What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

"Truth isn't truth" - Is "1984" Trump's Playbook? (1 Viewer)

squistion

squistion

Footballguy
This point was raised by apalmer in The Trump Years thread but I think it deserves its own thread.

This morning on Meet the Press Rudi Giuliani had this exchange with Chuck Todd:
 

Meet the Press‏ @MeetThePress 45m45 minutes ago

.@RudyGiuliani on Trump testifying with Mueller:

"I am not going to be rushed into having him testify so that he gets trapped into perjury... it’s somebody’s version of the truth. Not the truth."

@chucktodd: "Truth is truth"

GIULIANI: "No, it isn’t truth. Truth isn’t truth."
Click to expand...
This is about as Orwellian as it gets and continues a disturbing trend that we have been seeing from Trump and his representatives. Just last month Trump said,
 

"Don’t believe the crap you see from these people — the fake news.

"https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/07/24/trump_dont_believe_the_crap_you_see_from_these_people_on_fake_news.html 
Click to expand...
Do his supporters ever question statements like this, or do they just nod their heads in approval? The now regular use of this type of language is quite disturbing.

What are your thoughts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, any supporters at this point do not question his statements (although they may concede that Rudy is losing it).

 
I think not literally right now, but my feeling is that the destruction of institutional firewalls coupled with replacement of democratic principles with illiberal ones puts us in danger of that happening. 

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I think not literally right now, but my feeling is that the destruction of institutional firewalls coupled with replacement of democratic principles with illiberal ones puts us in danger of that happening. 
Click to expand...
1984 came in the Bush years when we invaded Iraq. Not that it was a bad move, but it was an Orwellian tactic.

 
bueno said:
1984 came in the Bush years when we invaded Iraq. Not that it was a bad move, but it was an Orwellian tactic.
Click to expand...
You could say the same think about 1964 & the Gulf of Tonkin. This is a concept of governance (or lack thereof) across the board. It’s an ideology and philosophically nihilistic.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
You could say the same think about 1964 & the Gupf of Tonkin. This is a concept of governance (or lack thereof) across the board. It’s an ideology and philosophically nihilistic.
Click to expand...
Well I had to take a Gupf on that one, but I see the reasoning for Vietnam a bit differently. True, containing Communism sounds a bit like Orwell, but not quite like: we ere attacked by the Taliban and OBL, so let's take out a different bad guy who happens to be of the same religion. The latter seems much more Orwellian to me.

Of course there is also the words of the wise Obi-Wan: 

“Luke, you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.”

“The truth is often what we make of it; you heard what you wanted to hear, believed what you wanted to believe.”

 
bueno said:
Well I had to take a Gupf on that one, but I see the reasoning for Vietnam a bit differently. True, containing Communism sounds a bit like Orwell, but not quite like: we ere attacked by the Taliban and OBL, so let's take out a different bad guy who happens to be of the same religion. The latter seems much more Orwellian to me.

Of course there is also the words of the wise Obi-Wan: 

“Luke, you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.”

“The truth is often what we make of it; you heard what you wanted to hear, believed what you wanted to believe.”
Click to expand...
I don’t think you see my point about GOT, the government claimed the US Navy was attacked, the facts have shown most likely they were not. It was a bigger and more damaging lie than Iraq. The comp though is that it was ‘a lie’, not a whole concept of ruling by altering truth and perception of reality.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I don’t think you see my point about GOT, the government claimed the US Navy was attacked, the facts have shown most likely they were not. It was a bigger and more damaging lie than Iraq. The comp though is that it was ‘a lie’, not a whole concept of ruling by altering truth and perception of reality.
Click to expand...
There is the reason presented to the public and then there are reasons the politicians don't want to present. Two U.S. Destroyers may or may not have been attacked - but that was the excuse needed to go fight the Communists in Vietnam. You can go back even earlier than that if you want to the explosion aboard the USS Maine and the Spanish American War. That explosion likely was not an act of aggression, but it provided the necessary excuse. Look at the War of 1812. The reason given was the Brits were impressing American sailors, but our actions show our real reason was to try to annex Canada.

