They're alternatively hilarious and sad. What an idiot.

But in his first White House call with Mexico’s president, Trump described his vow to charge Mexico as a growing political problem, pressuring the Mexican leader to stop saying publicly that his government would never pay.

“You cannot say that to the press,” Trump said repeatedly, according to a transcript of the Jan. 27 call obtained by The Washington Post. Trump made clear that he realized the funding would have to come from other sources but threatened to cut off contact if Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto continued to make defiant statements.

The funding “will work out in the formula somehow,” Trump said, adding later that “it will come out in the wash, and that is okay.” But “if you are going to say that Mexico is not going to pay for the wall, then I do not want to meet with you guys anymore because I cannot live with that.”

In the conversation with Australia, he called himself the "world's greatest person."

http://nypost.com/2017/08/03/trump-was- ... ralian-pm/

jetero wrote:

In the conversation with Australia, he called himself the "world's greatest person."

Apologies but I must nitpick this, it's taken out of context unfairly. When you read the full sentence it is clear that although clumsily stated ("I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country") he is saying that he is "the greatest advocate of not letting people in the country" (and he probably means "bad" people... ).

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

jetero wrote:

In the conversation with Australia, he called himself the "world's greatest person."

Apologies but I must nitpick this, it's taken out of context unfairly. When you read the full sentence it is clear that although clumsily stated ("I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country") he is saying that he is "the greatest advocate of not letting people in the country" (and he probably means "bad" people... ).

Tugg

What is common there is the superlative of "greatest"...still gets jetero's point across: he's the greatest at inflating his ego with "greatness".

Dementia. Time for the 25th Amendment.

The most shocking thing about the transcripts is incapacity to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with other world leaders.

So are we all just going to gloss over the fact that he basically told the Mexican president to "do what I say or else"? I mean, we do need a translator for what Trump says, which is bad enough, but threatening another world leader for looking out for their country?

mbmbos wrote:

The most shocking thing about the transcripts is incapacity to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with other world leaders.

Never mind a conversation, Trump can't string a single intellectually cogent sentence together!

mbmbos wrote:

Dementia. Time for the 25th Amendment.

The most shocking thing about the transcripts is incapacity to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with other world leaders.

Well he certainly believes his own sh*t, that's for sure.

Evidently a couple of weeks ago he compared Afghanistan to a restaurant renovation and wanted to fire head of Armed Forces in Afghanistan.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... eport.html

Trump told his advisers that the restaurant, Manhattan’s elite ‘21’ Club, had shut its doors for a year and hired an expensive consultant to craft a plan for a renovation. After a year, Trump said, the consultant’s only suggestion was that the restaurant needed a bigger kitchen.

Officials said Trump kept stressing the idea that lousy advice cost the owner a year of lost business and that talking to the restaurant’s waiters instead might have yielded a better result. He also said the tendency is to assume if someone isn’t a three-star general he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and that in his own experience in business talking to low-ranking workers has gotten him better outcomes.

The ‘21’ Club, which has been one of Trump’s favorite New York spots, closed for two months in 1987 while it underwent a full renovation and reopened to great fanfare.

OMG... I just thought about what the conversations with Putin must have been like. Can you imagine how impressed Putin must have been?

I'm sorry for those that desperately want to support Trump because "Republican" and "conservative agenda" but he is and always was a bad choice for President. The Republican primary process demonstrated that very clearly. No self-respecting Republican (and others) can really have fully supported him or still fully support him. Politics is a skill, as much as some want to bash it and impugn it, and it is a very important and not easy skill.

The hilarious but sad thing I have seen recently is some here desperately trying to blame Trump on anybody but the "Republican's or conservatives" who voted for him... saying something like "you created him, you are the reason he is president" (Yes I realize a lot of disaffected Dems and those that disliked Clinton did too)

Tugg

seb146 wrote:

So are we all just going to gloss over the fact that he basically told the Mexican president to "do what I say or else"? I mean, we do need a translator for what Trump says, which is bad enough, but threatening another world leader for looking out for their country?

And that is the reason why he is becoming more and more isolated and thus more irrelevant in the international stage. You can't just threaten another state. Diplomacy isn't the same as getting a project off the ground. Mr. Trump is learning that the hard way.

Leaking isn't over in the Trump administration.

Tugger wrote:

jetero wrote:

In the conversation with Australia, he called himself the "world's greatest person."

Apologies but I must nitpick this, it's taken out of context unfairly. When you read the full sentence it is clear that although clumsily stated ("I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country") he is saying that he is "the greatest advocate of not letting people in the country" (and he probably means "bad" people... ).

Thanks for speaking our for at least a bit of reason. In our dislike of the man we (and the purveyors of "news") are prone to twisting every quirk of speech in order to present a story in the most negative way possible.

I knew the Washington Post was doing it, and not just in opinion pieces. But I didn't know, until just recently, how bad the situation was generally among online "news" sources and blogs. Straight reporting of Trump-related political news is difficult to find. Mr. Trump's complaints about "fake news" are not totally unwarranted.

Once a feeding frenzy starts it is difficult to stop until the food runs out.

I think Trump should not say anything in WH. Go to nearest Starbucks to conduct important meetings or attend calls.

BobPatterson wrote:

Tugger wrote:

jetero wrote:

In the conversation with Australia, he called himself the "world's greatest person."

Apologies but I must nitpick this, it's taken out of context unfairly. When you read the full sentence it is clear that although clumsily stated ("I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country") he is saying that he is "the greatest advocate of not letting people in the country" (and he probably means "bad" people... ).

