26 Jul 2022, 10:22 am
goldfish21 wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
Anybody with any amount of common sense would deduce that Trump, at the very least, was seeking to overturn his loss in the 2020 election. It is quite likely, had he won in 2020, that he would have sought another, third term---a waiver to the constitutional amendment limiting him to two consecutive terms of office.
He attempted many things which point to his desire for an autocratic government, with himself as head.
He attempted many things which point to his desire for an autocratic government, with himself as head.
Trump was a businessman with zero political experience trying to handle things the way it's done in the business world. Which obviously doesn't translate too well in the political world. I think in someways there's an advantage to having a businessman as president because he'll likely bypass political crap and get the job done. The downside of course is having no experience in how to do anything politically. To me Trump was just being Trump. I'm sure he viewed it as like a hostile business takeover or whatever, rather than trying to mastermind a political coup.
Oh yeah, totally.. except for the fact that he knew this was not a business and was a country & the government of the USA. To excuse his criminal behaviour because he was just "businessing," is laughable. Orange former guy Knows he was criming on a coup level w/ an objective of installing himself as a fascist dictator. He may very well be delusional in the sense that he believed he could pull it off and his loyalists & supporters were great enough in number to enable it, but he still knew exactly what he was doing And that it wasn't a hostile takeover of some firm on the stock market.
"I thought I was businessing," would be hilarious to hear as his criminal defense in court.
I'm just not giving him more credit than I think he's due. And we all know as I'm sure they did that a few hundred mostly unarmed civilians were not going to take control of the United States. If you'll remember, they all went home for dinner.
Last edited by Matrix Glitch on 26 Jul 2022, 10:27 am, edited 2 times in total.
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
26 Jul 2022, 10:26 am
Matrix Glitch wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
There's probably an element of that....but there's also a strong element of a person allowing power to get to his head.
That's why in the long run it's a bad idea to make a *power player businessman* the most powerful man in the world.
You mean *conman*
The only power plays he's made is not paying people and telling them to sue him for the money - hence the thousands of lawsuits he's faced in his career.
Further, while he can technically be labelled a businessman or real estate developer, he certainly isn't a successful one. He's had many bankrupted ventures (casinos, airline etc) and been outed as a fraud (trump university) and by basic financial math would have made higher returns by simply investing the money he inherited vs. making his own business decisions with it -> he's successfully squandered an absolute fortune and is likely nowhere near as wealthy as he claims to be.
But I do concede, one does not have to be a Successful businessman to call himself A businessman. He's just no power player businessman so much as he's a conman and a fraud, IMO.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
26 Jul 2022, 10:32 am
Matrix Glitch wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
Anybody with any amount of common sense would deduce that Trump, at the very least, was seeking to overturn his loss in the 2020 election. It is quite likely, had he won in 2020, that he would have sought another, third term---a waiver to the constitutional amendment limiting him to two consecutive terms of office.
He attempted many things which point to his desire for an autocratic government, with himself as head.
He attempted many things which point to his desire for an autocratic government, with himself as head.
Trump was a businessman with zero political experience trying to handle things the way it's done in the business world. Which obviously doesn't translate too well in the political world. I think in someways there's an advantage to having a businessman as president because he'll likely bypass political crap and get the job done. The downside of course is having no experience in how to do anything politically. To me Trump was just being Trump. I'm sure he viewed it as like a hostile business takeover or whatever, rather than trying to mastermind a political coup.
Oh yeah, totally.. except for the fact that he knew this was not a business and was a country & the government of the USA. To excuse his criminal behaviour because he was just "businessing," is laughable. Orange former guy Knows he was criming on a coup level w/ an objective of installing himself as a fascist dictator. He may very well be delusional in the sense that he believed he could pull it off and his loyalists & supporters were great enough in number to enable it, but he still knew exactly what he was doing And that it wasn't a hostile takeover of some firm on the stock market.
"I thought I was businessing," would be hilarious to hear as his criminal defense in court.
I'm just not giving him more credit than I think he's due. And we all know as I'm sure they did that a few hundred mostly unarmed civilians were going to take control over the United States that day. If you'll remember, they all went home for dinner.
Mmhmm. Meanwhile, the J6 hearings have been very transparent about just how much more organized all of this stuff was in the background with trump and his loyalists pulling every move they could to overturn the election and install trump as potus. There was a whole lot more going on than "a few hundred mostly unarmed civilians," protesting at the capitol - and even for them; trump people colluded with the proud boys and oath keepers to do their dirty deeds that day and those nutters had delusions of becoming trump's militia when he took over the US gov't.
Really, by not watching the hearings you're choosing to remain ignorant about a bunch of the things that went down and thus your arguments are quite ineffective. It'd be a much more productive discussion if you opted to be informed instead.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.
26 Jul 2022, 10:48 am
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Instead of posting unanswerable trick questions or gainsaying what others post, why not take advantage of the many links posted?
