The Trump Road Tour--Arabia, Israel, Europe

[GMDino]

(05-24-2017, 04:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: In case anybody wants any non-insulting and/or belittling comments from the visit I listened to an interview with an interpreter today about Trump's visit and he said it is very difficult for them to translate for him because most dignitaries speak using similar phrases. He said Trump doesn't speak in the same common phrases and they have a hard time translating what he called his "Americanisims". He gave an example of how he had a hard (impossible) time translating "showboat".

He also said Trump uses a lot of "fillers" while he's thinking and those are difficult to translate, but he most or the audience will think he's keeping something from them.


Now back to the belittlement...

Yes, that's not belittling of him at all.


Well unless you want the POTUS to not use words like "showboat" and to be able to speak in full sentences.


But you did point to an interesting take on Trump (and did say where you heard the interview):


https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-05-21/ah-joys-and-challenges-translating-trump-russian

Quote:Berdy spends a lot of time dissecting the Russian language for insight into how to best translate it into English. She says in the mainstream American media, a lot gets lost in translation. Take the word Putin used to describe Donald Trump during the presidential campaign. It was reported that Putin was calling Trump "brilliant," as in super-smart. Berdy says it's more nuanced than that.



"The Russian word he used to describe him is 'yarkii' (яркий). That is a word that simply means very bright, a larger-than-life figure. It is basically positive but it isn't that he's brilliant or genius or anything like that at all."

Russian translators also find Trump's English tough to translate. "Sometimes people have trouble with him. They simply don't know what he's talking about," Berdy says. 


After Trump nominated Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, the president quipped to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell: “If we end up with that gridlock, I would say, ‘If you can, Mitch, go nuclear.’” In Russian newspapers, the punchline was translated as "use the nuclear option."


Berdy giggles. "That sounded like the Republicans, if they couldn't get their way, they would have to drop a nuclear bomb on the Democrats."


In other cases, Russian translators clean up Trump's language. "This is partially because you sort of clean up the leaders because that's what you do," says Berdy. "They clean up all the run-on sentences or the sentences that begin and don't go anywhere at all. So he sounds actually kind of more like Putin than he sounds like Trump."

And what about all those tweets?



Berdy says Russian translators clean them up, too. "In English all of those Twitter short-forms like 'sad,' 'beautiful,' 'weak,' sound rather childish, at least to my ears. In Russian, it's more like, 'that's sad.' 'Isn't that unfortunate.' They sound more adult and kind of presidential. He sounds much better in Russian than he does in English." 

http://www.bbc.com/news/video_and_audio/headlines/38812093/us-president-donald-trump-lost-in-translation

Quote:US President Donald Trump: Lost in translation

Translating US President Donald Trump into many of the foreign languages that the BBC broadcasts in is a huge responsibility.
How do you interpret what he says and what he means? BBC Persian's Siavash Ardalan discusses the challenge of becoming Trump.

That one is a link to a video about the subject.  How DO they translate "what's in his heart" since he isn't meaning literally what he says?

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2017, 04:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yes, that's not belittling of him at all.

Well unless you want the POTUS to not use words like "showboat" and to be able to speak in full sentences.

Of course it is not belittling, unless you're really looking to find something. Why would I want a president to not use words like showboat, what the hell word should he use? We just went 8 with our POTUS limiting his description of folks. Why would I want that for the next 4-8?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-24-2017, 04:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: In case anybody wants any non-insulting and/or belittling comments from the visit I listened to an interview with an interpreter today about Trump's visit and he said it is very difficult for them to translate for him because most dignitaries speak using similar phrases. He said Trump doesn't speak in the same common phrases and they have a hard time translating what he called his "Americanisims". He gave an example of how he had a hard (impossible) time translating "showboat".

He also said Trump uses a lot of "fillers" while he's thinking and those are difficult to translate, but he most or the audience will think he's keeping something from them.


Now back to the belittlement...

Belittling others for belittling Trump. Classic.

