Trump’s Wiretapping Claim

JoyInTheMorning

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 11:12 am

Fox, you and others have wondered at the visceral hatred of Trump that they've observed. I can't speak for every Trump hater, but let me try to explain why I feel very differently about Trump than I did about George W Bush, unhappy as I was when he became president.

I strongly disagreed with George W Bush's proposed policies. I also wasn't terribly impressed with him as a person. I saw him as someone who was fairly shallow and had achieved success mostly due to his having been born into privilege. I also cringed whenever he abused the English language. Yet I didn't hate him. And, while all these facts are true of Donald Trump, that's not why I hate him.

I've strongly disliked Donald Trump ever since he filed for bankruptcy and continued to live high on the hog. The stories that came out during this time about his stiffing his workers and creditors clearly showed that he disregarded his obligations and other people's rights. The disgusting way he acted regarding Ivana and Marla Maples made me despise him. I never watched the TV show he was on, so I know nothing about that. But I continued to despise him more when he started the whole birther controversy about Barack Obama. I've been a lukewarm Obama fan, so it's not that I couldn't stand to see Obama criticized. It is that this was clearly such a ludicrous story, and so clearly done for an ulterior motive (which at that point, I couldn't figure out), that I was disgusted by his behavior.

But you know, I despise a lot of politicians and public figures. When did despising turn into hatred? The day he announced his candidacy, in June 2015. The things that he said about Mexicans were so terrible they made me want to vomit. I know full well that he didn't say that all Mexicans were rapists. But his words held the clear implication that a disproportionate number of the Mexicans in the US are rapists and drug dealers and criminals. It was such an absolutely disgusting thing to say, and it would so clearly affect hard-working parents and children, that I was shocked beyond belief. At that point, I truly thought his campaign could never get off the ground because the good people of America would never stand for this sort of talk. I was wrong, and a few weeks later, when everybody was just snickering about Trump, I started to worry.

From there, it just got worse. The nivul peh (which I've brought up on other threads and been mocked for) was horrendous. What kind of person talks like this in public, in front of crowds and children? The demonizing of over a billion Muslims. The mocking of a disabled man. Such a person, in my opinion, deserves only my hatred.

When did the hatred become personal? When I started hearing about all the things he had done to women. Sure, I always knew about Ivana and Marla. But as the campaign went on, and I heard the things he had said ("Women: you have to treat them like sh*t"), and I heard that he had forced his way in to ogle naked young girls at beauty pageants (this was known even before the Hollywood Access tape), it became very personal to me. And when the Hollywood Access tape came out, and it was clear that he thought it was perfectly fine to force his attentions on women who didn't want them, my revulsion grew.

Fox, it may have been you in an earlier thread, and it may have been someone else, who said that they didn't worry about people who spoke like this, because they have raised their daughters to handle such situations. Let me tell you: I was raised well but have not been able to handle such situations. It has nothing to do with being careful about yichud or tznius. I can tell you that in public, in front of dozens of my colleagues, dressed in a long, loose, dark skirt, a shirt up to my neck, and a loose long-sleeved jacket, I have been fondled and groped in the boyfriend zone by (in their fields) powerful men. s-xual harassment is real. I hate people who do these things, and it is a visceral hatred.

That's my reason, as a woman. I'm sure there are people who grew up impoverished because their parents were not paid by Trump or by other people who blithely declared bankruptcy who have their own reasons for their visceral hatred. Or disabled people, or those who have loved ones with cerebral palsy. Or Muslims. There are plenty of people who have reasons for visceral hatred of Trump.

I dislike Pence and his policies. If he were president, there would be a greater chance of having more extreme conservatives on the Supreme Court. In general, he'd be more to the right of Trump in nearly every way. But I don't hate Pence. Do you see the difference?

Fox

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 12:43 pm

JoyInTheMorning wrote:

Do you see the difference?

Honestly, no.

And here's why: the visceral hatred of Trump seems to be rooted in a double-standard that I find incredibly dishonest and insulting.

I have no desire to re-fight the election, though that seems to be happening over and over these days. However, bear in mind that the two candidates we were presented were both highly flawed both personally and professionally.

So don't make it out as if the electorate selected a horrible candidate over an excellent candidate.

