Bolton:Trump ok'd China's camps, didn't know UK had nukes, thought Finland was Russia

[Belsnickel]

I may or may not have acquired a download of the book for perusing. I am interested in the content, but Bolton is trash so I don't want to give him any money.

[fredtoast]

(06-23-2020, 05:24 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Why did you purposely choose to say "gay lovers" instead of just lovers? This is what I was referencing a few months ago when I discussed people using "gay" in an attempt to be humorous, without concern that it may be seen as a pejorative usage by those who are actually gay.

I used "gay lovers" because sexual preference is a very private issue with some gay people. The choice for a gay person to be publicly open about his/her sexual preference is a monumental decision that should not be made by someone else.

Never heard of a single heterosexual person becoming outraged over being "outed" as straight.

[Lucidus]

(06-23-2020, 05:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I used "gay lovers" because sexual preference is a very private issue with some gay people. The choice for a gay person to be publicly open about his/her sexual preference is a monumental decision that should not be made by someone else.

Never heard of a single heterosexual person becoming outraged over being "outed" as straight.

You could have also used "extramarital lovers" [for example] which is also meant to be private and much more associated with Trump. However, you consciously chose to use "gay" instead. It came off to me as a cheap attempt at humor. Perhaps I'm letting your stereotypical generalizations concerning "black culture" taint my perception of you. If I am indeed wrong, then I apologize. 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-19-2020, 12:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But these are issues of national security.  It is his duty as a patriot to inform potential voters how dangerously incompetent Trump is as President.

(06-19-2020, 04:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Is it his Patriotic duty to get $32 per book?

This is where the patriot doing his duty narrative misses in my mind.... 

He worked for Trump for 17 months and didn't say any of this. 
He got fired and didn't say any of this.
Then 10 months after he was fired, NOW all of a sudden it was his duty as a patriot to inform potential voters? (In the form of a $32.50 book that he got paid a $2m advance for, of course.)

If it was such a patriotic duty to inform people of this, why wait for 27 months and a $2m book deal advance?

[*Nately120*]

(06-28-2020, 02:15 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: This is where the patriot doing his duty narrative misses in my mind.... 

He worked for Trump for 17 months and didn't say any of this. 
He got fired and didn't say any of this.
Then 10 months after he was fired, NOW all of a sudden it was his duty as a patriot to inform potential voters? (In the form of a $32.50 book that he got paid a $2m advance for, of course.)

If it was such a patriotic duty to inform people of this, why wait for 27 months and a $2m book deal advance?

Im not going to let this bad apple ruin capitalism for me, damn it!

[fredtoast]

(06-28-2020, 02:15 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: This is where the patriot doing his duty narrative misses in my mind.... 

He worked for Trump for 17 months and didn't say any of this. 
He got fired and didn't say any of this.
Then 10 months after he was fired, NOW all of a sudden it was his duty as a patriot to inform potential voters? (In the form of a $32.50 book that he got paid a $2m advance for, of course.)

If it was such a patriotic duty to inform people of this, why wait for 27 months and a $2m book deal advance?

I don't understand your argument.  

The message gets out the same if he gets $2 million or not.

So why the hell would he pass up the $2 million?

Would you?

Seems some people are starining pretty hard to find a reason to deflect from Trumps incompetence.

[*bfine32*]

(06-29-2020, 05:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand your argument.  

The message gets out the same if he gets $2 million or not.

So why the hell would he pass up the $2 million?

Would you?

Seems some people are starining pretty hard to find a reason to deflect from Trumps incompetence.

Well your first reply was "It's his Patriotic duty". 

But the glaring difference is: One would be required the be submitted under oath under penalty of perjury

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2020, 07:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well your first reply was "It's his Patriotic duty". 

But the glaring difference is: One would be required the be submitted under oath under penalty of perjury

No, it is not required to be under oath.

In fact 90% of the stuff he disclosed was never under investigation and he never would have been asked about it under oath.

[*bfine32*]

(06-29-2020, 07:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No, it is not required to be under oath.

In fact 90% of the stuff he disclosed was never under investigation and he never would have been asked about it under oath.

So you're saying if you testify before Congress you don't have to do so under oath?


And what about your 'Patriotic Duty" stance? 

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2020, 07:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So you're saying if you testify before Congress you don't have to do so under oath?


And what about your 'Patriotic Duty" stance? 

I'm lost.

You generally have to be under oath to testify before congress, but you can educate voters without testifying before congress.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-29-2020, 05:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand your argument.  

The message gets out the same if he gets $2 million or not.

So why the hell would he pass up the $2 million?

Would you?

Seems some people are starining pretty hard to find a reason to deflect from Trumps incompetence.

No, Trump is incompetent. I never argued that point.

You ask if I would turn down $2m, but I wouldn't have had the opportunity to get $2m because of two reasons:
1. I would have stopped working for him well before I got fired.
2. I would have testified to congress during the impeachment if I felt I had information that was important to reveal.

I am arguing that it was not Bolton's "patriotic duty" to wait 27 months, including 10 months after he wasn't even working for Trump anymore (and for an impeachment to pass) while saying nothing until it was time to make money.

You don't get to be silent during the impeachment and then nearly a year after you're fired start spilling the dirt for millions of dollars and get it spun as "patriotic duty".

[*bfine32*]

(06-29-2020, 07:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I'm lost.

You generally have to be under oath to testify before congress, but you can educate voters without testifying before congress.

Of course and pay no penalty if it is total fabrication. You realize this I'm sure. 

[GMDino]

(06-23-2020, 05:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I may or may not have acquired a download of the book for perusing. I am interested in the content, but Bolton is trash so I don't want to give him any money.

