Hillary Asks China To Hack IRS !!!!

[columbus]

These posts wonderfully illustrate how partisan politics determines
how people judge whether a politicians is serious or facetious when
stating something which is superficially wrongful.

I never said anything about serious or facetious. That was you.

I pointed out that Trump got what he asked for. He wanted the Russians to help him acquire the White House. He did acquire it.

Hillary hasn't done any such thing.

How partisan do you have to be to be blind to those facts?
Tom


PS ~ You don't show up in my alert box any more. I don't know why.~

 

[Stevicus]

You know, all this talk and hand-wringing over hacked e-mails and leaked sensitive data - I think they need to redo how they handle sensitive communications.

Whenever they have to communicate anything of a top secret nature, they should use the cone of silence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Something fun in the news....
Hillary Clinton suggests scenario in which Democrat asks China to hack IRS for Trump's tax returns - CNNPolitics


This post is for people who believe Trump openly asked the Russians to hack her emails.
Please explain the difference between his treason & hers.

What I wonder about all of this is how people know when Trump is joking.

 

[Revoltingest]

There you go again...

One was hypothetical. The other was not.

That's nice.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Blind with rage over Biden, Trump retweets an account titled 'F*ck Donald Trump'

I think Lindsey Graham said it best.

 

[sealchan]

I made it simple for illustrative purposes.
But I've paid more attention to the thinking
processes of some than they have to themselves.

Understood, but...

Trump's statement is intentionally left ambiguous given as an off the cuff joke which could as easily mask real hope as it could sarcasm. He literally asked Russia to spy on the US although we may understand he wasn't serious about it.

Clinton's statement is couched in explicit qualifiers (hypothetical and indicating it is not something desired) and direct references to how wrong Trump's joke was by telling the same sort of scenario (not as a joke because the matter should be treated seriously) in the opposite political context.

If Trump was telling a joke then what kind of joke? It may be he was being sarcastic. What form of sarcasm? What was the big "as if" implied in what he was saying? Was it "as if I would really ask the Russians that"? I think that he was using a sort of "huh, huh, I'm stupid" sort of sarcasm that is meant to taunt those who think they are smarter than him. But the "funny" thing is...that is exactly what the Russians actually did! So really his joke/sarcasm is on two levels...ha, ha, I'm stupid! I'm gonna say something you are going to get bent out of shape about because it is wrong and you (any critic) hate it!". But also his joke was for himself, "Yay, and I'll bet my pal Putin will actually do something".

Now whose laughing?

 

[sealchan]

You know, all this talk and hand-wringing over hacked e-mails and leaked sensitive data - I think they need to redo how they handle sensitive communications.

Whenever they have to communicate anything of a top secret nature, they should use the cone of silence.

How about the cone of willful ignorance? That works for some.

 

[Revoltingest]

I never said anything about serious or facetious. That was you.
I pointed out that Trump got what he asked for. He wanted the Russians to help him acquire the White House. He did acquire it.
Hillary hasn't done any such thing.

Those 'facts' don't say anything on their own.
They're irrelevant.

 

[Revoltingest]

What I wonder about all of this is how people know when Trump is joking.

Sentient beings who neither love nor hate him can generally tell by context & flight from reality.
But the true believers & the anti-Trumpettes.....their brains are hardwired to prejudge.

 

[Revoltingest]

But the "funny" thing is...that is exactly what the Russians actually did!

He'd have no need to solicit an act they'd already performed, ie,
hack into her emails. But his joke was about her missing emails.
Question for you....did those later turn up?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Let's just start calling stuff like this "Hillary derangement syndrome", and therefore we can totally justify ignoring any and all criticism regardless of merit. Apparently, this works somehow.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you believe that Trump was entirely serious when he remarked that
the media would approve of Russian hackers finding the missing emails?
These are the same media who: compared him to Hitler, who pronounced
him guilty of treason for collusion with Russia, & of being Putin's puppet.
They'll rejoice at hackers finding Hillary's lost emails, & then presenting
even more of the same thing which inspired such venom? Astounding.

On top of that, he wants to enlist Russian help to win the election, but
instead of doing it secretly so that there'd be no political fallout, he calls
for it on nationally broadcast TV. This is serious? Astounding.

The man is such an idiot it is hard to tell if he is being serious or not. Have you not followed his Tweets at all? That is the unfiltered raw Trump.

 

[Revoltingest]

The man is such an idiot it is hard to tell if he is being serious or not. Have you not followed his Tweets at all? That is the unfiltered raw Trump.

I don't follow anyone's tweets.
But calling him an "idiot" instead of analyzing what he said doesn't satisfy me.
And I must be satisfied.

People so want to believe him because it's politically useful for them.
And so they leap to absurd inferences. But those same people can
see Hillary was being sarcastic because there's no compelling need
to believe otherwise. It truly is TDS.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So you believe that Trump was entirely serious when he remarked that
the media would approve of Russian hackers finding the missing emails?
These are the same media who: compared him to Hitler, who pronounced
him guilty of treason for collusion with Russia, & of being Putin's puppet.
They'll rejoice at hackers finding Hillary's lost emails, & then presenting
even more of the same thing which inspired such venom? Astounding.

