The Trump Card...

[muttly]

How does that work? Politicians say much more incendiary things which could be construed to incite people but they think that is fine, but Trump says to be peaceful and patriotic and that is considered over the line.
#Theyshouldgetamirror

 

[RLENT]

How does that work? Politicians say much more incendiary things which could be construed to incite people but they think that is fine, but Trump says to be peaceful and patriotic and that is considered over the line.

That isn't what is, or was, considered to be "over the line" ...

See:

#willfulmisdirection

That's the sort of thing, that gets folks to not be taken seriously.

 

[Turtle]

Say ... aren't these Donnie's Boys ... the very same ones he told to "stand back and stand by" ?

Do you remember when Chris Wallace asked if Trump would tell the Proud Boys to stand down?

Wallace: "Are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we've seen in Portland?"
Trump: "Sure. I'm willing to do that."

Considering "stand back," stand by," and "stand down," all are synonyms for "withdraw from a situation and take no action," when Trump later in the conversation said, "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by," he was doing precisely what Wallace asked him to do. So it's not like Trump was out of the blue giving Proud Boys their marching orders. Sheesh.

(From the Austin American Statesman)

 

[RLENT]

Do you remember when Chris Wallace asked if Trump would tell the Proud Boys to stand down?

Wallace: "Are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we've seen in Portland?"
Trump: "Sure. I'm willing to do that."

Considering "stand back," stand by," and "stand down," all are synonyms for "withdraw from a situation and take no action,"

Here's another definition for stand by:

To wait in expectation of some event; to make ready.

when Trump later in the conversation said, "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by," he was doing precisely what Wallace asked him to do. So it's not like Trump was out of the blue giving Proud Boys their marching orders. Sheesh.

Not at that exact point anyways.

 

[muttly]

Here's another definition for stand by:





Not at that exact point anyways.

And some want to be taken seriously. So "stand by" meant to stand by and pounce when necessary instead of stand by and DON'T DO ANYTHING?
Anyone honest and intelligent enough knows he meant the latter.

 

[Turtle]

Here's another definition for stand by:

I can find several alternate definitions for all three terms, too, but linguistically they all have a common semantic synonym.
But the point is, Trump said what he said, after being directly prompted by Chris Wallace.

 

[muttly]

That isn't what is, or was, considered to be "over the line" ...

See:

#willfulmisdirection

That's the sort of thing, that gets folks to not be taken seriously.

People specifically said his speech incited. But there isn't anything in the text of his speech that told people to be violent at the capitol.

 

[RLENT]

People specifically said his speech incited. But there isn't anything in the text of his speech that told people to be violent at the capitol.

That's a nice opinion.

But others see it differently.

 

[RLENT]

I can find several alternate definitions for all three terms, too, but linguistically they all have a common semantic synonym.
But the point is, Trump said what he said, after being directly prompted by Chris Wallace.

Exactly.

He said what he said ... and he didn't say what Chris Wallace prompted him to say.

On the matter of synonyms:

English, with its long history of absorbing terminology from a wealth of other tongues, is a language particularly rich in synonyms —words so close in meaning that in many contexts they are interchangeable, like the nouns tongue and language in the first part of this sentence. Just about every popular dictionary defines synonym as a term having “the same or nearly the same” meaning as another, but there is an important difference between “the same” and “nearly the same.”

Noun synonyms sometimes mean exactly the same thing. A Dalmatian is a coach dog —same dog. A bureauis a chest of drawers. And if you ask for a soda on the east coast of the U.S., you’ll get the same drink that asking for a pop will get you farther west. The object referred to remains constant. But forest and wood,though often interchangeable, have different shades of meaning: a forest tends to be larger and denser than a wood. And when we move from nouns to other parts of speech, we almost always find subtle but important differences among synonyms: although the meanings overlap, they differ in emphasis and connotation. A sunset might be described equally well as beautiful or resplendent, but a beautiful baby would not usually be described as resplendent, which implies an especially dazzling appearance. The verbs make and constructmean roughly the same thing, but one is more likely to make a cake but construct a building, which is a more complex undertaking.