I would argue that finding an excuse like these three examples is not Orwellian so much as SOP. Iraq was Orwellian.

 
This feels like trolling - and not serious discussion - and certainly could have been included in any number of existing Trump threads.

Rudy is inartful, but he is not necessarily wrong...

 
Congressman Ted Lieu seems to view this similarly as I do:

Ted Lieu‏ @tedlieu 1h1 hour ago

The statement by Rudy Giuliani that "truth isn't truth" is another step towards authoritarianism. It also reminds us of Nixon's defense that "when the president does it, that means it is not illegal."

Does this make you angry? Scared? If so, vote this Nov & get others to vote.

 
This is interesting, this tweet was posted 8 hours ago, before Giuliani went on MTP. 

Tomi Lahren‏ @TomiLahren 9h9 hours ago

Truth is the new hate speech.

I am wondering if attacking the concept of truth was some sort of preplanned meme or talking point for today:

 
squistion said:
This is interesting, this tweet was posted 8 hours ago, before Giuliani went on MTP. 

Tomi Lahren‏ @TomiLahren 9h9 hours ago

Truth is the new hate speech.

I am wondering if attacking the concept of truth was some sort of preplanned meme or talking point for today:
Click to expand...
The timing is weird, the concept is weirder.

 
bueno said:
There is the reason presented to the public and then there are reasons the politicians don't want to present. Two U.S. Destroyers may or may not have been attacked - but that was the excuse needed to go fight the Communists in Vietnam. You can go back even earlier than that if you want to the explosion aboard the USS Maine and the Spanish American War. That explosion likely was not an act of aggression, but it provided the necessary excuse. Look at the War of 1812. The reason given was the Brits were impressing American sailors, but our actions show our real reason was to try to annex Canada.

I would argue that finding an excuse like these three examples is not Orwellian so much as SOP. Iraq was Orwellian.
Click to expand...
I disagree, Iraq was very much in line with those anecdotes IMO.

Trump telling people to disbelieve what they see & here is Orwellian.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
This point was raised by apalmer in The Trump Years thread but I think it deserves its own thread.

This morning on Meet the Press Rudi Giuliani had this exchange with Chuck Todd:
 

This is about as Orwellian as it gets and continues a disturbing trend that we have been seeing from Trump and his representatives. Just last month Trump said,
 

Do his supporters ever question statements like this, or do they just nod their heads in approval? The now regular use of this type of language is quite disturbing.

What are your thoughts.
Click to expand...
The question and debate we need to be having...is Trump the biggest con man liar to ever have walked the face of the earth and who wouldn't you find more credible than him at this point.

 
lazyike said:
The question and debate we need to be having...is Trump the biggest con man liar to ever have walked the face of the earth and who wouldn't you find more credible than him at this point.
Click to expand...
At least P.T. Barnum didn't become President.

 
bueno said:
WMD in Iraq was very much Orwellian and many people believed it, including me.
Click to expand...
Ok maybe we just see Orwellian differently. When our troops got to the site where we had claimed in our U.N. briefing to have been the locals of mobile launchers IIRC and found no WMD the administration didn’t tell people the news was fake, or that the reports of troops themselves were not to be believed, they just shifted their claims. Technically that’s just lying and being caught at it, but I don’t want to wrestle too much with you on that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Giuliani was specifically talking about not wanting to put Trump on the stand, because he fears a perjury trap. What he can’t say, but we all know, is that Trump lies all the time. 

The argument that Rudy is trying to make is this: there is a big truth out there, and that big truth is that Trump did not collude with the Russians. But that big truth is surrounded by all sorts of little lies and possible obstruction, mainly because Trump wanted this whole story ended quickly and continually blundered in attempting to do so. Rudy can’t say this, so instead he makes absurd comments like “truth isn’t truth.” This is not some Orwellian scheme to destroy our sense of integrity; it’s a bunch of Trump’s officials trying to get around the fact that he lies as easily as he breathes, and just as often. 

