Meredith McIver has been scapegoated by Trump more than once

Post Reply New Topic

Why didn't he employ his characteristic "You're Fired" response the first time? Her usefulness as a scapegoat and his retention of her suggests another underlying deception of his to me:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/ar ... d=11692050

New Zealand is watching closely. It is likely that very few Americans know that this country allows the USA to have and operate a major international spying network here and have done for a long time. New Zealanders have known this for years and it was confirmed by Snowden - though the extent of its range and activity surprised everyone. If Trump is elected, it is likely that New Zealand will stop allowing this use of its sovereign territory. This would have important security implications for the USA. I have read posts in this forum that the USA doesn't need any other country to achieve safety. That is possible though not likely; if it were so, then why base a huge international spying operation here at all?

excerpt from the above linked article:


"This is somebody that wrote it, probably Meredith McIver," Trump said at one point when confronted with another false statement. "That is a mistake."

McIver, a staff writer with the Trump Organization, blazed into the public eye last month for having inserted plagiarized material - taken from Michelle Obama's 2008 convention speech - in the convention speech of Trump's wife, Melania. McIver said it had been an innocent mistake.

Trump is simply not trusted here; he is not considered fit to be a candidate, let alone a president. A professionally designed survey was done this week, asking how New Zealanders would vote (if they could) in the American election. Only 9% chose Trump, and most of them identified themselves as members of a minority right wing party here (called NZ First). The margin of error was within acceptable limits.

Was Trump's times two scapegoat paid out twice over eight years for taking blame away from him? If she really committed such grave errors, why would Trump (or any other employer) retain her services? It just doesn't compute. Trump doesn't have any record of doing such things as overlooking major errors others make. What an extraordinary story this whole thing is. Stranger than fiction, I think.

Professionals of all kinds in the Five Eyes network will find it impossible to trust or cooperate with a Trump regime.

In the unlikely event of a Trump victory, the current order will change more than people imagine possible and in ways they won't like.

The role of Five Eyes in Europe is already changing because of the Brexit vote: http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/25/brexit-defense-eu/

It is truly weird that so many of his fans are relentlessly hostile to Hillary Clinton's dishonesty, but are willfully blind to their own candidate's lies. I thought this passage from your link summed him up very well:

I wouldn't credit New Zealand with having impeccable political standards (far from it) though what I am certain of is that any politician or would be politician who had been caught out acting as a sock puppet to the media for his/her own benefit would have no chance of being considered as a political candidate, not even of the least important kind (like the local board in a small town). Pretending not to be yourself is something that would be completely beyond the pale here.

Trump's past sock puppets - John Miller, John Barron - used to tell the media how great he is - would make a laughing stock of someone here, and their political credibility thereafter would be non-existent (even amongst former supporters).

The idea of America having a president who has done this and may do it again is stranger than fiction to me. It goes to the heart of his personal ethics and credibility, and who a would-be politician is as a person in their own life is a very important factor. Policies and ideas a person holds may change, however character tends to be fixed. Trump is proud of never having changed from his childhood. Most people would not be. Trump has a very strange moral compass.

A very minor MP here with no position nor portfolio in his party was caught out as having obtained a second identity taken from a gravestone which he claimed was only done "to see if it was possible".He was (as we say) "gone by lunchtime". His own party wouldn't tolerate him because it would have reflected badly on their own standards.

So the opposite kind of thing happening in the USA really is puzzling to us down here. One mistake or lie would sink a politician here; false claims by the dozen and misrepresentation (particularly of himself) have not sunken Trump. We can't understand that from a kiwi perspective.

Also, we shudder at the thought of a horde of USA immigrants all at once coming to New Zealand should Trump assume POTUS power; we are already stretched to the limit in terms of available housing and infrastructure and planning and providing for future growth is far from sufficient at the current time.

LOL...not that I wouldn't mind living in New Zealand, but I wouldn't just up and leave New York should Trump win the Presidential race.

Obviously, I don't like the man; but I have too much here in NYC to just up and split.

So don't worry: unless you invite me, I won't take up any space in New Zealand

I noticed this quote today and immediately thought of a political aspirant of the moment:


“The best index to a person's character is how he treats people who can't do him any good, and how he treats people who can't fight back.”
― Abigail Van Buren


Another index as I recall is said to be how well or badly you act when you think no-one is looking, and that one seems to apply more to the aforementioned history of sock puppetry IMO.

Would not the New Zealand government be worried that if they pulled the spy network. that Trump would nuke you in a fit of anger to teach the "loser" a lesson?

Australia is already vocal at top levels about its unwillingness to even consider working with Trump - and Australia has been the most constant and rabid admirer of (and co-operator with) the USA. It is unprecedented for Australia to voice dissent of any kind with USA politics and politicians. So Trump would probably have to nuke both countries and if he did he would not stop there..

He seems to perceive as enemies anyone who don't personally admire or agree with him. So maybe Trump will have to nuke every other country in the five eyes, which will please his friend Putin no end.

There is no way that he can take on the entire world, even if "no loser, best words", he'd lose horribly, although admittedly a (supposed) cooperation between two nuclear warheads (not sure if that refers to the two characters or the actual physics) might prove problematic, although I assume China will not join the bukkake of aggression, since they're supposedly enemies, despite having a similar head of state/party. A breakdown in spy coordination isn't, perhaps, the worst threat.