Latest allegations against Trump seems to be false in my opinion.

[Juggy777]

There have been two major allegations against Trump lately, the first one is where he called war veterans as suckers, and second is where he hired a Obama look a like only to make fun of Obama and then to fire him, however both seem to be false in my opinion.

The first allegation is being advocated by the Democrats to effect Trump’s voter base of military families, and I’m surprised that the Democrats are stopping to such low levels to insult the American Soldiers for political gains.

Furthermore the second allegation is being made, because the Author (former attorney) is trying to use Trump’s name to increase his book sales, and this motive proves that even this allegation is false.

Lastly it’s difficult to say how much effect are these two allegations having on Trump’s image, and will these aallegations harm his chances of winning the upcoming elections?.

Sources:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-obama-lookalike-apprentice-youre-fired-michael-cohen-book-b404575.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-americans-who-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-denies-calling-dead-us-soldiers-losers-and-suckers-12063179

https://time.com/5886241/trumps-support-among-military-voters-is-tanking/

[1715546417]

1715546417

[1715546417]

1715546417

[1715546417]

1715546417

[TwitchySeal]

The first allegation is being advocated by the Democrats to effect Trump’s voter base of military families, and I’m surprised that the Democrats are stopping to such low levels to insult the American Soldiers for political gains.

This doesn't make it not true.  If the allegations made trump look good, they'd be 'advocated by the Republicans'.  These ones make him look bad, so they're being 'advocated by the Democrats'.

If a journalist came out and made the same claims about Biden, the same would be true the other way around.

Furthermore the second allegation is being made, because the Author (former attorney) is trying to use Trump’s name to increase his book sales, and this motive proves that even this allegation is false.

This defense has been used for every single book that's been published about Trump that was less than flattering.  And there have been many.  Just because someone is trying to increase their book sales doesn't mean the stuff in the book is fabricated and it certainly isn't proof that it's not true.

Oh, and there's a photo.


If you consider the things that Trump has said on the record about Obama and Veterans, and his history of claiming things are fake news that end up being verified as real, neither allegation is all that much of a stretch.

[Coyster]

@Juggy777, just saying those allegations against Trump is false or fabricated doesn't make them false, the Democrats cannot also just make this thing completely up, from what I know about these political propagandas, it could be overblown and embellished, but if you investigate closely, you'll find out that there's a bit of truth in it and something within that line actually happened. Even if the opposition picks it up and adds more damaging facts to make it worse, it's definitely not always completely false.

In Donald Trumps case these allegations are even more believable, Trump is quite extremely vocal and makes statements/issues orders that are very much questionable, but that being said, I don't think this allegations will change whatever the outcome of the November election will/should be.

[Spendulus]

Normally the Democrats produce a bunch of claims right before the election, and these are usually total fabrications. The idea is to get a bunch of negatives in the media that can't be refuted quickly enough.

Of course, in this case they've been doing it non stop for four years...

[suchmoon]

The first allegation is being advocated by the Democrats to effect Trump’s voter base of military families, and I’m surprised that the Democrats are stopping to such low levels to insult the American Soldiers for political gains.

Trump has attacked a Gold Star family and a Vietnam war vet publicly. It's completely in character for him and at least some of these allegations have been confirmed by media that's not quite in the Democrat camp (e.g. Fox News) so I'd say your argument here is baseless.

I'd be less inclined to believe if someone said that Trump said something empathetic about soldiers or veterans without reading it from a teleprompter. It's who he is and insulting people is what he does. What's more amazing is that his supporters who praise him for being non-PC have suddenly drawn an arbitrary line here. They should embrace it. Make it a campaign slogan.

[feitannnnnnn]

Normally the Democrats produce a bunch of claims right before the election, and these are usually total fabrications. The idea is to get a bunch of negatives in the media that can't be refuted quickly enough.

Of course, in this case they've been doing it non stop for four years...