Now, onto the specifics of your hatred:

Trump Allegedly Insulted Mexicans, the Disabled, and Muslims.
You yourself acknowledge that he didn't actually insult Mexicans -- you felt he "implied" it. Well, I would happily agree that he doesn't choose his words particularly well. But did you feel a visceral hatred when Justice Sotomayor's words about a "wise Latina woman" were publicized? Were you similarly angered by her implied insult to the Supreme Court?

This is the problem of identity politics: once you've separated everybody into groups, you have to live with the consequences. Well, actually, you don't. You just end up with a competition of oppression, which is what we have now.

Mocking the disabled reporter has long been disproven or, at minimum, severely discredited. Trump has been seen mocking a variety of people in the same manner, and the particular disability of the reporter was neither widely known nor consistent with Trump's actions. I suppose, however, that being a reporter should itself count as a disability.

I'm not sure what specific incidents you're referring to regarding Muslims. If someone is among the 86 percent of American Muslims who believe that terrorism and killing civilians in the name of Islam is never justified, I don't think President Trump has any problem with him/her. I am perfectly content if the other 14 percent feel insulted.

Trump's Personal Conduct
What are you expecting me to say? That everything he did was fine? Of course not.

But again, the double standard. I don't fault Hillary for being married to Bill or even staying married to him. However, less than a year ago, the Democratic National Convention welcomed a man to the stage who has been repeatedly accused of rape, has been caught s-xually manipulating a young woman in his employ, and has lied about it under oath!

Where were all the pink hats then? Where were the celebrities insisting that it is disgusting to have a serial rapist/abuser give a keynote speech for the DNC? Where was all the visceral hatred toward someone who had treated women -- including his wife -- so shabbily, both in public and private?

When I've asked these questions before, I've gotten the following answers:

1. "That was a long time ago."
2. "Bill Clinton wasn't running for President"
3. "Two wrongs don't make a right."

Really? So what's the public statute of limitations for rape and abuse? Is it different from being a cad? And are the standards different if you've already been elected? President Clinton's impeachment wasn't back in the Dark Ages. It was 20 years ago, and many of the same Senators who voted not to convict are still in their seats to this day.

Trump's Business Practices
None of us know the complete truth, and there probably isn't a complete truth. For anyone who's been stiffed by Trump, there are people who claim he's made their businesses successful.

As a small business owner, I'm frankly very skeptical of claims on both sides. Small businesses regularly get stiffed -- since most of my debtors are Jewish schools and organizations, it takes a lot of self-control for me not to respond when people ask about School X, Y, or Z. I want to say, "Sure, if you don't mind sending your kid to a school run by dishonest jerks who don't pay their bills and then lie about it." But I don't. Part of my responsibility is to make sure I'm not 100 percent dependent on any one client or project.

Is Trump a super-tough negotiator? Yes. Has he hurt people in business? No doubt. But your patronizing attitude toward small business owners would actually be insulting to many entrepreneurs, suggesting that most of us are too dumb and clueless to do business with big, bad Donald Trump.

Honestly, I increasingly believe that most of the visceral hatred is at this point simply feeding on itself. People seem to think that they can repeat epithets ("racist, sexist, homophobic!") and that doing so somehow stands in place of evidence.

Like most Presidents, Trump has done some good things, some bad things, and some stupid things. Feel free to disagree with any of them. But singling him out for visceral hatred while shrugging off so many worse and more destructive instances of identity politics, bad treatment of women, and harsh business tactics only reinforces the discontent that pushed him into the White House to start.

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 1:23 pm

Fox wrote:

"When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

"You have people come in and I'm not just saying Mexicans, I'm talking about people that are from all over, that are killers and rapists and they're coming to this country."

"The Mexican government is much smarter, much sharper, much more cunning. They send the bad ones over because they don't want to pay for them. They don't want to take care of them."

Add in his comments on Judge Curiel.

There's no question in my mind that these were direct insults.

How would you feel if the comment were made about Jews? "I don't think the US should be allowing so many Jews here. They've got a lot of problems, and they're bringing those problems with them. The Jews are bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. Jews are rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." I'm guessing the ADL wouldn't find that so amusing.

And you don't know what comments about Muslims people might find offensive? Let's start with:

"Donald J. Trump is calling for a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on."

Mocking the disabled reporter has only been "discredited" by people who have no eyes, ears, or souls.

The argument that he always mocks people by acting like they have physical challenges is, well, disgusting. And that's what the defense boils down to.

