snopes.com

snopes.com (http://message.snopes.com/index.php)
-   Soapbox Derby (http://message.snopes.com/forumdisplay.php?f=43)
-   -   A Quisling and His Enablers (http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=96730)

Sue 12 June 2018 03:40 PM

A Quisling and His Enablers
 
This is not a column about whether Donald Trump is a quisling — a politician who serves the interests of foreign masters at his own country’s expense. Any reasonable doubts about that reality were put to rest by the events of the past few days, when he defended Russia while attacking our closest allies.

We don’t know Trump’s motivation. Is it blackmail? Bribery? Or just a generalized sympathy for autocrats and hatred for democracy? And we may never find out: If he shuts down the Mueller investigation and Republicans retain control of Congress, the cover-up may hold indefinitely. But his actions tell the story.

As I said, however, this isn’t a column about Trump. It is, instead, about the people who are enabling his betrayal of America: the inner circle of officials and media personalities who are willing to back him up whatever he says or does, and the wider set of politicians — basically the entire Republican delegation in Congress — who have the power and constitutional obligation to stop what he’s doing, but won’t lift a finger in America’s defense.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/o...-enablers.html

Beachlife! 12 June 2018 04:33 PM

I was thinking of the Max Brooks use of the term...

dfresh 12 June 2018 06:22 PM

So you think they risk getting eaten by their "allies", Beach?

Sooeygun 12 June 2018 06:39 PM

Well, I think this explains why he so desperately wants to get into NK.

https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/stat...67614007177216

Quote:

SINGAPORE (AP) — Trump says he talked up North Korea's real estate, beachside hotel opportunities in Kim Jong Un meeting.

Sue 12 June 2018 06:43 PM

Maybe he'd like us better if we let him build a beachside hotel in Nunavut?

erwins 12 June 2018 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sooeygun (Post 1980751)
Well, I think this explains why he so desperately wants to get into NK.

https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/stat...67614007177216

I guess it's a good thing that I continue to be shocked by him. Not surprised, exactly. But shocked and appalled.

GenYus234 12 June 2018 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue (Post 1980752)
Maybe he'd like us better if we let him build a beachside hotel in Nunavut?

He was offered a deal on several sites, but he wanted none of it.

ETA: Isn't that the same reason he was helping ZTE? He's not even original in his blatant corruption anymore. I remember the good old days when Trump would create a new outrage every day. Now he's just recycling the same old outrages.

Sue 12 June 2018 06:55 PM

A useful way to test the deal Donald Trump has reached with Kim Jong-un is to imagine what Trump himself would have said had it been Barack Obama rather than him who shook hands with the North Korean dictator. Trump and his echo chamber on Fox News and elsewhere would have poured buckets of derision on Obama for the piece of paper he signed with Kim, for the fawning praise he lavished on a brutal tyrant, and for the paltry non-concessions he got in return. He would have branded the agreement a “horrible deal” and condemned Obama as a sucker for signing it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ea-kim-jong-un

Darth Credence 12 June 2018 10:11 PM

I understand the argument, but I don't think that is a useful way to test the deal. Trump and the Fox and Friends crew would, and did, deride things that Obama did that actually were good deals. To determine whether or not a deal is good based on how they would have reacted had Obama made the deal is to say that there is no such thing as a good deal.
I am not saying that this is a good deal, mind you.

jimmy101_again 12 June 2018 10:27 PM

Did/does the US get anything out of the agreement? Kim Jong Un got a photo with a US president in front of US and NK flags. He got a promise (which apparently isn't actually in the agreement) that the US would stop war games with SK forces.

What did the US get? There is no agreement on stopping development of, or destroying existing, nukes in NK. No promise of pulling back the million or so NK troops within spitting distance of Seoul.

The Turnip not only signed the same agreement that has been signed twice before but he has given real value to NK and Jong-Un for the same meaningless promises. Near as I can tell the US was a BIG loser in this meeting.

UEL 12 June 2018 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue (Post 1980752)
Maybe he'd like us better if we let him build a beachside hotel in Nunavut?

Given how much the celebrities are talking up that beachside resort in Labrador, I would not put it past him.

erwins 12 June 2018 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue (Post 1980756)
A useful way to test the deal Donald Trump has reached with Kim Jong-un is to imagine what Trump himself would have said had it been Barack Obama rather than him who shook hands with the North Korean dictator. Trump and his echo chamber on Fox News and elsewhere would have poured buckets of derision on Obama for the piece of paper he signed with Kim, for the fawning praise he lavished on a brutal tyrant, and for the paltry non-concessions he got in return. He would have branded the agreement a “horrible deal” and condemned Obama as a sucker for signing it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ea-kim-jong-un

It's not a good way to test it. The difference is that they would have been right. Obama never, to my knowledge, had such boneheaded diplomacy* and deal, but the reaction would have been the same.