Because to me that's like asking someone what they think about something, and being handed a book. That's not the way to communicate in my opinion. Can you imagine a debate where they keep handing pamphlets to each other? As for trick questions, I'm trying to ascertain what's fact from what's guesswork regarding statements being made.But if you won't even glance through it...
26 Jul 2022, 10:49 am
26 Jul 2022, 10:54 am
Cornflake wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Instead of posting unanswerable trick questions or gainsaying what others post, why not take advantage of the many links posted?
Because to me that's like asking someone what they think about something, and being handed a book. That's not the way to communicate in my opinion. Can you imagine a debate where they keep handing pamphlets to each other? As for trick questions, I'm trying to ascertain what's fact from what's guesswork regarding statements being made.Cornflake wrote:
But if you won't even glance through it...
Aye, there's the rub.
26 Jul 2022, 10:56 am
Cornflake wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Instead of posting unanswerable trick questions or gainsaying what others post, why not take advantage of the many links posted?
Because to me that's like asking someone what they think about something, and being handed a book. That's not the way to communicate in my opinion. Can you imagine a debate where they keep handing pamphlets to each other? As for trick questions, I'm trying to ascertain what's fact from what's guesswork regarding statements being made.But if you won't even glance through it...
I already know enough of the main points of the subject to be able to discuss it without having to take time out to read articles. I'd rather just get an answer. If the answer is "I don't know for sure" that's perfectly acceptable and appreciated.
Last edited by Matrix Glitch on 26 Jul 2022, 10:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
26 Jul 2022, 10:57 am
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
26 Jul 2022, 11:06 am
Fnord wrote:
I wish they would simply arrest Trump, try him, convict him, sentence him, incarcerate him, and get it over with.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
26 Jul 2022, 11:08 am
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Instead of posting unanswerable trick questions or gainsaying what others post, why not take advantage of the many links posted?
Because to me that's like asking someone what they think about something, and being handed a book. That's not the way to communicate in my opinion. Can you imagine a debate where they keep handing pamphlets to each other? As for trick questions, I'm trying to ascertain what's fact from what's guesswork regarding statements being made.But if you won't even glance through it...
I already know enough of the main points of the subject to be able to discuss it without having to take time out to read articles. I'd rather just get an answer. If the answer is "I don't know for sure" that's perfectly acceptable and appreciated.
Anyone who's watched the hearings and then read your posts knows you don't know enough of the main points of the subject to be able to discuss it. Hence people suggesting that you invest a little bit of time informing yourself so that you can participate fully in the conversation.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.26 Jul 2022, 11:13 am
26 Jul 2022, 11:15 am
26 Jul 2022, 11:18 am
goldfish21 wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Instead of posting unanswerable trick questions or gainsaying what others post, why not take advantage of the many links posted?
Because to me that's like asking someone what they think about something, and being handed a book. That's not the way to communicate in my opinion. Can you imagine a debate where they keep handing pamphlets to each other? As for trick questions, I'm trying to ascertain what's fact from what's guesswork regarding statements being made.But if you won't even glance through it...
I already know enough of the main points of the subject to be able to discuss it without having to take time out to read articles. I'd rather just get an answer. If the answer is "I don't know for sure" that's perfectly acceptable and appreciated.
Anyone who's watched the hearings and then read your posts knows you don't know enough of the main points of the subject to be able to discuss it. Hence people suggesting that you invest a little bit of time informing yourself so that you can participate fully in the conversation.
From my perspective as someone who has religiously watched the latest of six years of hearings, you don't seem to be able to name one thing Trump is going to be indicted for. I mean you're the "expert" and you don't seem to know squat outside of anecdotes.
26 Jul 2022, 11:19 am
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
26 Jul 2022, 11:23 am
Matrix Glitch wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Anyone who's watched the hearings and then read your posts knows you don't know enough of the main points of the subject to be able to discuss it. Hence people suggesting that you invest a little bit of time informing yourself so that you can participate fully in the conversation.
From my perspective as someone who has religiously watched the latest of six years of hearings, you don't seem to be able to name one thing Trump is going to be indicted for. I mean you're the "expert" and you don't seem to know squat outside of anecdotes.
Because you're asking impossible to answer questions. There's a laundry list of potential criminal charges for trump - I linked to several lists. I don't work for the DOJ and can't tell you specifically which one(s) he's going to be charged with. There's simply a list of potential charges for his criminal acts And I believe he will be charged with Something over the '6th, because not charging him sets an incredibly dangerous precedent.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
26 Jul 2022, 11:24 am
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Matrix Glitch wrote:
Fnord wrote:
I wish they would simply arrest Trump, try him, convict him, sentence him, incarcerate him, and get it over with.
Me too, if that's what's going to happen. I've been waiting for six years for it. I don't quite understand why I seem to be the only one who's dejected over six years of investigations and hearings getting nowhere.Then why am I getting so much flack for expressing it?
Because you're not expressing it. You're dismissing the mountains of evidence presented by the J6 committee in their hearings and declaring that trump was just being trump so all of the crimes he committed in the process are okay. There's a big difference between the two.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.
