Does he not remember trying everything in his power to stay in the WH after he was officially declared the loser?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/03/us/politics/trump-pa-rally-election.html
he was officially declared the loser?
No, OJ was declared not guilty by a jury of his peers. No defendant is declared innocent in a court of law.
I propose you research the difference between the terms innocent and not guilty.
I propose you research the difference between the terms innocent and not guilty.
The Secret Service would've dragged the losing squatter out of the White House since all power and nuclear codes, etc. would be transferred to the new president, Biden.
sharehttps://youtu.be/K5A_UKLe5uo?t=350
He's already claiming rigging when the votes haven't even been tallied yet, lol. I am so getting my insurrection v2.0 bloodbath ticket. MAGATS are so easy to read. I guess this is why Trump himself grifts them so much, the low IQ are easy to wallet empty. I can see the cartoon where Trump gets them to give their money to him and then the voters wonder where their money went before complaining they're poor and blame Biden.
You cite an article behind a paywall. Why even bother with a hyperlink no one can read for themselves? Obama said arguably analogous things. Context is important.
shareDid he? When did Obama say he should have ignored the 2016 result and remained in the White House (which is roughly comparable here)?
Well, I’m not accepting your decision on what’s analogous especially because I can’t even see the NY Times article about what Trump said. But I was referring to when Obama was interviewed by Colbert and expounded about his fantasy of a third term in which he could direct a stand-in president from behind the scenes
share>But I was referring to when Obama was interviewed by Colbert and expounded about his fantasy of a third term in which he could direct a stand-in president from behind the scenes
This would be known generally, as a joke.
https://web.archive.org/web/20241103212701/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/03/us/politics/trump-pa-rally-election.html
I don’t remember Obama’s delivery coming across as a joke. I will accept that he was elaborating in the theoretical but he was not telling a joke in my opinion. As I said, context is important to interpretation. Just as you reject the meaning of my quotation of Obama on a third-term-by-puppet, I do not accept OP’s interpretation (that I’m getting by hearsay) of Trump’s quote.
Your link will not open for me either. (I get a “thank you for your patience while we verify if you are a subscriber…”). I will find a link to listen to Trump’s comments from the horse’s mouth. Maybe it was a joke or theoretical pondering or whatever context others may charitably ascribe to my Obama quote.
>I don’t remember Obama’s delivery coming across as a joke.
You think Obama went on a comedy show to seriously suggest that he should've organised a stand-in with an earpiece that he would dictate to without anyone knowing?
> As I said, context is important to interpretation. Just as you reject the meaning of my quotation of Obama on a third-term-by-puppet, I do not accept OP’s interpretation (that I’m getting by hearsay) of Trump’s quote.
Trump is also referring to an election where he seriously and repeatedly questioned the results and outcome of. Where he actively tried to prevent leaving office via lawfare. Obama at no point questioned the 2016 results, and left office normally.
Obama wasn’t on a comedy show when he said it. It was a traditional media interview taped in a professional setting with somber lighting meant to portray the seriousness of the exchange.
Look, I’m not going to argue about something about which I don’t even know if I disagree. Trump routinely says some foolish things. He is also routinely misquoted or misinterpreted by the left leaning media for political purposes.
My gripe is with OP for giving us his impression of the Trump quote and trying to suggest his take is credible by sourcing it to a media hyperlink behind a paywall.
>Obama wasn’t on a comedy show when he said it. It was a traditional media interview taped in a professional setting with somber lighting meant to portray the seriousness of the exchange.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCfpxx0NH9I
What the hell are you on about?
>My gripe is with OP for giving us his impression of the Trump quote and trying to suggest his take is credible by sourcing it to a media hyperlink behind a paywall.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/03/trump-election-pennsylvania-rally
Not paywalled. And video.
I don’t know why you’re now cussing at me. As always, I communicated respectfully with you. The Obama video scene matches what I remembered and recounted. Thanks for the Trump speech video. It’s more than OP provided. I’ll watch it and make my own judgment of what Trump meant as you have done with the Obama example.
shareI have no idea how you watch that clip and assume Obama was being even slightly serious.
shareYou’re morphing to a different phrase from the word “joke” that you wanted me to accept in your original impression of the Obama answer. I said that he was speaking theoretically. His answer was not delivered as a joke. You disagree with my impressions. I disagree with yours.
