I know nothing about Wikileaks

a reply to: tanstaafl

Did you miss the fact that that is exactly what I was asking for? I looked, and couldn't find it.

Exactly. We can maybe assume that there was a larger context within which Trump was speaking, that his words were clipped from a larger reel of film and presented in such a manner as to make him look bad. I think this is the kind of thing you are alluding to . However, where is that film. You have said you cannot provide it as you have look. As have I.

From what I could find there was no larger context other than he was asked about the arrest of Assange and he said exactly what he said on that video which was very different from numerous videos of him at his rallies going on and on about how much he loves wikileaks and thinks they are good guys. For me, these two positions vary so greatly that it is no great jump to add it to the list of things that he says one day, saying something different the next.

And yes, Tartuffe spoke to this ''context issue, at least in one of the two posts I found. And while I agree with that overall assessment that words should always be taken in context, in this case I will repeat, there was no larger context that anyone can provide, other than he was asked and he answered as we have all seen in that video. That is unless you can find it for us.

And finally, you say [No, it is virtually always a spot on assumption in the case of Trump and TDS sufferers. Get over it...

which is exactly my earlier point. You ''believe'' that to be true yet it is nothing more than an assumption. You yourself defined your use of the term ''you'' as ''Anyone - including you - proclaiming that Trump is 'lying again' or whatever because of these totally out of context 'quotes' being pushed by the MSM.''.

To me it seems you have come right back to your earlier statement that ''we'', all of us who find fault with Trump are all under sway to the liberal media to which all I can say is that that is a false assumption and now repeating myself as well think you might consider reassessing that assumption.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
And yes, Tartuffe spoke to this ''context issue, at least in one of the two posts I found.

Ok, I'll make it easy for you... go here then do a search on the page for 'wiki', and read... here is the full context:

"Q Mr. President, do you still love WikiLeaks?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It’s not my thing. And I know there is something having to do with Julian Assange. I’ve been seeing what’s happened with Assange. And that will be a determination, I would imagine, mostly by the Attorney General, who’s doing an excellent job.

So he’ll be making a determination. I know nothing really about him. It’s not my — it’s not my deal in life.

Q What would you like to see happen? What is it that your Attorney General —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I don’t really have any opinion. I know the Attorney General will be involved in that and he’ll make a decision, okay?"

So, as I said... just more nothing from the TDS sufferers...

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
To me it seems you have come right back to your earlier statement that ''we'', all of us who find fault with Trump are all under sway to the liberal media to which all I can say is that that is a false assumption and now repeating myself as well think you might consider reassessing that assumption.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I find fault with a lot of things Trump (does (mostly to do with twitter rants, but some things he says in speeches, etc)... but I don't let it get in the way of my knowing for a fact that he is the first President that I can remember that actually says what he means (and I love that he is totally politically incorrect), or that he and his campaign were spied on in one of the worst cases of abuse of power by our own government in history.

That is the difference between a Trump supporter, and a TDS sufferer.

a reply to: tanstaafl
Yes, that is the whole quote as I heard and saw it as well. However does this not conflict with all the other statements he made earlier in praise of wikileaks? Have you seen any of those, they are all over the place. If you find no conflict between those earlier statements and the statement he made that you quoted, then that is where we stand. I find conflict and you do not. Thanks by the way for helping me focus on what exactly you considered to be his larger context, it's just that the context I have been referring to holds both his contradictory statements.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Thank you for the polite rejoinder. Mights be I have made false assumptions as well.

T

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: tanstaafl
Yes, that is the whole quote as I heard and saw it as well. However does this not conflict with all the other statements he made earlier in praise of wikileaks?

No, not when you understand his communication style.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: tanstaafl
Yes, that is the whole quote as I heard and saw it as well. However does this not conflict with all the other statements he made earlier in praise of wikileaks?

No, not when you understand his communication style.

That is a good suggestion there, coming to understand his communication style. That does need some consideration. You see I have come to understand his communication style as popping out what ever little truth or lie or random thought that he thinks will get him through any given situation. Just like the old SNL Jon Lovitz charactor of the pathalogical liar. But if you have better insight into just what IS his communication style that many of his supporters believe make him the greatest of trolls, please let's talk about that.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
That is a good suggestion there, coming to understand his communication style. That does need some consideration. You see I have come to understand his communication style as popping out what ever little truth or lie or random thought that he thinks will get him through any given situation. Just like the old SNL Jon Lovitz charactor of the pathalogical liar. But if you have better insight into just what IS his communication style that many of his supporters believe make him the greatest of trolls, please let's talk about that.

I would agree to the extent that many/most of the things that he says (on twitter or on camera) that make me cringe or face-palm are very likely due to what you describe...

But, for the most part, his communication style is simple - short, sweet and to the point, no pulling of punches. He is also New York street saavy, and a troll master, a skill he uses for many different reasons - maybe just for fun, maybe to engage in a bit of mis-direction or for other purposes... aka, 'The Art of the Deal'...

Thanks for the reminder, I keep forgetting to order his book, and now I see he's written 3, so I'll just get all of them for an even better look into his communication style...

a reply to: tanstaafl

But, for the most part, his communication style is simple - short, sweet and to the point, no pulling of punches.

You know, that originally drew me to him as well, that no pulling punches part. When he hit the stage at during the primaries I thought it refreshing that he could speak truth to the established Republican order. But then for me he seemed to just get petty what with some of his jabs at women's looks and disabled people. What at first seemed to me to be a well conceived evaluation of the established order turn, in my mind, to little more than blind jabs at any opponent that stood in his way. Blind jabs based on little more than his own psychopathy. And that is not to say that Clinton didn't jab blindly as well. Her ''basket of deplorables'' remark was like an iceberg to the hull of her ship.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
But then for me he seemed to just get petty what with some of his jabs at women's looks and disabled people.

As for the jabs at women - he is a New Yorker... rude, crude and socially unacceptable.

But, maybe you were unaware that the charges that he 'made fun of disabled people' were totally debunked... never happened.