumps) political ideology then their own morality and behavior. 
 

Edited December 19, 2019 by MormonGator

[anatess2]

5 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

@Scott you bring up an interesting point. Almost all heterosexual guys are going to comment about women at some point in their lives. If this is a surprise to any woman over 18, sorry I spoiled it for you.  It's part of male sexual nature, and we have to be taught that it's not appropriate to make really vulgar comments. My problem with the Trumpers is the double standard many of them have. If Trump says this or that about women, it's dismissed as "boys being boys" or "locker room talk." If their son said that, they'd ground him. It's because Trumpers place a higher value on his (Trumps) political ideology then their own morality and behavior. 
 

Yes, we're going to ground our sons but we're not going to disown him for it.  If my boss does it, I'm going to criticize him for it but I won't stop getting my paycheck from him if he's doing a good job as my manager.  Trump's communication style is more vulgar than formal.  Doesn't change the fact that he's good at Presiding over a country.

[Guest Mores]

1 hour ago, Scott said:

The ones that have been recorded either by sound or video can't be proven wrong.    I don't believe that you can't find other videos with voice recordings. 

I didn't say I didn't find them.  I said they tended to follow several categories (which fail the validity test) that you apparently chose to ignore.

Quote

So, answering someone's request who requested a quote and source is holding him (Trump) to the wall?  Although it was JJ who was quoted, I would think that anyone could answer the request.

Have you actually been following the conversation? Perhaps you missed it.  It was about character flaws so bad that it would be worth refusing to vote for a person over it.

Do you honestly believe that (what I admitted was an impolite thing to say) his comments were bad enough to not vote for him over it?  Then you're being hypocritical.

He said they can't be a 10.  It doesn't mean they can't be a 9 or 9.5 or 8.

When I think of my wife, she is the most beautiful woman in the world.  No one would fault me for saying that.  But one has to acknowledge that such a statement by default means that all other women are uglier than she is.  Is that a character flaw?  So, I should stop saying my wife is the most beautiful woman in the world?

Quote

If I said those things, would it bother you?  If you (or anyone else) said such things, I'd be at least a little bothered, even if I didn't say anything about it.    Being bothered by a comment isn't the same as looking for offense (and I agree with you that some people do this).  

If anyone said it, I would feel exactly the same way.  It was worded in a less than polite method.  That would bother me no matter who said it.  And I would just as easily forgive them considering their background and lack of verbal skills to use euphemisms to say the exact same thing in a less offensive way.  But in the end, it would not be a make-or break thing as far as elections go.

Quote

No matter who says them, comments such as a women isn't beautiful unless she meets certain physical criteria affect more than the person saying them.   This is especially true when said in public by a public figure whether or not someone is offended by them.

This is a liberal point of view.  We can argue about differences in standards.  I see no problem with that.  But there's no denying they exist and that virtually everyone subscribes to them (different standards, yes, but standards nonetheless).  Why would you say they shouldn't?  That's just being in denial.  And you're going to fault someone for declaring their own standard that they go by?

Quote

We all make judgements on physical beauty (unfortunately) whether we admit it or not.  We probably shouldn't, but we do and it's all of us and in our human nature.   But that's different than making the comments that were made in a public setting.        

Again, I see the politeness part of it.  But if your worst complaint is that he's A) just like everyone else and B) He said the same thing that anyone else says all the time, but in a less polite way... then I'm not certain we're talking about the same thing here.

Just explain how my statement about my wife is less derogatory towards all other women aside from the "politeness" part.  If you can't really make a good argument for it, then you're really saying that his fault was that he's not very polite.

Edited December 19, 2019 by Mores

[Guest Scott]

12 minutes ago, Mores said:

Do you honestly believe that (what I admitted was an impolite thing to say) his comments were bad enough to not vote for him over it? 

Not that particular comment, but the sum of them is enough for me.  I wouldn't vote for Bill Clinton or Al Sharpton either if they ran for office based on some of their comments alone.  

Quote

He said they can't be a 10.  It doesn't mean they can't be a 9 or 9.5 or 8.

If you go listen to the whole thing, he did.    He rated her a 4 because her breasts were too small.

Quote

And you're going to fault someone for declaring their own standard that they go by?

No one should be judging anyone negatively for something he or she has no control over. 

Quote

When I think of my wife, she is the most beautiful woman in the world.

Quote

Just explain how my statement about my wife is less derogatory towards all other women aside from the "politeness" part. 

Saying your wife is the most beautiful woman in the world means that you are judging your wife in a positive manner, which you should.

Now if you went to another woman and said that she wasn't attractive because her breast weren't as big as your wife's, that wouldn't be OK (in my book at least).   

There is a big difference between judging someone positively by giving a compliment (i.e. "you have the most beautiful eyes") and insulting someone negatively for something they have no control over (i.e. "you aren't attractive because of your breast size").   

There is a big difference between the two.    If you don't see the difference, then there really is no need to continue further.

 

 

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

No one should be judging anyone negatively for something he or she has no control over.

Nonsense. if this were true, dating would be very different. The fact is that if a guy doesn't like blondes, he doesn't date blondes. And that's his prerogative. Nothing immoral about it. In fact, he's doing the blondes a favor by avoiding them, isn't he?

I agree with you that public figures should keep their private biases private. Publicly commenting on a woman's physicality, and especially publically judging her to be unattractive because of physical attributes, is coarse and boorish, words often (and rightly) applied to the current Commander-in-Chief. But unless you believe that people should not follow their hearts and their tastes in dating situations, what you write above goes way too far and is simply false.

For myself, I will vote for a vulgar boor who makes good executive decisions as President over some two-faced liar beholden to the rigid Goodthink of the starched-shorts politically correct Left.

