Scott Adams and the tactical error in Trump's Ukraine defense

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by IvanVic, Jan 28, 2020.

  1. IvanVic

    IvanVic

    Messages:
    11,795
    Likes Received:
    10,218
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Scott Adams mentioned this yesterday and it was mentioned again today on Shapiro's podcast. The correct move from the beginning was to point out the simple fact that pressuring a foreign government into investigating election fraud is not illegal. Withholding foreign aid to accomplish this is not illegal or impeachable.

    Instead, Trump claimed there was no quid pro quo. Scott Adams rightly predicted that eventually something would come out, true or not, that alluded to this quid pro quo, and would inevitably put Trump in an awkward spot of having to say something like "okay, I did it, but it wasn't illegal or impeachable." This is clearly less favorable than the other strategy.

    Scroll down to the audio player and skip to 5:20 for the beginning of this topic, and 6:28 he addressed the specific strategic error.

    https://www.scottadamssays.com/2020...t-adams-the-bolton-bombshell-and-coronavirus/

    Is this error material? He won't be convicted in the Senate, but the prevailing prediction is that the error will likely lead to spineless senate republicans allowing witnesses.
     
    Kablam and czsmithGT like this.
  2. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    58,277
    Likes Received:
    45,970
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Scott Adams may not be the sharpest tool in the shed.

    Example - the mayor says "hey would you volunteer on my reelection campaign?" Perfectly legal. The mayor says, "hey, I'm going to recommend against the zoning change you wanted." Perfectly legal. The mayor says, "volunteer on my reelection campaign or I'll recommend you don't get that zoning change." Not legal. How hard was that? It is the "quid pro quo" that can take 2 perfectly legal things and make them illegal when combined.
     
    orangejeep06 likes this.

  3. G33

    G33 Frisky! CLM Millennium Member

    Messages:
    34,004
    Likes Received:
    13,976
    Joined:
    May 29, 1999
    Location:
    With G29
    And none of that matters.
    The democrats would paste together something.
    And after the election, they will paste together some new BS impeachment.
    :)
     
    B C, Willard and orangejeep06 like this.
  4. IvanVic

    IvanVic

    Messages:
    11,795
    Likes Received:
    10,218
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    You're the first person I've heard make that claim.

    It is not illegal to pressure a foreign government into investigating corruption, even if that pressure means withholding funds. There was never anything illegal or impeachable about that. What is illegal/impeachable would be to withhold foreign aid for personal gain in an attempt to influence an upcoming election. These are not the same things. Just because the corruption involved a political opponent who is running for president doesn't mean it was the primary reason for the investigation.

    You are arguing the point of the democrats, verbatim. Your claim implies that it's impossible for there to be a quid pro quo without it being illegal/impeachable.
     
    JArthurD likes this.
  5. Dreamaster

    Dreamaster

    Messages:
    1,177
    Likes Received:
    1,326
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Location:
    Outer Space
    This times 100. That's why the defense had to show Trumps "probable cause" to ask for the investigation...

    Democrats had to repeat over and over again that the "Biden thing has been debunked" because without that little lie being accepted as truth, their entire case for abuse of power goes out the window.

    The media has done a MASTERFUL job at playing the Democrat's violin. That the NYT can write about Bolton's manuscript on the day that the defense starts their arguments is absurd, but what's more absurd is how effective the rest of the media is that it created an entire campaign about "Call Bolton as a witness or else Republican's are complicit in a coverup."

    In the MIDDLE of the freakin' trial! OVER the defense. And it just happened to be the day that defense tore Biden a new hole and collapsed the Democrat's case but the sheep don't care.

    It's just sick.
     
    Officer's Match likes this.
  6. Mayhem like Me

    Mayhem like Me Semper Paratus

    Messages:
    26,617
    Likes Received:
    19,759
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2001
    Location:
    outer rim
    Pam Biondi Just screwed the democrats chance at any election ,if we actually had a media ,they would be #1 outraged that they were duped and played so easily, #2 be following up on her brief.
    but they seem to be too vapid to admit they were played for 8 years, I am telling you a righteous and honest news network would clean up with the right backing.
     
    Officer's Match, Teecher45 and robhic like this.
  7. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    Messages:
    58,277
    Likes Received:
    45,970
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Location:
    Kentucky
    You are right. First, you have to have the quid pro quo, but then it has to have been for the purpose of influencing the election, not just the purpose of having the crime investigated. That's where the Democrat problem really lies, is they have no evidence of the corrupt motive, other than that would be the natural result of investigating the crime. If that is enough, then pretty much anybody who announces they are running for office would have immunity from prosecution.

    It seems it me the real dividing line would be whether he demanded a legitimate investigation or demanded an anti-Biden result. Since the Dems have only claimed he demanded an investigation, it's still a loser.
     
    pjanthony and Berto like this.
  8. Berto

    Berto woo woo

    Messages:
    29,593
    Likes Received:
    15,398
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Location:
    WA
    I'd think most would actually expect a pres to investigate corruption/graft under these circumstances, and Biden, still lacking DNC nomination is essentially nobody.
     
    pjanthony likes this.
  9. NAZG26

    NAZG26 Lost in transit

    Messages:
    5,325
    Likes Received:
    17,368
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Location:
    Arizona
    Can we burn the beltway to the ground and start over?
     
    Cambo and Officer's Match like this.
  10. Grabbrass

    Grabbrass

    Messages:
    12,100
    Likes Received:
    22,567
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2001
    Location:
    Almost Heaven

    He's pretty smart at manipulating people on the internet to keep his name trending. First he makes waves with a tease tweet (redirecting to his blog, of course) claiming Trump is a super-sly genius, plays 4Dchess, hair is real ... whatever. He gets traffic and retweets like mad. Next day, new tweet says Trump's achilles heel, Trump's crucial error, chink in the Trump armor ... whatever. He gets traffic and retweets like mad.

    Rinse, repeat. He's been riding the Trump phenomenon like a gnarly dude since 2016.
     
    pjanthony likes this.
  11. porschedog

    porschedog

    Messages:
    4,553
    Likes Received:
    6,641
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    Pam Biondi is amazing.
     
    Officer's Match likes this.
  12. GWSHARK

    GWSHARK BITEYAHEADOFF

    Messages:
    6,375
    Likes Received:
    509
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Location:
    QUARREL REEF
  13. Dave Brubaker

    Dave Brubaker

    Messages:
    3,218
    Likes Received:
    7,114
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2016
    Location:
    The Devil’s Backbone