[GMDino]

Full clip: Trump wanders off, ignores BiBi and staff have to bring him back, looking still lost. @AdamParkhomenko pic.twitter.com/0vlyTf3z5w

— Pesach 'Pace' Lattin (@pacelattin) May 26, 2017

[GMDino]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/27/fact-check-president-trump-nato-speech/102236892/

Quote:It’s been a muted week for the “real” Donald Trump, the Twitter account where the president normally says a lot of things that are unreal. That respite may have come to a close, though, as he wrapped up his foreign trip with yet another mistold tale about NATO.

In a tweet and a speech before leaving for home Saturday, he said that thanks to him, money is “starting to pour into NATO,” which it isn’t.

Besides going light on provocative tweets, Trump held no news conferences and gave no extended interviews abroad. Those venues are frequent sources of Trump’s off-the-cuff misstatements. Even a more scripted Trump, though, does not always tell it straight, and the release of his proposed budget stirred a fresh round of questionable rhetoric from his stateside aides.

Read more:
[/url]

Is NATO 'obsolete' or not? Trump and military alliance aim to work out differences

Trump's NATO mystery: How much does he support it?
Trump leaves G-7 summit amid climate change, trade disputes
At NATO, Trump does not pledge U.S. commitment to collective defense

A look at the NATO statements under scrutiny over the past week:

TRUMP: “I will tell you, a big difference over the last year, money is actually starting to pour into NATO from countries that would not have been doing what they’re doing now had I not been elected, I can tell you that. Money is starting to pour in.” — speech to U.S. troops in Sicily on Saturday

Quote:[url=https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump]Donald J. Trump 

@realDonaldTrump
Many NATO countries have agreed to step up payments considerably, as they should. Money is beginning to pour in- NATO will be much stronger.
6:03 AM - 27 May 2017 · Taormina, Sicily

TRUMP tweet: “Many NATO countries have agreed to step up payments considerably, as they should. Money is beginning to pour in.”

THE FACTS: First, no money is pouring in and countries do not pay the U.S. Nor do they pay NATO directly, apart from administrative expenses, which are not the issue.

The issue is how much each NATO member country spends on its own defense.

Although the president is right that many NATO countries have agreed to spend more on their military budgets, that is not a result of the NATO summit this past week at which Trump pressed them to do so. The countries agreed in 2014 to stop cutting their military spending and to start increasing it “toward” 2 percent of their gross domestic product by 2024.

That goal was set during the Obama administration and is less than an ironclad commitment.
———
TRUMP: “But 23 of the 28 member nations are still not paying what they should be paying and what they are supposed to be paying for their defense. This is not fair to the people and taxpayers of the United States and many of these nations owe massive amounts of money from past years, and not paying in those past years.” — remarks to NATO on Thursday

THE FACTS: Members of the alliance are not in arrears in their military spending. They are not in debt to the United States, or failing to meet a current standard, and Washington is not trying to collect anything, despite the president’s contention that they “owe massive amounts of money.” They merely committed in 2014 to work toward the goal of 2 percent of GDP by 2024.

[GMDino]

[GMDino]

Once again the POTUS shows a complete lack of caring about, well, anything.

One note:  This video was posted a lot of places.  This particular story (heavy on opinion) showed up in my feed from a friend and it contains a longer version of the same vdeo along with a screen shot refuting Spicer's claims.

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/331928/trump-has-clearly-given-up-and-isnt-even-using-translation-headphones-at-the-g7-summit/

Quote:Trump has clearly given up and isn’t even using translation headphones at the G7 summit

In News by Jordan Freiman / May 27, 2017
STUMBLE


President Trump appears to be done with this whole G7 summit nonsense. Despite his 2016 campaign’s criticisms of Hillary Clinton and her supposed lack of stamina, it seems Trump’s first overseas trip has completely wiped him out, to the point where he can’t be bothered to pretend to listen to the other summit attendees.

During a roundtable meet, Italy’s Prime Minister and host Paolo Gentiloni spoke briefly in Italian, as he is wont to do. While NATO leaders put on their headphones so they could hear a translation and actually understand what Gentiloni was saying, Trump said **** it and just sat there.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer tried to declare this as fake news by saying Trump just had an earpiece in his right ear, which isn’t visible in that shot.

