It's That Time Again: MSM Launches 'Muh Russia' Election Narrative As Brands Collude To Silence Dissent | ZeroHedge
IMO, the point you make is pretty valid. This may be a reach from people who are "anti" Trump. But then, on the other side of things, we have people who make a willful effort to lie for Trump, to ignore facts and reality, who appear to believe that lying and gaslighting is a childish game. The Trump campaign, as documented by the Republican Senate Intelligence Committee, had numerous illicit contacts with Russian intelligence agents. How is this acceptable? This becomes acceptable solely because Trump doesn't care and encourages people to lie about it? And the Republican Party as an organization has, since lots and lots of people love Trump and have chosen to ignore and lie about this........chosen to ignore and lie about this too? It's amazing, really.
You post like a cheerleader... your statement sounds like a high school football cheerleader's cheer. "When Trump says "we" he means Russia, yes, Russia... repeat it... 2016 called and they want their lies back...
A gas station masquerading as a country is the first thing Democrats think of, when wake up, and the last thing they think about when they go to sleep.
Here is how it works coco - Trump talking to Putin: - here is how "The Art of the Deal" works for me as president of the United trump facists of America: You want state secrest - sure - no issue. My asking price: For every top secret document folder detailing all aspects of American strategy and purpose: One Trump Casino in a city of our choosing for every classified document file. Vlad you will, of course build the facility gratis. We will cut you in 5% of the net profits for maintenance and upkeep of your various Dacha's.
Your first three examples place the speaker in alignment/connection with the subject, as Trump has done (perhaps in a Freudian sorta way). The last one actually supports your case. At any rate, this Trump comment is illustrative of how tone deaf the man is; how awful a spokesperson he is; how weak-minded he is. No need to excuse it.
I understand your points, but I still think it’s a stretch to call it tone deaf. If I spoke in public as much as any politician does, and had the whole world analyzing everything I said for every nuance, I’d be in big trouble. Once I had a small part in the play, and one of my lines was to yell out “of all the abominable things.” However, it came out “of all the abdominal things.” These things happen.
It’s not nitpicking. It deals with the title of the thread and the OP. Do you agree with that title? Do you believe that Trump’s statement means he identifies the submarines and warships as being his side?
On its own, the thread title is factual. As to the interpretive aspect, have you read any of the Ukraine war thread? A strange pro-Russian phenomenon has been occurring and it's not only in that thread, but that thread gives a snapshot. A couple frequent posters on this board are overtly pro-Russia (weird). I presume this sentiment is being spread in far-right media, but the Trump ties to Russian along with the Putin a$$-kissing that Trumph does is evident. Back to your question, there's reason to believe that even the interpretive aspect of the thread title is true. So yes, I agree with it.
Inasmuch as the US doesn't have those subs and warships "in Cuba", one.must assume he meant "we" to be Russia. HOWEVER, it is not always clear what Trump means, so assuming is dangerous. He likes ambiguity so that he can claim something was not what he meant. In short, who the heck knows what he meant. He's not far behind Biden in terms of senility.
I think you guys are reading way too much into this. It’s nothing more than saying, “We have a situation here and the media are not reporting it.” That’s all. I don’t like Trump, but I try to be careful not to project onto people things from my preconceptions.
There are two possibilities here. The one that makes less sense is that Trump is revealing things he knows about US vessels near Cuba and that is the "we" in question. That answer isn't any better than the actual truth. In context, it's very clear he was talking about the Russian ships mentioned in the attached CNN news piece. Go play apologist somewhere else.