I can just as easily say that I have no idea how you watch that Trump clip and see his comment as anything more than a tongue-and-cheek boast about how he should apparently have not left office because the border patrol thinks him the only president capable of controlling the border.
He wasn't being serious, and it was clearly a joke.
>I can just as easily say that I have no idea how you watch that Trump clip and see his comment as anything more than a tongue-and-cheek boast about how he should apparently not left office because the border patrol thinks him the only president capable of controlling the border.
Probably because he actually did try to cling onto office at the time.
And years later, Obama parachutes into the White House from behind the scenes for a private meeting with the sitting President to whisper in his ear to abandon reelection; a remarkable event never before occurring in the history of the office which happens to closely mirror the theoretical power he fantasized about in the Colbert interview long before. Which is why those who disagree with you politically do not automatically accept your interpretation (or that of the OP) about the meaning of these quotes from former Presidents. i.e., the only point I was originally making. I sense we’re just going to go round and round on what really is an uncontroversial point in my OP which I’m starting to perceive may be your only goal here
share>And years later, Obama parachutes into the White House from behind the scenes for a private meeting with the sitting President to whisper in his ear to abandon reelection; a remarkable event never before occurring in the history of the office which happens to closely mirror the theoretical power he fantasized about in the Colbert interview long before.
This seems to be some mythical meeting that you've concocted in your head. Obama is a long and old friend of Joe Biden and very likely privately urged him to stand down. But most of the Democrat establishment was telling Joe Biden to stand down in the end, either publicly or privately.
Not sure what this has to do with the claim that Obama, in a November 2020 interview with a comedian genuinely wanted to try a third term by proxy.
> Which is why those who disagree with you politically do not automatically accept your interpretation (or that of the OP) about the meaning of these quotes from former Presidents. i.e., the only point I was originally making. I sense we’re just going to go round and round on what really is an uncontroversial point in my OP which I’m starting to perceive may be your only goal here
The context behind both comments by Trump and Obama, and the characters of each, could not be any more different.
Obama was being serious when he said that, only an imbecile would think he was only kidding especially since he has said it in the past.
He may not be literally using the earpiece method but he has certainly been puppeteering Biden and running as a 3rd term shadow president.
>Obama was being serious when he said that, only an imbecile would think he was only kidding especially since he has said it in the past.
Based on what? He's literally being interviewed by a satirist and he is half-grinning.
>He may not be literally using the earpiece method but he has certainly been puppeteering Biden and running as a 3rd term shadow president.
Provide evidence please.
Obama at no point questioned the 2016 results, and left office normally.
>Why wouldn't he leave normally, he wasn't the nominee, Hillary was and she contested it enough to stage a soft coup using the Russia collusion hoax.
A "soft coup" that would have, at best, resulted in President Pence?
Why did he do nothing to ensure he had a third term in secret like he supposedly seriously called for?
A "soft coup" that would have, at best, resulted in President Pence?
>Yes, and Pence is member of the same swamp as Hillary, Obama and Biden (the UniPartY).
No reason to believe this nonsense about "muh uniparty" you claim really.
Why did he do nothing to ensure he had a third term in secret like he supposedly seriously called for?
>He did, by endorsing Hillary. Now he wants a 4th term by endorsing Scamala.
Hillary isn't Obama. And you speak as if it's some big conspiracy that Democrat politicians endorse Democrats.
Hillary and Obama = same policies, same plans, same agenda and same swamp.
that Democrat politicians endorse Democrats.
>Hillary and Obama = same policies, same plans, same agenda and same swamp.
They're both Democrats. Typically Democrat politicians endorse Democrat politicians for office.
>... And many of the Republicans since they are of the same UniPartY swamp.
What democrats have endorsed republicans?
98% of Republicans are RINOs = Democrats posing as Republicans
shareThat's not what I asked you.
shareAnd you didn’t understand my response.
Democrats don’t need to endorse other Democrats that are already in disguise posing as Republicans which is why it’s the other way around (fake Republicans endorsing Democrats).
>Democrats don’t need to endorse other Democrats that are already in disguise posing as Republicans which is why it’s the other way around (fake Republicans endorsing Democrats).
Democrats don't endorse Republicans in the first place. What the hell are you on about? My point was that Democrats typically endorse Democrats. Most Republican politicians even if they don't like Trump are also endorsing Trump. There's some never-trumpers, but most of them are just not endorsing Trump as opposed to endorsing the Democrats.