We've hashed out your attempts to equate Bill Clinton with Donald Trump before. Clinton had a consensual affair. Yes, with a younger woman. Trump walked in on naked or near-naked teens, and boasted about grabbing women's crotches, because he's rich, so they must be OK with it. He brought his mistress on vacation with his wife and children, and then stood by and watched while the mistress (the completely unsympathetic Marla Maples) confronted Ivana and told her "I love your husband, do you? (Not a direct quote, from memory.) If you want to talk accusations, apart from the fact that the woman who accused Clinton of rape swore, under oath, that its a lie, we're going to have to talk about the accusations that Trump raped a child, and all of the other allegations of z3xual misconduct. “You have to treat ’em like s--t,” he said. And apparently, he did.

There's simply no equivalence.

Last edited by SixOfWands on Wed, Mar 15 2017, 1:35 pm; edited 1 time in total

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 1:33 pm

To add ...

You cannot believe what Trump says. Obama wiretapped Trump; its like Watergate. Well, he didn't really mean Obama did it. He meant that the Obama obtained a subpoena. And wiretapping doesn't necessarily mean wiretapping. And maybe it was really intercepted communications with other who were being tapped. You can't take him literally, you know.

Yes. We should be able to take the president literally.

He's not prepared for the office. ‘Nobody Knew Health Care Could Be So Complicated’ Well, yes, EVERYONE knew it.

He lacks the ability to control himself. I don't think that someone who starts a Twitter war over SNL should be meeting with foreign leaders.

And I don't necessarily believe he will do what he thinks is best for the country. I'm old. I didn't like Carter, but I thought he'd do what he thought was in the best interests of the country. I didn't like Reagan, but I thought he'd do what he thought was in the best interests of the country. I didn't like either Bush, but I thought they would do what they thought was in the best interests of the country. I rather like Clinton and Obama, and still thought they would do what they thought was in the best interests of the country. Trump will do what is best for Trump. Maybe he conflates the two, but he's be wrong.

Fox

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 1:53 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Clinton had a consensual affair.

Out of fear for the fate of my fingernails, I'm not going to engage further on the topic. The Trump-hating narrative has developed a life of its own, and even Trump opponents, such as Ben Shapiro, are appalled.

However, I am astonished that even the most hardened misogynist would claim Clinton's behavior with Ms. Lewinsky was "a consensual affair."

Did you consider it "a consensual affair" when the head of several seminaries in EY was accused of having engaged in inappropriate relationships with students?

Do you consider it "a consensual affair" if a professor attempts to cultivate a s-xual relationship with one of his students?

There is a reason there are taboos and even specific rules about these kinds of relationships. Even if both parties are old enough to give legal consent, the power differential creates a coercive and/or manipulative situation. Claiming that the leader of the free world and a 22-year-old intern had a "consensual affair" is laughable.

Again, I'm not defending Trump. But if you feel visceral hatred for Trump because of his treatment of women, you must surely feel even more strongly about Bill Clinton -- yet he was smiling from the podium last summer, nary a pink hat or protest in sight.

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 2:11 pm

Fox wrote:

FTR, Lewinsky was a 23 year-old college graduate. I differentiate between her and 19 year old girls, particularly 19 year old girls from sheltered backgrounds. And Lewinsky, to this day, defends the affair as wholly consensual on her part. ( "This was a mutual relationship, mutual on all levels, right from the way it started and all the way through. […]" But you know better. And also FTR, I knew plenty of girls in college who tried to seduce professors to get better grades. I specifically remember one in statistics, who wound up with a C. I always wondered what the C was actually in. I also recall that in freshman French, we had to interview a French graduate student. One of the suggested questions (which I refused to ask) was "In America, it is common for college students to sleep with their professors. Is that also true in France?"

But, point blank. Do you condemn Trump for HIS misconduct? Or do you excuse it?

Leave Clinton out of it. Bill didn't run; Hilary didn't win. They're not relevant now. Only the man who was elected president is relevant. You can't keep defending Trump by saying, "but Clinton ...." He has to stand on his own.

Fox

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 2:31 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

This is precisely the double-standard I'm talking about. Gigabytes have been devoted on Imamother to the fact that victims of manipulation or abuse don't always -- in fact, often prefer not to -- identify themselves as victims. They feel more empowered by claiming they were willing participants.

