Split From News Thread: Putin Comment on Trump Prosecutions

[Tank]

Putin is right. However it is a monumental case of the pot calling the kettle black.

[The Magic Pudding..]

Putin is right. However it is a monumental case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Hmmm

"Everything that is happening with Trump is the persecution of a political rival for political reasons. That's what it is. And this is being done in front of the public of the United States and the whole world," he said.

There would be political reasons but I think it goes beyond that, unless valuing the rule of law and government institutions now joins concern for climate change as lefty liberal bleating.

[Recusant]

For reference: "Russian President Vladimir Putin says prosecution of Donald Trump shows US political system is 'rotten'" | ABC

* * *

Putin is right. However it is a monumental case of the pot calling the kettle black.

I disagree with your first sentence. Trump clearly violated several laws. He riled up a mob and sent them to attack the US Capitol in an attempt to overturn democracy in the US. He and his sidekicks cooked up a scheme (that one of the primary schemers freely admitted was illegal) to overturn the election--aside from the attack on the Capitol. Is he to be exempt from prosecution just so that shits like Putin and Trump himself won't claim he's being treated unfairly?

There are a number of separate cases against him. In New York, he's being prosecuted for the same scheme that sent his lawyer to jail (paying hush money to a porn actress and attempting to illegally hide the payment). The lawyer was acting on direct orders from Trump. In Florida, he's being prosecuted for stealing national security documents and lying to the government about them. He's being prosecuted in Georgia for the scheme to overturn the presidential vote in that state. Lastly, as mentioned above, he's being prosecuted for a blatant, multifaceted attempt to stay in the White House after losing an election. Which of these should be overlooked? Which of them are politically motivated (as opposed to genuine attempts to enforce the law)?

Putin is essentially saying that Biden directed various law enforcement entities to indict Trump for his crimes. There is no indication whatever that is the case. There are plenty of things that can be laid at the feet of the Biden administration in particular and the US in general, but Putin's attempt to shore up Trump's lies is nothing but another falsehood.

ETA: See addendum below . . .

[Icarus]

^Thank you Rec for that honest rebuttal.

Individuals in other countries are not legitimately informed of the actual details of our politics. Nor, I fear, are we honestly informed about political realities in other countries.

 

[Recusant]

^Thank you Rec for that honest rebuttal.

Individuals in other countries are not legitimately informed of the actual details of our politics. Nor, I fear, are we honestly informed about political realities in other countries.

 

To be fair, Tank may have just been agreeing with the notion that the political system in the US is rotten. In a number of ways it's far from ideal, almost entirely due to being the product of an 18th century document that's nearly impossible to revise, and rulings by a corrupted Supreme Court which allow wealthy individuals and corporations to essentially buy politicians and put their fat thumbs on the political scales. That isn't what Putin is blithering about though.

Putin would really like it if Trump were to be in the White House again. His disastrous war against Ukraine might then have a face-saving outcome, given Trump's repeated pronouncements favoring Putin's ambitions.

[Tank]

^Thank you Rec for that honest rebuttal.

Individuals in other countries are not legitimately informed of the actual details of our politics. Nor, I fear, are we honestly informed about political realities in other countries.

 

To be fair, Tank may have just been agreeing with the notion that the political system in the US is rotten. In a number of ways it's far from ideal, almost entirely due to being the product of an 18th century document that's nearly impossible to revise, and rulings by a corrupted Supreme Court which allow wealthy individuals and corporations to essentially buy politicians and put their fat thumbs on the political scales. That isn't what Putin is blithering about though.

Putin would really like it if Trump were to be in the White House again. His disastrous war against Ukraine might then have a face-saving outcome, given Trump's repeated pronouncements favoring Putin's ambitions.

You were quite right. The political system in the US is less than ideal, and that is something a lot of Americans say.

[Asmodean]

He riled up a mob and sent them to attack the US Capitol in an attempt to overturn democracy in the US.

This right here though. There are non-political receipts towards that end, yes..? Some source with no axe to grind either way, not itself blindly quoting axe-grinding sources? An actual quote of the former president sending people to attack a seat of power, perhaps? Granted, I don't hang onto Trump's every statement, but I can't remember ever reading or hearing him doing that as described.