[Guest Scott]

15 minutes ago, Vort said:

Nonsense. if this were true, dating would be very different. The fact is that if a guy doesn't like blondes, he doesn't date blondes. And that's his prerogative. Nothing immoral about it. In fact, he's doing the blondes a favor by avoiding them, isn't he?

No one should be judging a person negatively just because of his or her natural hair color.    It doesn't meant that no one does.   And if you feel you must do so, you should keep it to yourself.

Quote

I agree with you that public figures should keep their private biases private. Publicly commenting on a woman's physicality, and especially publically judging her to be unattractive because of physical attributes, is coarse and boorish, words often (and rightly) applied to the current Commander-in-Chief.

Agreed.

Quote

For myself, I will vote for a vulgar boor who makes good executive decisions as President over some two-faced liar beholden to the rigid Goodthink of the starched-shorts politically correct Left.

So why do we have to settle for that?

Why can't we demand and expect more from our politicians?    

It seems that  having affairs, lying, making vulgar comments, etc., is somehow a resume for running for political office.    Of course this is nothing new, but why can't we demand better?

It seems to me that instead of excusing the behaviors and comments of the people who we vote for, we should be calling them out and asking them to do better., even if they are the person we vote for.  Instead, so many would rather just excuse their bahavior and say "well the other guy is worse".  

 

Edited December 19, 2019 by Scott

[Vort]

10 minutes ago, Scott said:

So why do we have to settle for that?

Because Jesus Christ is unavailable, and the members of the First Presidency have for some reason opted not to run.

10 minutes ago, Scott said:

Why can't we demand and expect more from our politicians?

We may expect and even demand whatever we want. But we won't get it, unless what we want and demand is selfishness and corruption.

10 minutes ago, Scott said:

It seems to me that instead of excusing the behaviors and comments of the people who we vote for, we should be calling them out and asking them to do better., even if they are the person we vote for.  Instead, so many would rather just excuse their bahavior and say "well the other guy is worse".

This is the ugly reality. But the thing is, it IS reality. When it comes to Hillary Clinton or literally any other Democrat running, the Democrat "other guy" really is much, much worse than Trump. I wish the Repubs could do better than Donald Trump, but you can't effectively argue that the majority of his executive actions havenot been greatly to the net benefit from a so-called conservative point of view. It's the Jaredite Morianton paradox, and is as old as fallen man. I'll vote for Morianton over Amalekiah 100 times out of 100.

Edited December 19, 2019 by Vort

[Guest Mores]

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

No one should be judging anyone negatively for something he or she has no control over. 

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

There is a big difference between judging someone positively by giving a compliment (i.e. "you have the most beautiful eyes") and insulting someone negatively for something they have no control over (i.e. "you aren't attractive because of your breast size").   

These two are the summation of your position.  I'm going to reword it so it is more succinct to make a point.  If you believe I've misrepresented you, then feel free to correct me.

1) It's bad to judge someone negatively because of appearance.
2) Judging someone attractively is not the same as judging someone else negatively.

I disagree.  But I hope it is mostly just semantics.  So, perhaps you can understand where I'm coming from.

As far as I can tell, you're somewhat athletic and an outdoorsman.  As such you may have never been the did who was chosen last when picking teams for a game as a kid.  Those small, awkward kids couldn't help their young bodies from being fully developed.  Why should they be judged by it?

There are plenty of small, weak, physically awkward kids who have plenty of friends who can honestly assess the fact that these kids are not the ones you want on your team.  But they still love and appreciate them as a friend.

Are you so shallow that you hold attractiveness in such high esteem that it is the end all and be all of a person's worth?  I'd say it is rather an indictment of the society that values attractiveness so highly that they are willing to believe that physical attractiveness is the basis upon which we judge people's intrinsic value.

Trump, OTOH, hires many people of all levels of attractiveness because of their competence.  He values them because of who they are and what they can do rather than physical appearance.  Based on that, it appears that he thinks nothing more about attractiveness in people than he does about a person's height.  He'll acknowledge it.  But that really has no bearing on how he treats them.

As for the positive/negative: My point has been that whether A>B  or B<A, they are mathematically the same message.  You are really saying that you care more about the deliver than the message.  I don't.  I readily admit that the delivery was REALLY bad.  But when you consider this was ONE comment over 25 years ago, in a setting that just isn't the norm and it was all impromptu, one tends to be forgiving of the delivery.  I care about the message.  And the message was simply of a matter-of-fact personal opinion that he does not use to determine anyone's intrinsic value.  So, when you accuse him of "judging",  what is your basis here?

You say he should keep it to himself?  That again is delivery.  The choice to NOT deliver is a form of delivery.  That is not enough for me to care about.

[Guest Mores]

17 minutes ago, Scott said:

Why can't we demand and expect more from our politicians? 

We certainly should.  But part of the founding of the Consitution admitted that those who seek power will tend to be less virtuous than the average person.  That's why checks and balances and the separation of powers were instituted in the first place.

I was just in a discussion the other day where a group of Republicans were all licking their lips in anticipation for the 2020 elections where the house would flip and they'd get both chambers + the White House.  I pointed out, I thought that would be a bad thing.  That's too much power for one group to have.  There needs to be the push/pull in our government, or else there is too much potential for corruption.  I honestly hope the Dems DON'T lose the House for that reason.

[Guest Scott]

34 minutes ago, Vort said:

This is the ugly reality. But the thing is, it IS reality. 

And it always will be reality as long as people accept it (which will probably be until the second coming).   It doesn't mean that I have to like it though and can't speak out against it.

Edited December 19, 2019 by Scott