"But she wanted it," has always been the defense of every rapist, pedophile, and all-round creep. Sorry, but the power and age differential makes this sleazy manipulation on the part of an older man, not so-called sophisticated adults engaging in an extra-marital romp.

SixOfWands wrote:

And also FTR, I knew plenty of girls in college who tried to seduce professors to get better grades. I specifically remember one in statistics, who wound up with a C. I always wondered what the C was actually in. I also recall that in freshman French, we had to interview a French graduate student. One of the suggested questions (which I refused to ask) was "In America, it is common for college students to sleep with their professors. Is that also true in France?"

So you and your classmates were apparently perfectly aware that such a taboo existed. You do realize that such a relationship, no matter how "consensual," is treated as s-xual harassment?

SixOfWands wrote:

But, point blank. Do you condemn Trump for HIS misconduct? Or do you excuse it?

Of course, I condemn him. I've been condemning him all along for his private behavior. He's been a boor and a cad. I don't know if he's reformed or just gotten tired of the chase. Or for all I know, he's done neither and is getting licentious tips from President Clinton.

SixOfWands wrote:

Leave Clinton out of it. Bill didn't run; Hilary didn't win. They're not relevant now. Only the man who was elected president is relevant. You can't keep defending Trump by saying, "but Clinton ...." He has to stand on his own.

So let me make sure I understand the rules: it's perfectly okay for a serial predator to give a keynote address at the national convention of a political party, but it should result in visceral hatred if a boor/cad is elected President?

My point is simple: I'm not defending Trump. Go ahead and hate him as much as you want because of his treatment of women. He probably deserves it. But if you're claiming that's the reason you hate him, show me evidence that you and other Trump-haters are equally appalled by the presence of people like Bill Clinton in public life. Otherwise, you're lying to me, lying to yourself, or lying to both of us.

Fox

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 2:44 pm

Jeanette wrote:

As long as we're going to discuss the hysteria and visceral hatred on the left towards trump, why not address the hatred and hysteria towards obama and Hillary? And it's coming from mainstream RW sites like Breitbart, Info wars and Newsmax.

That's funny, I don't recall Breitbart calling Obama "mentally ill." I don't recall celebrities calling for Obama's assassination. I don't recall news anchors literally weeping when Obama was elected.

I do recall defending President Obama on Imamother back in 2008, when some people said the world was ending and others responded that they must be racists. However, my fingernails survived that election without threat. Although one Imamother gave me grief about my economics education. After apparently acquitting myself to her satisfaction, she said, "Oh, well, I thought maybe you were one of those rah-rah patriotic types."

Jeanette wrote:

Do YOU believe they are running a shadow government with Valerie Jarrett? Let's face it, right wing media is the mainstream media now. If you can't trust them, who can you trust?

President Obama has stated that he intends to be involved in organizing, though he's been suitably vague about the purposes for which people need to be organized. Loretta Lynch has called for resistance and insurrection. Tim Kaine has called for dissent to be taken to the streets.

Who needs the right-wing media? There's absolutely nothing they can add to such statements.

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 2:53 pm

Fox wrote:

Again, what does Clinton have to do with anything? Is Hilary Clinton the President of the United States? You keep saying "but Clinton ....." When does that end? In 4 years, are we still going to hear, "sure, Trump called so-and-so a fat beeyotch, but Bill Clinton got a BJ, so its all fine with me."

Gotta love your rhetoric, though. Bill Clinton has an affair. He's a "serial predator."

Trump brags about molesting women, is accused of actually molesting several (Temple Taggart, Summer Zervos, Jessica Drake and Rachel Crooks, among others) and even accused of statutory rape. Says of Carly Fiorina, ""Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that?" Called Alica Machado "Miss Piggy." Called Rosie O'Donnell “disgusting” and “a slob” with “a fat, ugly face.” He's a "cad" or a "boor." He lacks manners. A bad boy. Boys will be boys, you know.

In any case, you still haven't commented on the fact that there is no evidence of wiretapping by Obama. Does it bother you that the president made an unsubstantiated and scurrilous accusation against a former president?

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 3:09 pm

Fox wrote:

Enjoy reading about the Republican obstruction of Obama. “If he was for it,” former Ohio Senator George Voinovich explained, “we had to be against it.” John Boehner on Obama's agenda: “We're going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.” Mitch McConnell, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

http://swampland.time.com/2012.....bama/

I'm sure there are thousands more I can post.