The fact that the first allegation provide proofs of trump being with someone who resembles his predecessor is something not to be ignored, and in fact needed to be saved. Allegations may only be completely true after it is complete verified, but as of the moment, the evidences shows the legitimacy of the allegations.

For you to believe that it is happening 4 years before shows that you disregard all the negative facts about the president, and just being amazed from what you believe and want to see from him.

[Gyfts]

The Atlantic is a propaganda rag that's as credible as infowars. I'm not sure why people are taking their word for anything. On the same note, I'm not inclined to believe a word from Michael Cohen's book that's being written so he can buy an new summer home after spending months in prison. Regardless, both sources don't offer any evidence. It's usually how these things go. Someone with association with the President disassociates, they get a deal with a publisher, said publisher hires a ghost writer, the author makes millions on erroneous or salacious claims.

I don't think any President or Presidential candidate in recent history has ever cared about troops (excluding John McCain). Not Trump, Hillary, Obama, ect. Politicians are the elite that live their lives on a pedestal. Doing photo ops and "visiting the troops" is about the most bare minimum a President can do and to me that isn't indicative of actually caring.

[suchmoon]

The Atlantic is a propaganda rag that's as credible as infowars. I'm not sure why people are taking their word for anything. On the same note, I'm not inclined to believe a word from Michael Cohen's book that's being written so he can buy an new summer home after spending months in prison. Regardless, both sources don't offer any evidence. It's usually how these things go. Someone with association with the President disassociates, they get a deal with a publisher, said publisher hires a ghost writer, the author makes millions on erroneous or salacious claims.

I don't think any President or Presidential candidate in recent history has ever cared about troops (excluding John McCain). Not Trump, Hillary, Obama, ect. Politicians are the elite that live their lives on a pedestal. Doing photo ops and "visiting the troops" is about the most bare minimum a President can do and to me that isn't indicative of actually caring.

Is this the "he didn't do it but even if he did it's not a big deal" defence? Fine, I'll take it. You're allowed to put this in your yard:

[Gyfts]

The Atlantic is a propaganda rag that's as credible as infowars. I'm not sure why people are taking their word for anything. On the same note, I'm not inclined to believe a word from Michael Cohen's book that's being written so he can buy an new summer home after spending months in prison. Regardless, both sources don't offer any evidence. It's usually how these things go. Someone with association with the President disassociates, they get a deal with a publisher, said publisher hires a ghost writer, the author makes millions on erroneous or salacious claims.

I don't think any President or Presidential candidate in recent history has ever cared about troops (excluding John McCain). Not Trump, Hillary, Obama, ect. Politicians are the elite that live their lives on a pedestal. Doing photo ops and "visiting the troops" is about the most bare minimum a President can do and to me that isn't indicative of actually caring.

Is this the "he didn't do it but even if he did it's not a big deal" defence? Fine, I'll take it. You're allowed to put this in your yard:

image

If evidence surfaces that he did actually call soldiers losers, I think he should apologize. He was a billionaire in his previous life, I'm not going to act like he gives a shit about anyone other than himself before or after these alleged comments.

[TwitchySeal]

If evidence surfaces that he did actually call soldiers losers, I think he should apologize.

Even if it reduces his chances at winning the election?

All he has to do is say it's fake news, regardless of any evidence, and everyone that's been conditioned to dismiss any claims by journalists or political opponents will believe him. That's a lot of people.

[Gyfts]

If evidence surfaces that he did actually call soldiers losers, I think he should apologize.

Even if it reduces his chances at winning the election?

All he has to do is say it's fake news, regardless of any evidence, and everyone that's been conditioned to dismiss any claims by journalists or political opponents will believe him. That's a lot of people.

I'm talking about literal concrete proof. Irrefutable. Kinda like the pussy tapes. I thought him proclaiming himself as a pussy grabber would be the end, but apparently not. If something like this ends up being true, it's probably over.

[TwitchySeal]

If evidence surfaces that he did actually call soldiers losers, I think he should apologize.

Even if it reduces his chances at winning the election?