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Ok maybe we just see Orwellian differently. When our troops got to the site where we had claimed in our U.N. briefing to have been the locals of mobile launchers IIRC and found no WMD the administration didn’t tell people the news was fake, or that the reports of troops themselves were not to be believed, they just shifted their claims. Technically that’s just lying and being caught at it, but I don’t want to wrestle too much with you on that.
Click to expand...
Remember the scene in 1984 when the enemy changed in the middle of a speech?

 
timschochet said:
Giuliani was specifically talking about not wanting to put Trump on the stand, because he fears a perjury trap. What he can’t say, but we all know, is that Trump lies all the time. 

The argument that Rudy is trying to make is this: there is a big truth out there, and that big truth is that Trump did not collude with the Russians. But that big truth is surrounded by all sorts of little lies and possible obstruction, mainly because Trump wanted this whole story ended quickly and continually blundered in attempting to do so. Rudy can’t say this, so instead he makes absurd comments like “truth isn’t truth.” This is not some Orwellian scheme to destroy our sense of integrity; it’s a bunch of Trump’s officials trying to get around the fact that he lies as easily as he breathes, and just as often. 
Click to expand...
You don't know what a "perjury trap" is, do you?

"A perjury trap is a real thing. The term describes when prosecutors lure a witness into giving false testimony, usually for reasons other than covering up a crime, knowing they can prove the claim was false, and then nail them for perjury. The impeachment of President Clinton was a classic perjury trap."

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Ok maybe we just see Orwellian differently. When our troops got to the site where we had claimed in our U.N. briefing to have been the locals of mobile launchers IIRC and found no WMD the administration didn’t tell people the news was fake, or that the reports of troops themselves were not to be believed, they just shifted their claims. Technically that’s just lying and being caught at it, but I don’t want to wrestle too much with you on that.
Click to expand...
He doesn't get Orwell. The government lying to us or giving us false information about WMD is not Orwellian (governments have lied to their citizens since governments began) 

However, the government telling us that black is white, or is this case truth is not truth, is not lying to us, but rather saying that we can't trust our perceptions of reality - that what we see, hear and read can not be trusted and in some cases the opposite of that is what is the real truth.

In other words, it is a brain bash to avoid using the vulgar term of messing with someone's mind.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Qanon said:
You don't know what a "perjury trap" is, do you?

"A perjury trap is a real thing. The term describes when prosecutors lure a witness into giving false testimony, usually for reasons other than covering up a crime, knowing they can prove the claim was false, and then nail them for perjury. The impeachment of President Clinton was a classic perjury trap."
Click to expand...
:lmao:  Hey conspiracy boy, I’ve forgotten more about Clinton’s impeachment than you’re ever going to learn, OK? Go back to your numerology lessons and fake aerial photographs, and leave the serious discussion to the grownups. 

 
Qanon said:
You don't know what a "perjury trap" is, do you?

"A perjury trap is a real thing. The term describes when prosecutors lure a witness into giving false testimony, usually for reasons other than covering up a crime, knowing they can prove the claim was false, and then nail them for perjury. The impeachment of President Clinton was a classic perjury trap."
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as a perjury trap.

If you tell the truth, you can't commit perjury.

Clinton committed perjury. If he told the truth about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky he would not been charged with anything. However, he tried to parse words and it came back to bite him (so to speak).

 
squistion said:
He doesn't get Orwell. The government lying to us or giving us false information about WMD is not Orwellian (governments have lied to their citizens since governments began) 

However, the government telling us that black is white, or is this case truth is not truth, is not lying to us, but rather saying that we can't trust our perceptions of reality - that what we see, hear and read can not be trusted and in some cases the opposite of that is what is the real truth.

In other words, it is a brain bash to avoid using the vulgar term of messing with someone's mind.
Click to expand...
Changing reasoning mid-speech is right out of Orwell.

 
timschochet said:
Giuliani was specifically talking about not wanting to put Trump on the stand, because he fears a perjury trap. What he can’t say, but we all know, is that Trump lies all the time. 