I think Putin was not-wrong in this, by much the same token as those who think that the whole Biden impeachment business is a political witchhunt above all else. It does walk like one and talk like one. Might it just be because that's what it is? I might even have applauded the efforts if they genuinely were aimed towards justice and the preservation of the democratic process - not just a very specific perception of what justice and the democratic process should be, and even that seeming secondary to damaging a political opponent.

Lock them all up, you damned hypocrite! [Not you-you. Just trying out some slogans for us "unaffiliated strange bedfellows" ]

..."Cast the first stone from behind the throne..?" Pretty sure it's copyrighted, but hey!

[billy rubin]

the fucked up amrican government is partly baked into our constitution, and partly due to hijacking by scoundrels

[Asmodean]

Eh... Politics is a job that has a certain attraction to the more scoundrelly-minded among us, so I suppose that is hardly surprising.

[billy rubin]

it still bemuses me, though, that lies, betrayal, and hypocrisy are traits that everybody decries in private life, yet are openly practiced in politics by people who demand respect while demonstrsting that they deserve none

i live in ohio, usa, where hypocrisy and corruption especially rife.

[Recusant]

He riled up a mob and sent them to attack the US Capitol in an attempt to overturn democracy in the US.

This right here though. There are non-political receipts towards that end, yes..? Some source with no axe to grind either way, not itself blindly quoting axe-grinding sources? An actual quote of the former president sending people to attack a seat of power, perhaps? Granted, I don't hang onto Trump's every statement, but I can't remember ever reading or hearing him doing that as described.

I think Putin was not-wrong in this, by much the same token as those who think that the whole Biden impeachment business is a political witchhunt above all else. It does walk like one and talk like one. Might it just be because that's what it is? I might even have applauded the efforts if they genuinely were aimed towards justice and the preservation of the democratic process - not just a very specific perception of what justice and the democratic process should be, and even that seeming secondary to damaging a political opponent.

Lock them all up, you damned hypocrite! [Not you-you. Just trying out some slogans for us "unaffiliated strange bedfellows" ]

..."Cast the first stone from behind the throne..?" Pretty sure it's copyrighted, but hey!

Trump called for his MAGA zealots to come to Washington DC. "Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!"

When the true believers came and some were being turned away from his speech because they were carrying weapons he said, "I don't f'ing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the f'ing mags [metal detectors] away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the f'ing people in. Take the mags away."


The transcript of the speech is readily available.

On the "oh it's just a Democrat smear against the great and honorable president" side, you will see this excerpt:

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

On the "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" side --

We will not let them silence your voices. We're not going to let it happen, I'm not going to let it happen.

(Audience chants: "Fight for Trump.")

Thank you.

[. . .]

And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. But I said something's wrong here, something is really wrong, can have happened.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children, and for our beloved country.

And I say this despite all that's happened. The best is yet to come.

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless, they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

As for Putin being "not-wrong in this" perhaps you will give answers to the questions already asked:

There are a number of separate cases against him. In New York, he's being prosecuted for the same scheme that sent his lawyer to jail (paying hush money to a porn actress and attempting to illegally hide the payment). The lawyer was acting on direct orders from Trump. In Florida, he's being prosecuted for stealing national security documents and lying to the government about them. He's being prosecuted in Georgia for the scheme to overturn the presidential vote in that state. Lastly, as mentioned above, he's being prosecuted for a blatant, multifaceted attempt to stay in the White House after losing an election. Which of these should be overlooked? Which of them are politically motivated (as opposed to genuine attempts to enforce the law)?

And one more: If you believe that Biden (or some nebulous entity) directed multiple law enforcement agencies to bring charges against Trump for his crimes, what evidence do you have to support that belief?

[Asmodean]

...by people who demand respect while demonstrsting that they deserve none

...while being held up as role models by some, expected to be so by others.

What a world we live in, indeed.

[Asmodean]

Should consider putting the Trump fight into its own thread. Such things tend to hijack and sour things somewhat, but are still meaningful to talk about. That said,

Trump called for his MAGA zealots to come to Washington DC. "Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!"

When the true believers came and some were being turned away from his speech because they were carrying weapons he said, "I don't f'ing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the f'ing mags [metal detectors] away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the f'ing people in. Take the mags away."

None of what you provided here amounts to Trump sending "his people" to attack anybody. This is a call to protest, which should be any-one's right in a democratic society. Did Trump call for a violent protest, or are you building a case on supposed presence of dog whistles and hidden meanings?