Quote:[/url] Follow
Sean Spicer 

@PressSec
As usual @POTUS wears a single ear piece for translation in his right ear https://twitter.com/bbcjlandale/status/868418708502441986 …
8:52 AM - 27 May 2017

This is almost certainly not true. Here’s a longer video of Gentiloni’s remarks. While we’re still treated to basically the same angle, Trump does turn his head around the 2:16 mark where you can see he clearly does not have anything resembling the headphones everyone else is wearing anywhere near his right ear.


Another photo from earlier in the session appears to show that Trump doesn’t even have his own set of headphones. Everyone else at the table has a pair clearly visible right in front of them. Trump’s got nothing.


Unless Trump has his own wireless earbuds, Spicer appears to be lying. Take a moment to compose yourself after this devastating and atypical news.

Quote:27 May
Shane Goldmacher 

 @ShaneGoldmacher
Per @PressSec: Trump has earpiece in his right ear that is not visible here --> https://twitter.com/ShaneGoldmacher/status/868442770259791872 …

Quote: Follow
Noga Tarnopolsky 

@NTarnopolsky
@ShaneGoldmacher @maggieNYT @PressSec That appears to be a lie, as simultaneous translation systems use the same headphones for each user, and those in use are big and visible.
9:16 AM - 27 May 2017

For what it’s worth, in that very first clip it appears as if Trump is reading something. Why not just say he chose to read a translation of the PM’s prepared remarks instead, Spicey? Do I have to do your job for you?

Also, this is not the only example we have of Trump tuning out and foregoing a translation headset.

Quote: Follow
Eric Reguly 

@ereguly
#DonaldTrump disengaging from #G7. No press meet today and didn't bother putting on headphones in #Africa session to listen to translation.
5:41 AM - 27 May 2017

“Donald Trump disengaging from G7,” Globe and Mail’s Eric Reguly tweeted. “No press meet today and didn’t bother putting on headphones in Africa session to listen to translation.”

Perhaps I’m being unfair. Maybe Trump just speaks 15 languages but we’ve all just assumed he can’t because he barely has a grasp on English.

[screen shot: [url=https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/868418708502441986]@BBCJLandale]

[Dill]

(05-26-2017, 01:13 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Full clip: Trump wanders off, ignores BiBi and staff have to bring him back, looking still lost. @AdamParkhomenko pic.twitter.com/0vlyTf3z5w

— Pesach 'Pace' Lattin (@pacelattin) May 26, 2017

Geezus, He looks stoned or like he just woke up from a nap, or just suffered a minor stroke.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/truth-president-trump-110-billion-saudi-arms-deal-000003153--abc-news-topstories.html

So about that $110 billion dollar arms deal . . .

Quote:In total, the six possible sales are valued at about $23.7 billion. Five of the six notifications were announced during the Obama administration, some as far back as 2013.

Since then, three additional Saudi-related Congressional Notifications were issued in late May and early June. These potential sales involve training and radar systems sales and total roughly $1.7 billion.

All told, the approximate $25 billion in potential sales is far from Trump's claim of $110 billion. The other $85 billion would be categorized as a Memorandum of Intent (MOI), which the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency describes as "potential future defense capabilities"

So $1.7 billion in new contracts during the Trump administration, $23.7 billion in prior sales, and a whole lot of memorandums which aren't the same as contracts or actual sales.

[GMDino]

(06-07-2017, 10:29 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/truth-president-trump-110-billion-saudi-arms-deal-000003153--abc-news-topstories.html

So about that $110 billion dollar arms deal . . .


So $1.7 billion in new contracts during the Trump administration, $23.7 billion in prior sales, and a whole lot of memorandums which aren't the same as contracts or actual sales.

So to sum up:

It wasn't as big a deal as the POTUS claimed and he did a deal with the Saudi's after complaining about them and Obama's dealings with them.

He is SO winning.

[Dill]

(06-07-2017, 10:29 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/truth-president-trump-110-billion-saudi-arms-deal-000003153--abc-news-topstories.html

So about that $110 billion dollar arms deal . . .


So $1.7 billion in new contracts during the Trump administration, $23.7 billion in prior sales, and a whole lot of memorandums which aren't the same as contracts or actual sales.

LOL, thanks for turning over that rock, Oncemore.  For a moment I thought we had "won" again.