All he has to do is say it's fake news, regardless of any evidence, and everyone that's been conditioned to dismiss any claims by journalists or political opponents will believe him. That's a lot of people.

I'm talking about literal concrete proof. Irrefutable. Kinda like the pussy tapes. I thought him proclaiming himself as a pussy grabber would be the end, but apparently not. If something like this ends up being true, it's probably over.

"Those tapes are fake news.  The democrats doctored them to turn the military against me because they're planning another illegal coup."

That's all he'd have to say.  Or tweet.  And if it didn't go away quickly, he'd just start repeating himself several times a day until the tapes were thought of as the 'phony tapes' or something.

He's been caught lying with irrefutable proof plenty of times before, it works.

[Salauddin1994]

I also think the latest allegations against Trump may be false the allegation against Trump's campaign was that he had secret contacts with Russia in order to influence voters in the general election. At the time Trump also publicly called on Russia to help find Hillary Clinton's missing emails while denying allegations of collusion with foreign powers to influence the national election, the FBI's investigation found information that Trump campaigners had secret meetings with Russian officials at the Trump Tower. The FBI has been investigating for a long time what was discussed at the meeting and whether it was acceptable in the eyes of the law.

[squatz1]

The Atlantic is a propaganda rag that's as credible as infowars. I'm not sure why people are taking their word for anything. On the same note, I'm not inclined to believe a word from Michael Cohen's book that's being written so he can buy an new summer home after spending months in prison. Regardless, both sources don't offer any evidence. It's usually how these things go. Someone with association with the President disassociates, they get a deal with a publisher, said publisher hires a ghost writer, the author makes millions on erroneous or salacious claims.

I don't think any President or Presidential candidate in recent history has ever cared about troops (excluding John McCain). Not Trump, Hillary, Obama, ect. Politicians are the elite that live their lives on a pedestal. Doing photo ops and "visiting the troops" is about the most bare minimum a President can do and to me that isn't indicative of actually caring.

O LORD. Not the defense that I would've used.

Do I think that President Trump said these things? No.

Is it plausible to think that he did? Yes. Based on his past actions it would be understandable

General John Kelly can end all of this right now and come out and say if Trump said anything about his dead son when they were visiting him at Arlington (pretty sure this was the situation) Not sure if he has a NDA from Trump on a personal level, but if he does not (and even if he does, not sure on enforceability) then he should just say if it was said or not.

If it is true, then Trump should lose to Biden. Publicly making fun of veterans, and dead ones isn't something that is looked at favorably, for obvious reasons.

If it isn't true, well then fuck the fake news for spreading this shit.

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

If evidence surfaces that he did actually call soldiers losers, I think he should apologize.

Even if it reduces his chances at winning the election?

All he has to do is say it's fake news, regardless of any evidence, and everyone that's been conditioned to dismiss any claims by journalists or political opponents will believe him. That's a lot of people.

I'm talking about literal concrete proof. Irrefutable. Kinda like the pussy tapes. I thought him proclaiming himself as a pussy grabber would be the end, but apparently not. If something like this ends up being true, it's probably over.

"Those tapes are fake news.  The democrats doctored them to turn the military against me because they're planning another illegal coup."

That's all he'd have to say.  Or tweet.  And if it didn't go away quickly, he'd just start repeating himself several times a day until the tapes were thought of as the 'phony tapes' or something.

He's been caught lying with irrefutable proof plenty of times before, it works.

you were right !!! but how can a coup be legal?

[franky1]

trump knows many people in the military are abroad so could not vote in person. so by trump trying to get the mail-in/absentee votes declared as void/fraud. he is literally saying he does not care about military votes.

the mail in votes from instate people (disabled) arrive through the post within 2 days. so they got counted although trump half assed tried to get them excluded also.
but trump is really pushing for ones that arrive after 3-14 days after election day.. but these are held up in the mail system due to them coming from other countries. meaning they are military personnel..

so he is directly trying to get laws to get military votes disposed of