Yeah I don't want him to profit from it but I do think it will be interesting and truthful.

No one ever said Bolton was a liar no matter how much they disagreed with him on policy.

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2020, 07:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course and pay no penalty if it is total fabrication. You realize this I'm sure. 

Uh, no.

I know about the civil penalties for libel.  

[Dill]

(06-23-2020, 05:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I may or may not have acquired a download of the book for perusing. I am interested in the content, but Bolton is trash so I don't want to give him any money.

I have in fact just acquired a hard cover copy of the book in question.

Right now I am pouring over accounts of NSC meetings on AFghanistan. 

It is pretty much what we were hearing from "unnamed sources" before, only with more detailed and nuanced of each player's positional moves.

Trump speaks of NATO like it was one of his contractors paid to do a job. That may be the kernel of his approach to diplomacy.

[fredtoast]

(06-29-2020, 07:35 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You don't get to be silent during the impeachment and then nearly a year after you're fired start spilling the dirt for millions of dollars and get it spun as "patriotic duty".

And when somone shits on your President you don't get to say "It isn't true because he made some money off the information".

I think it is ridiculous to say Bolton should have quit and then remained silent hoping for a chace to testify, and then never mentiona anything else if he was not asked about it under oath.

Bolton had every right to make money off this information.  That does not mean it is false information.  And it does not mean the information was not important for voters to know.

All this talk from capitalists critizing Bolton for making money is just a deflection from the actual facts that have been disclosed.  Nothing but a red herring (fish).

[Dill]

(06-30-2020, 02:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Bolton had every right to make money off this information.  That does not mean it is false information.  And it does not mean the information was not important for voters to know.

All this talk from capitalists critizing Bolton for making money is just a deflection from the actual facts that have been disclosed.  Nothing but a red herring (fish).

In a nutshell yes. That's the correct response to complaints it was "for money."

Reading it is about prioritizing national security, not helping Bolton.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-30-2020, 02:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And when somone shits on your President you don't get to say "It isn't true because he made some money off the information".

I think it is ridiculous to say Bolton should have quit and then remained silent hoping for a chace to testify, and then never mentiona anything else if he was not asked about it under oath.

Bolton had every right to make money off this information.  That does not mean it is false information.  And it does not mean the information was not important for voters to know.

All this talk from capitalists critizing Bolton for making money is just a deflection from the actual facts that have been disclosed.  Nothing but a red herring (fish).

Where did I say it wasn't true?

You have brought up I was trying to deflect from Trump's incompetence (I wasn't) and now you're saying I am claiming it is not true (I never did). Gonna need you to stop making shit up in order to feel outraged at my stance that Bolton is a slimy PoS rather than a guy doing his "patriotic duty".

Trump is an incompetent PoS. 
Bolton is a slimy PoS.

Both can be true. Throwing out the term capitalism\capitalists doesn't mean you support it when a person in the government does not speak up about what they believe to be important information to the security and wellbeing of this nation, and then waiting and waiting until you can get paid for that information and being praised as "patriotic duty". That is letting self-interest be the #1 motivator, which is literally the opposite of patriot duty for a government official.

[fredtoast]

(06-30-2020, 02:14 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Where did I say it wasn't true?

I apologize for misrepresnting your opinion, but my comments about a "red herring" are still correct.

An overwhelming majority of your posts have been trashing Bolton instead of discussing the issues he reported.  In fact many of them imply that you don't think any of this negative information that Bolton would never have been asked about under oath should ever be made known to the voters.

Although you say Trump is incompetent you seem to feel that any information about it should be kept secret.  You don't think any of it should have been made public unless Bolton was questioned about it under oath.

It is just another step in a pattern of supporting the suppression of First Amendment rights when you don't agree with the message.

[Dill]

(06-30-2020, 02:14 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Where did I say it wasn't true?

You have brought up I was trying to deflect from Trump's incompetence (I wasn't) and now you're saying I am claiming it is not true (I never did). Gonna need you to stop making shit up in order to feel outraged at my stance that Bolton is a slimy PoS rather than a guy doing his "patriotic duty".

Trump is an incompetent PoS. 
Bolton is a slimy PoS.

Both can be true. Throwing out the term capitalism\capitalists doesn't mean you support it when a person in the government does not speak up about what they believe to be important information to the security and wellbeing of this nation, and then waiting and waiting until you can get paid for that information and being praised as "patriotic duty". That is letting self-interest be the #1 motivator, which is literally the opposite of patriot duty for a government official.

I assumed Fred was speaking to the group, as number of people have complained about profitable patriotism.

I know that YOU are not a Trump supporter.  And I agree Bolton did everything you said he did. (Though I don't agree he is or has all along acted purely in self interest. He is a committed ideologue who cares deeply about his neocon foreign policy premises, the opposite of Trump in that respect.)

But I have to set all that aside when what he says is so immediately relevant to the president's handling of national security RIGHT NOW. The people are sovereign and they have to be able to judge what their government does. There is no privilege protecting abuse of power.

I am also considering Bolton's defense of his timing. I am not sure why he did not testify before the House. He may have needed more time to mentally process turning against what has become a regime party with its own press organ. He has been very close to Bfine in his views of government secrecy when Republicans are in power.

Republicans would not allow him to testify before the Senate. And he rightly (in my view) judges his addition to the Impeachment trial would have made no material difference (though I think he might have moved two or three more votes to impeach). Perhaps he was thinking of the election, and how the book would keep the impeachment charges and other mideeds in the news cycle over the summer. Right alongside Trump's mishandling of the Coronavirus.