On top of that, he wants to enlist Russian help to win the election, but
instead of doing it secretly so that there'd be no political fallout, he calls
for it on nationally broadcast TV. This is serious? Astounding.

Sentient beings who neither love nor hate him can generally tell by context & flight from reality.
But the true believers & the anti-Trumpettes.....their brains are hardwired to prejudge.

I doubt that I will ever become a fan of Donald Trump, but after reading your posts and watching that video again, I do wonder if he may actually be joking. Either he really is a genius--I do not really see that--and he orchestrated the greatest political attack that he can plausibly deny as one or he is a stupid loud-mouthed bore that got lucky. Right or wrong, does this rise to treason? I am not sure of that. Given that he says many things that just float to the top of his head and straight out of his mouth, it is hard to see this as more than just his usual off the wall comments.

I hope that this is not taken as a defense of the man, I would not stoop to that, but I am trying to be more objective in my appraisal of him. I believe he definitely has some serious character flaws that would have kept most people out of the job he got, but those do not seem to slow him down with his core group of supporters.

Iit has often been said that as long as a person is moral they can be an effective president even if they are an atheist. So, I am wondering, if a person has other abilities that lend themselves to the office, could they be an effective president even if they are...well, just like Trump. Of course, there is much more to being president than just having a positive impact on the economy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't follow anyone's tweets.
But calling him an "idiot" instead of analyzing what he said doesn't satisfy me.
And I must be satisfied.

People so want to believe him because it's politically useful for them.
And so they leap to absurd inferences. But those same people can
see Hillary was being sarcastic because there's no compelling need
to believe otherwise. It truly is TDS.

If you have not followed his Tweets then you are not in a position to judge. Trump's tweets are sometimes his own worst enemy.

 

[Revoltingest]

I doubt that I will ever become a fan of Donald Trump, but after reading your posts and watching that video again, I do wonder if he may actually be joking. Either he really is a genius--I do not really see that--and he orchestrated the greatest political attack that he can plausibly deny as one or he is a stupid loud-mouthed bore that got lucky. Right or wrong, does this rise to treason? I am not sure of that. Given that he says many things that just float to the top of his head and straight out of his mouth, it is hard to see this as more than just his usual off the wall comments.

I hope that this is not taken as a defense of the man, I would not stoop to that, but I am trying to be more objective in my appraisal of him. I believe he definitely has some serious character flaws that would have kept most people out of the job he got, but those do not seem to slow him down with his core group of supporters.

Iit has often been said that as long as a person is moral they can be an effective president even if they are an atheist. So, I am wondering, if a person has other abilities that lend themselves to the office, could they be an effective president even if they are...well, just like Trump. Of course, there is much more to being president than just having a positive impact on the economy.

Well, he says he's a genius.
But so far, no liberal will address Trump's accompanying claim that the
media would be elated if Russian hackers found Hillary's missing emails.
No one believes that would happen. Trump certainly knows that the
media hated her emails being released. Yet despite this obvious
sarchasm, they either ignore it, or dismiss it as his believing it because
he's an idiot. TDS is causing cognitive dissonance.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I don't follow anyone's tweets.
But calling him an "idiot" instead of analyzing what he said doesn't satisfy me.
And I must be satisfied.

People so want to believe him because it's politically useful for them.
And so they leap to absurd inferences. But those same people can
see Hillary was being sarcastic because there's no compelling need
to believe otherwise. It truly is TDS.

I am having a hard time coming to the same conclusions as you are in equating these two different scenarios of Trump and Clinton as the same sort of scenario. Even if I were to conclude to my own satisfaction that Trump was joking, what Clinton did was not done in the frame of reference of a joke. If the conclusion is that Trump was not joking, than Clinton's hypothetical story does not equate there either.

I am not sure if I am conveying the sense of this very well.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you have not followed his Tweets then you are not in a position to judge. Trump's tweets are sometimes his own worst enemy.

I provided a video of his claim.
You cannot claim that the inerrant truth is available
only to those who follow his all his tweets. If you
want to make an argument based upon them, then
you must cite them....not require that anyone who
disagrees start reading everyone of his ravings.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well, he says he's a genius.
But so far, no liberal will address Trump's accompanying claim that the
media would be elated if Russian hackers found Hillary's missing emails.
No one believes that would happen. Trump certainly knows that the
media hated her emails being released. Yet despite this obvious
sarchasm, they either ignore it, or dismiss it as his believing it because
he's an idiot. TDS is causing cognitive dissonance.

Certainly, he could be highly intelligent and still be a train wreck. I thought he was a mess long before he took up the idea of running for president. I am trying to find the right word here. Personality quirks just does not seem to cover the magnitude of some of his behavior.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, he says he's a genius.
But so far, no liberal will address Trump's accompanying claim that the
media would be elated if Russian hackers found Hillary's missing emails.
No one believes that would happen. Trump certainly knows that the
media hated her emails being released. Yet despite this obvious
sarchasm, they either ignore it, or dismiss it as his believing it because
he's an idiot. TDS is causing cognitive dissonance.

I will grant that the media was unreasonably biased for Hillary. That was a pity since it may have hurt her chances. The voting public is not totally ignorant. If they were fair in reporting Hillary's obvious weaknesses it might have helped her in the long run.