Additionally, I would refer you to the Congressional testimony of his long-time lawyer, Michael Cohen (my paraphrase):

Mr. Trump is quite capable of conveying what he desires ... without having to ask for it explicitly.

One need look no further than his recorded call with GA election officials for a rather striking example of that.

 

[RLENT]

People specifically said his speech incited. But there isn't anything in the text of his speech that told people to be violent at the capitol.

There's some very telling audio/video of what he was saying ... and what the crowd was getting from that.

The video was shot from in the crowd itself ...

I expect you might see/hear it at the trial.

Let me know if you want me to post a link to it ...

 

[Turtle]

Exactly.

He said what he said ... and he didn't say what Chris Wallace prompted him to say.

Well, Trump didn't say it on his own out of the blue. Someone or something prompted him to say it.

He didn't repeat Wallace's words verbatim, but Wallace wanted Trump to tell the Proud Boys to not add to the violence. And that's what Trump did.

On the matter of synonyms:

Good grief. Yes, all synonyms each can have their own distinct and different meanings, and as you quoted, they can often overlap. It depends on emphasis, connotation, and context. For example, "destination" and "last stop" mean the same thing, but depending on connotation or context they can have subtle shades of different meanings. Connotation, of course, means something implied or invoked (a feeling or idea) from a word or phrase in addition to its literal meaning. Both the context and connotation of the phrases Wallace spoke and that Trump spoke in response are linguistically the same (do not add to the violence). "Hold up" or even "hold, please" could have been said with the same context and connotation and would also mean the same as what was said.

This forum really isn't the proper place for a comprehensive course in linguistics, including the study of morphology, phonetics, syntax, and semantics, much less delving into the various branches of linguistics such as sociolinguistics, dialectology, psycholinguistics, computational linguistics, historical-comparative linguistics, and applied linguistics. But I'm positive if presented in context with the same connotation, any linguistics professor will say those phrases uttered by Wallace and Trump are linguistically synonymous.

Say ... aren't these Donnie's Boys ... the very same ones he told to "stand back and stand by" ?

when Trump later in the conversation said, "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by," he was doing precisely what Wallace asked him to do. So it's not like Trump was out of the blue giving Proud Boys their marching orders. Sheesh.

Not at that exact point anyways.

At what exact point did Trump give the Proud Boys their marching orders, then? I completely missed that one.

Additionally, I would refer you to the Congressional testimony of his long-time lawyer, Michael Cohen (my paraphrase):

Mr. Trump is quite capable of conveying what he desires ... without having to ask for it explicitly.

Why would you refer anyone to the testimony of someone who is not credible? It's not very persuasive.

One need look no further than his recorded call with GA election officials for a rather striking example of that.

One should look further than the edited and truncated audio for such an example, and instead listen to the entire unedited audio.

 

[skyraider]

 

[RLENT]

Well, Trump didn't say it on his own out of the blue. Someone or something prompted him to say it.

Indeed.

Yet another missed opportunity and failure of leadership.

He didn't repeat Wallace's words verbatim, but Wallace wanted Trump to tell the Proud Boys to not add to the violence. And that's what Trump did.

Not exactly.

Actually, if one reads the linked article at the Austin American Statesman (that was so graciously provided previously) one will see that Wallace mentions nothing about the Proud Boys specifically - that was actually Biden:

Here’s how the exchange, which saw Wallace and Trump talk over each other and Biden interject a few times, went down on stage:
Wallace: "Are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we've seen in Portland?"
Trump: "Sure. I'm willing to do that."
Biden: "Do it."
Wallace: "Go ahead, sir."
Trump: "But I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing."
Wallace: "What are you saying?"
Trump: "I'm willing to do anything. I want to see peace."
Wallace: "Then do it, sir."
Biden: "Say it. Do it. Say it."
Trump: "You want to call them, what do you want to call them? Give me a name. Give me a name. Go ahead. Who do you want me to condemn? Who?"
Wallace: "White supremacists and right-wing militias."
Biden: "White supremacists. Proud Boys. Proud Boys."
Trump: "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I'll tell you what. I’ll tell you what. Somebody has got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem, this is a left wing. This is a left-wing problem."