*I was going to just say deal, but that doesn't cover it. It was all of the run up and the adulation once there, too.

Sue 12 June 2018 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UEL (Post 1980780)
Given how much the celebrities are talking up that beachside resort in Labrador, I would not put it past him.

What's sad (oh god I'm channeling Trump) is that Americans are still going to come to Canada for holidays etc because of the favourable exchange rate if nothing else but Canadians are starting to rethink crossing the border for anything. I do realize the plural of anecdote is not data but seriously everyone I know personally is saying if they can't show support to our government in any other way at the very least they won't be going to the US and they will be seriously reconsidering purchases in light of where the money goes.

crocoduck_hunter 13 June 2018 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue (Post 1980756)
A useful way to test the deal Donald Trump has reached with Kim Jong-un is to imagine what Trump himself would have said had it been Barack Obama rather than him who shook hands with the North Korean dictator. Trump and his echo chamber on Fox News and elsewhere would have poured buckets of derision on Obama for the piece of paper he signed with Kim, for the fawning praise he lavished on a brutal tyrant, and for the paltry non-concessions he got in return. He would have branded the agreement a “horrible deal” and condemned Obama as a sucker for signing it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ea-kim-jong-un

FAUX said that about Obama's deal with Iran, and it was a good deal.

The real test is how MSNBC would have reacted to this deal if Obama had signed it.

And I think they'd have acted the way they acted about Trump.

Beachlife! 13 June 2018 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue (Post 1980785)
What's sad (oh god I'm channeling Trump) is that Americans are still going to come to Canada for holidays etc because of the favourable exchange rate if nothing else but Canadians are starting to rethink crossing the border for anything. I do realize the plural of anecdote is not data but seriously everyone I know personally is saying if they can't show support to our government in any other way at the very least they won't be going to the US and they will be seriously reconsidering purchases in light of where the money goes.

I know scores of Canadians and Americans in the Dragon Boat community and haven't talked to one person yet who is curtailing their trips across the border. The exchange hasn't come into play yet either. I will be in Toronto this weekend, paddling with a team based in Halifax, NS and have no idea what the exchange rate even is. I will be back again for the Toronto Grand Prix. Politics and exchange rate have never been part of my decision.

Sue 13 June 2018 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beachlife! (Post 1980792)
Politics and exchange rate have never been part of my decision.

Until Trump got in politics didn't play a part in my decisions either :(. The exchange rate, however, definitely has.

Darth Credence 13 June 2018 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmy101_again (Post 1980779)
Did/does the US get anything out of the agreement? Kim Jong Un got a photo with a US president in front of US and NK flags. He got a promise (which apparently isn't actually in the agreement) that the US would stop war games with SK forces.

What did the US get? There is no agreement on stopping development of, or destroying existing, nukes in NK. No promise of pulling back the million or so NK troops within spitting distance of Seoul.

The Turnip not only signed the same agreement that has been signed twice before but he has given real value to NK and Jong-Un for the same meaningless promises. Near as I can tell the US was a BIG loser in this meeting.

The US got nothing. Trump got help in conning Americans. The entire point of this, IMO, is to convince some that he actually is a deal maker and can go and do things that other presidents couldn't. Remember him saying on the campaign trail that only he could do some things? Well, he is now saying that only he could get this out of the Kim family, and all his predecessors couldn't. Never mind that any previous president could have done exactly this, and several presidents have gotten effectively the same promises from them. Trump will continue to push that he did something that hasn't been done before because he is such a good deal maker, and far too many people will believe him.

crocoduck_hunter 13 June 2018 04:14 PM

Last night on I think Rachel Maddow, it was stated that this was partially why he's had so many businesses fail: he makes a big noise about how tough and unyielding he's going to be before the meeting, then tends to just give whatever the other side asks for with little to no concessions on their part.

Sue 13 June 2018 05:33 PM

I saw some speculation that the reason Trump and his advisers went nuts attacking Trudeau and by extension Canada was that he wanted to go into the meeting with North Korea looking tough. I guess subsequent events prove that theory wrong. He basically rolled over showed his tummy and wagged his curly little tail.

crocoduck_hunter 13 June 2018 06:13 PM

Trump always wants to look tough. And he always wants the approval of men he thinks really are tough.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.