The argument that Rudy is trying to make is this: there is a big truth out there, and that big truth is that Trump did not collude with the Russians. But that big truth is surrounded by all sorts of little lies and possible obstruction, mainly because Trump wanted this whole story ended quickly and continually blundered in attempting to do so. Rudy can’t say this, so instead he makes absurd comments like “truth isn’t truth.” This is not some Orwellian scheme to destroy our sense of integrity; it’s a bunch of Trump’s officials trying to get around the fact that he lies as easily as he breathes, and just as often. 
Click to expand...
Agree with this.  But the words have meaning and should be chosen more carefully.   But, having said that, I’m sort of with you on the overall narrative angle:   None of these ridiculous statements are useful ammunition in the vote to come in November, or how the public will react to whatever Mueller puts out.  The sides are drawn.  Short of video where trump actually blows putin, nothing else will move the needle on the right.  I’m not sure that would even do it.  

The “Trump” is a despicable human being on every level narrative wont carry the water.  For sure not in the Senate and may just do anough to flip the house.  

The irony is that a R controlled senate with a weak D hold on the house only feeds the trump 2020 campaign.  And I think he knows it.  May even want it.  

 
bueno said:
Changing reasoning mid-speech is right out of Orwell.
Click to expand...
Except that wasn't done in the middle of a speech with WMD. Rolling disclosures or shifting narratives to fit new facts is not changing reasoning mid-speech.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoonation said:
The irony is that a R controlled senate with a weak D hold on the house only feeds the trump 2020 campaign.  
Click to expand...
This is an interesting theory which I haven’t considered. At this point in time I don’t agree with you. But I’ll have to think about it. 

 
timschochet said:
:lmao:  Hey conspiracy boy, I’ve forgotten more about Clinton’s impeachment than you’re ever going to learn, OK? Go back to your numerology lessons and fake aerial photographs, and leave the serious discussion to the grownups. 
Click to expand...
This was quite agressive for you!

 
timschochet said:
This is an interesting theory which I haven’t considered. At this point in time I don’t agree with you. But I’ll have to think about it. 
Click to expand...
He needs chaos to thrive.  He can ramp up the rhetoric big time if he has a true opponent blocking his “promises” to the people.   

Think of the grenades he could launch between nov 18 and 20 if the Dems can run some interference. 

 
squistion said:
Except that wasn't done in the middle of a speech with WMD. Rolling disclosures or shifting narrative to fit new facts is not changing reasoning mid-speech.
Click to expand...
I think you are being too literal with your literature.

 
bueno said:
1984 came in the Bush years when we invaded Iraq. Not that it was a bad move, but it was an Orwellian tactic.
Click to expand...
I agree in a way as we really had a 5 min hate going with OBL.  He fit the description of the guy in the book to a tee also. 

 
timschochet said:
:lmao:  Hey conspiracy boy, I’ve forgotten more about Clinton’s impeachment than you’re ever going to learn, OK? Go back to your numerology lessons and fake aerial photographs, and leave the serious discussion to the grownups. 
Click to expand...
I hope this gets you a timeout.  Bully.  

 
zoonation said:
He needs chaos to thrive.  He can ramp up the rhetoric big time if he has a true opponent blocking his “promises” to the people.   

Think of the grenades he could launch between nov 18 and 20 if the Dems can run some interference. 
Click to expand...
I have a different theory. I think if the Dems win the House Trump will work with them on infrastructure and immigration, much to his supporters chagrin. 

 
timschochet said:
I have a different theory. I think if the Dems win the House Trump will work with them on infrastructure and immigration, much to his supporters chagrin. 
Click to expand...
You’re dreaming.  That is not a path to reelection.   Which is the only thing he cares about.  

 
timschochet said:
I have a different theory. I think if the Dems win the House Trump will work with them on infrastructure and immigration, much to his supporters chagrin. 
Click to expand...
I don't think he cares who wins in November, unless he doesn't get his SC nomination by then. He will do most of his work the same way Obama did - through the executive branch.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HellToupee
Ted Kennedy , the liberal lion, attempted to conspire and collude with the Kremlin to defeat Ronald Reagan
2
Replies
61
Views
2K
rockaction
rockaction
BobbyLayne
The 25 Greatest Films of the 21st Century So Far
2 3 4
Replies
155
Views
6K
El Floppo
El Floppo
(HULK)
Dave Berry's Year in Review
Replies
2
Views
778
Joe Summer
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top