The Democrats are slow on the uptake most of the time. But this time, they're learning from the masters.

Fox

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 3:17 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

I've been over this a million times. Either I'm not explaining it well or you've decided to avoid the topic.

It's not about Clinton. Clinton is just an example. It's about your selective outrage and hatred.

SixOfWands wrote:

In any case, you still haven't commented on the fact that there is no evidence of wiretapping by Obama. Does it bother you that the president made an unsubstantiated and scurrilous accusation against a former president?

Presidents are constantly making unsubstantiated and scurrilous accusations against their political rivals. Trump just does it on Twitter. Am I outraged? No, more like eye-rolling.

Anyway, I don't think there's a firm conclusion. Unsourced reports are now suggesting that Obama may have gained information through GCHQ. We'll see. My guess is that whatever emerges will be eclipsed by newer news and no one will care.

However, recall that the Democratic Party doesn't exactly occupy the moral high ground. Robert Creamer's involvement in bird-dogging and Donna Brazile's confusion over CNN's status as a wing of the Democratic organization suggest that it's not crazy to think that surveillance might have occurred.

JoyInTheMorning

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 3:31 pm

Fox, SixofWands and Jeanette have explained the differences between what Trump did and what Bill Clinton did. To me, the essential differences are (1) physical force vs. no physical force and (2) whether it was done/discussed in public. Regarding (1): Trump physically forced himself on women, groping and grabbing them. He barged into a dressing room to violate women's privacy. There is no evidence that Clinton did anything like that. I am not saying an affair where there's a mismatch in power is a great idea, but that's not comparable to physically forcing s-xual contact. Not to mention that if that's your standard, very powerful people, whether presidents or billionaires, will always be guilty on that account. Regarding (2): Trump repeatedly spoke in public (e.g., radio shows) about his exploits. He has shown no shame. Clinton did something disgusting, but didn't voluntarily publicize it.

Even though I consider Bill Clinton to have committed less egregious offenses, they were bad enough that I would never vote for him again. His sleaziness is a big turn-off for me.

But that isn't the question, in any case. You are surprised that people could viscerally hate Donald Trump. I don't hate Bill Clinton, though I like him much less than I did before I found out the details of the Lewinsky affair. But I would not be shocked if people told me they hated Bill Clinton. Why are you so shocked that people hate Donald Trump?

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 15 2017, 3:34 pm

Jeanette wrote:

Here's Loretta Lynch's full statement calling for "insurrection and blood in the streets."

I know that this is a time of great fear and uncertainty for so many people. I know it’s a time of concern for people who see our rights being assailed, being trampled on, and even being rolled back. I know that this is difficult, but I remind you that this has never been easy. We have always had to work to move this country forward to achieve the great ideals of our Founding Fathers.

It has been people, individuals who have banded together, ordinary people who simply saw what needed to be done and came together and supported those ideals who have made the difference. They’ve marched, they’ve bled and yes, some of them died. This is hard. Every good thing is. We have done this before. We can do this again.

And here's Tim Kaine:

Quote:

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: So, broad question about the future of the Democratic Party, especially given your firsthand experience with what we've all been through. There's so much going on here that we clearly see, you know, places where you -- we can criticize what the administration is doing, but how does the party rebuild? How do you prevent overreach in a situation like this? How do you prevent a continuation of the bubble in a situation like this, and how does the party reclaim its reach across the country while fighting these battles?

SEN. KAINE: Well, let me talk about continuation of the bubble, Mika. This is something I'm so excited about. I saw that Howard Dean tweeted at me the other day, "Tim, the base is getting ahead of the leaders." That's exactly backward. We are so excited that the American public is energized to speak out against the abuses of this administration.

Democrats senators led healthcare rallies -- Save Our Healthcare -- on Martin Luther King Day in about 75 cities around the country, including Richmond. Tens of thousands of people rallied to save our health care. Then, the Women's March that was organized at a grassroots label. Then, people coming out in protest of these orders. So, the way we get outside the bubble is we take advantage of this tremendous public outcry against the administration.

What we've got to do is fight in Congress, fight in the courts, fight in the streets, fight online, fight at the ballot box, and now there's the momentum to be able to do this. And we're not afraid of the popular outcry, we're energized by it and that's going to help us do our job and do it better.

Hardly armed warfare, is it.