Wallace's request was more broad and much less specific.

Trump got distracted and baited into addressing a particular group named by Biden ... and still failed to deliver the unequivocal condemnation and call for non-violence as requested by Wallace.

Trump's response is commonly known as "talking out of both sides of your mouth" ...

Good grief.

I had that thought at several points too.

Yes, all synonyms each can have their own distinct and different meanings, and as you quoted, they can often overlap. It depends on emphasis, connotation, and context. For example, "destination" and "last stop" mean the same thing, but depending on connotation or context they can have subtle shades of different meanings. Connotation, of course, means something implied or invoked (a feeling or idea) from a word or phrase in addition to its literal meaning. Both the context and connotation of the phrases Wallace spoke and that Trump spoke in response are linguistically the same (do not add to the violence). "Hold up" or even "hold, please" could have been said with the same context and connotation and would also mean the same as what was said.

This forum really isn't the proper place for a comprehensive course in linguistics, including the study of morphology, phonetics, syntax, and semantics, much less delving into the various branches of linguistics such as sociolinguistics, dialectology, psycholinguistics, computational linguistics, historical-comparative linguistics, and applied linguistics. But I'm positive if presented in context with the same connotation, any linguistics professor will say those phrases uttered by Wallace and Trump are linguistically synonymous.

That's probably a good thing.

At what exact point did Trump give the Proud Boys their marching orders, then? I completely missed that one.

Beyond his generalized incitement throughout his entire presidency ?



Not (publicly) known if there was an exact point.

But there is certainly historical precedence for this sort of thing in relatively recent history.

... "this sort of thing" being where certain words are said, but the conveyed meaning and intent is understood by the recipients to be the opposite of, or at least in contradiction to, what was actually said.

Why would you refer anyone to the testimony of someone who is not credible? It's not very persuasive.

I think the issue of whether Cohen is credible on this particular matter or not is debatable.

One should look further than the edited and truncated audio for such an example, and instead listen to the entire unedited audio.

I'd be happy to listen to the entire unedited audio which contains the crowds' reaction and was recorded from within the crowd. I doubt whether it would make much difference in the conclusion I would draw.

BTW - I suspect the Feds are already doing just that - scraping it for every bit of evidence they can ... and if not, they probably will be in fairly short order.

Edit: The above was said in reference specifically to the crowd audio at the January 6th rally - but parts of it apply equally to the GA election officials call. As far as the GA election official call goes, I have already listened to the entire unedited audio - it's 01:02:07 long and follows at the link:

 

[muttly]

That's a nice opinion.

But others see it differently.

They see it differently purely for partisan reasons.
#graspingatstraws

 

[coalminer]

I have listened to the entire ga call and he said you need to find me 12000 votes. If you believe there was fraud ok that’s one thing but he said repeatedly he won by a landslide, even if every number of fraudulent votes he talked about he would have only won by a few thousand votes, I wouldn’t call that a landslide.

So for the trump fans, what would you consider a landslide?


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[RLENT]

They see it differently purely for partisan reasons.
#graspingatstraws

That's a nice opinion ... but ... nope, not necessarily.

 

[muttly]

I have listened to the entire ga call and he said you need to find me 12000 votes. If you believe there was fraud ok that’s one thing but he said repeatedly he won by a landslide, even if every number of fraudulent votes he talked about he would have only won by a few thousand votes, I wouldn’t call that a landslide.

So for the trump fans, what would you consider a landslide?


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

Check out the link I posted early from Sharyll Atkisson.
There are many issue with what went on in the Ga. Election.

 

[RLENT]

Sharyl Attkisson Cries Media Bias, But Her Shoddy Reporting Speaks For Itself

Always with the victimhood ...

 

[muttly]

Sharyl Attkisson Cries Media Bias, But Her Shoddy Reporting Speaks For Itself

Always with the victimhood ...

#someareafraidoffacts

 

[Turtle]

Media Matters isn't even credible.