As for firearms, may he have asked to let the armed supporters in because as a primary target at his own rally, he knew or rather, strongly assumed, that they were not there for him? I could let you come to my barbecue with a gun because you are a friend and I don't see you as intending to shoot "me or mine." If you then shoot the neighbour because we called him a dick while munching on hot dogs, that is entirely on you.

I hope you may be starting to see why I'm asking for non-political, non-axe-grinding sources. I don't need somebody else to read intent into words and actions I can readily verify.

On the "oh it's just a Democrat smear against the great and honorable president" side, you will see this excerpt:

I'm not on their side, and don't think their agenda should matter in assessing Trump's intent with the speech you seem to be using as a sole source for making the following statements of fact;

He riled up a mob and sent them to attack the US Capitol in an attempt to overturn democracy in the US.

On the "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" side --

I'm not on their side either, and so I realise that using the word "fight" at a protest or a rally does not a call for violence make. You can fight using politics, economics, linguistics... Any tool for a heated exchange of ideas, establishing the dominance of values and so forth. The rabid environmentalists are fighting for their ideals, and yet generally, no-one but them and someone else's bottom line gets hurt when they chain themselves to earth-moving machinery.

As for Putin being "not-wrong in this" perhaps you will give answers to the questions already asked:

Which of these should be overlooked? Which of them are politically motivated (as opposed to genuine attempts to enforce the law)?

I already did, at least in part. None of them should be overlooked, if you are willing to "clean house." All of them should be, if "your" inquisition is limited to your political opponents. There are arguments to be made against overlooking potential breach of law in the latter case. My argument for is quite simple; "For what can war, but endless war, still breed?" One perceived power grab will lead to another and another and retaliation and retaliation for the retaliation, so forth.

And one more: If you believe that Biden (or some nebulous entity) directed multiple law enforcement agencies to bring charges against Trump for his crimes, what evidence do you have to support that belief?

That's coming perilously close to putting words in my mouth - or beliefs in my head, as it were. Which, given the similar nature of your response... A bit disappointing. I give you "the third option;"

I do not believe ideology is a conscious actor that directs people to certain actions. I do, however, believe that people will take certain actions to conform to an ideology already held.

[Recusant]

Either Putin is wrong or he is to use your phrase "not-wrong."

The Trumpists were carrying weapons (not necessarily guns) to a supposedly peaceful rally for what reason? Trump had planned to send them to the Capitol. What reason might he have for wanting them to go to the Capitol carrying weapons? During campaign rallies Trump had repeatedly encouraged violence by his supporters, even going so far as to falsely claim that he would pay the legal fees of those who acted on his encouragement. It is completely reasonable to infer that he hoped the crowd he'd gathered on January 6th would engage in violence on his behalf.

While some have claimed that Trump is stupid, I have never agreed with that assessment. In my opinion he's not terribly intelligent, but he is definitely not stupid. Decades of shady dealings (and coaching by such scumbags as Roy Cohn and Roger Stone) have given him the nous to convey his nefarious wishes without outright stating them. Some may be willing to impute pure motives to his January 6 speech, for whatever reason. I think there is absolutely no basis for that imputation. He has consistently shown the world who he is.

Leaving that aside, it comes down to a stark question. Should Trump be allowed to commit serious crimes (crimes that many others have been prosecuted for) without repercussions merely because some people will claim that it is a political act to prosecute him for those crimes?

The ideology behind these prosecutions appears to be that of holding a person accountable for their criminal acts. Putin claims it is something else. Unless evidence supports Putin's claim there is no reason to believe it.

[Tom62]

^Thank you Rec for that honest rebuttal.

Individuals in other countries are not legitimately informed of the actual details of our politics. Nor, I fear, are we honestly informed about political realities in other countries.

 

That is a bold statement. The way I see it, TV networks in the States don't bring any objective news but propaganda. Either pro Trump and anti Biden or pro Biden and anti Trump. The quality standards of these "news shows" are also pretty low, because real news isn't presented as news but as info nuggets. In most cases facts are disregarded if it harmful to the narrative. It is better to keep people misinformed or not informed.

As an outsider we may therefore have a better understanding of US politics than most Americans who are only watching CNBC,  CNN or Fox News.