Thanks for speaking our for at least a bit of reason. In our dislike of the man we (and the purveyors of "news") are prone to twisting every quirk of speech in order to present a story in the most negative way possible.

I knew the Washington Post was doing it, and not just in opinion pieces. But I didn't know, until just recently, how bad the situation was generally among online "news" sources and blogs. Straight reporting of Trump-related political news is difficult to find. Mr. Trump's complaints about "fake news" are not totally unwarranted.

Once a feeding frenzy starts it is difficult to stop until the food runs out.

Well in fairness I read the transcript and didn't come to the same conclusion as Tugger (but will acknowledge there's a good chance he's right). But, at the end of the day, who knows with this guy? Is there a way to read those transcripts objectively and not be appalled (between laughs, mind you)? But sure if you don't want to highlight the "world's greatest person," that's fine. It sure doesn't make a dent in my opinion as to whether he's suited to lead the country.

jetero wrote:

Well in fairness I read the transcript and didn't come to the same conclusion as Tugger (but will acknowledge there's a good chance he's right). But, at the end of the day, who knows with this guy? Is there a way to read those transcripts objectively and not be appalled (between laughs, mind you)? But sure if you don't want to highlight the "world's greatest person," that's fine. It sure doesn't make a dent in my opinion as to whether he's suited to lead the country.

I have said a number of times that Mr. Trump is the worst President we have ever had and that I hope he will be removed from the White House as soon as possible.

What I would like to know (haven't seen mention of it) is whether the document/transcript received by the Washington Post bore any notation about the contents being classified.

BobPatterson wrote:

Tugger wrote:

jetero wrote:

In the conversation with Australia, he called himself the "world's greatest person."

Apologies but I must nitpick this, it's taken out of context unfairly. When you read the full sentence it is clear that although clumsily stated ("I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country") he is saying that he is "the greatest advocate of not letting people in the country" (and he probably means "bad" people... ).

Thanks for speaking our for at least a bit of reason. In our dislike of the man we (and the purveyors of "news") are prone to twisting every quirk of speech in order to present a story in the most negative way possible.

That's not it at all. You have totally missed the point again, Bob. Both Bush's were plain speaking presidents. They used small words when they could. But, they also understood diplomacy. They both had speaking quirks, but everyone understood and were okay with the general message.

Tugger wrote:

OMG... I just thought about what the conversations with Putin must have been like. Can you imagine how impressed Putin must have been?

They were probably pretty one-sided - Putin talking, and Trump saying "Yes, sir!"

BobPatterson wrote:

What I would like to know (haven't seen mention of it) is whether the document/transcript received by the Washington Post bore any notation about the contents being classified.

No idea.

There is a 'kind of classified' category called "For Official Use Only".

If the transcript was classified as 'Confidential' technically the contents could not be disclosed/ discussed with political supporters.

It is normal in the US to have many Confidential documents which have nothing to do with National Security, but are marked as so because they are embarrassing to the government.

It is also normal for many of those documents to be leaked.

Leakers almost always are members of the party in power who either have personal disagreements or policy disagreements with the person whom the documents are about.

Personally I think these probably came from Spicer or Preibus. Maybe even Scaramucci. All would have been ina position to see/ have them.

By now any Obama holdovers are gone from the offices which might have seen the transcripts.

The release serves no purpose except to embarrass Trump. It has no impact on foreign policy. How can anyone say it hurts relationships with Mexico or Australia.

Trump is in the same position as Nixon was, trying to control the people he hired who can no longer stand to do his dirty work.

rfields5421 wrote:

Trump is in the same position as Nixon was, trying to control the people he hired who can no longer stand to do his dirty work.

Then they should resign with honor rather than to betray with dishonor.

Their are politicians, from Trump down. They believe to the depths of their soul that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

Honor isn't a concept they understand.

(The Democratic Party / Democrat administrations aren't any better.)

rfields5421 wrote:

The release serves no purpose except to embarrass Trump.

This is true and on many levels. The release embarrases Trump because it shows he continues to have zero control over his administration. That there is the sole source of embarrassment to the man himself. But the embarrassment doesn't end there because the content of the calls should also be embarrassing to anyone that voted for him and also to anyone that takes any pride whatsoever in this country, the failure of our democratic process in preventing such a fool from taking office, and ultimately to anyone that understands the value and quality of true leadership. Reading the call transcripts is brutally painful. They show a man who is a buffoon of extraordinary, almost cartoonish incompetence. Trump is a joke and I pray for all of our sakes that he does the right thing and resigns his office before the of the year. He is a clear and present danger to this country and the world. Back at the country club and on his idiotic tv shows he can do little harm to anyone but himself or anyone stupid enough to buy into his bullshit scams. I can't wait to see where Mueller ends up on the money trail.

BobPatterson wrote:

Tugger wrote:

jetero wrote:

In the conversation with Australia, he called himself the "world's greatest person."

Apologies but I must nitpick this, it's taken out of context unfairly. When you read the full sentence it is clear that although clumsily stated ("I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country") he is saying that he is "the greatest advocate of not letting people in the country" (and he probably means "bad" people... ).

Thanks for speaking our for at least a bit of reason. In our dislike of the man we (and the purveyors of "news") are prone to twisting every quirk of speech in order to present a story in the most negative way possible.

I knew the Washington Post was doing it, and not just in opinion pieces. But I didn't know, until just recently, how bad the situation was generally among online "news" sources and blogs. Straight reporting of Trump-related political news is difficult to find. Mr. Trump's complaints about "fake news" are not totally unwarranted.

Once a feeding frenzy starts it is difficult to stop until the food runs out.

Are these transcripts fake then?

The conversation with Turnbull doesn't seem fake, it has his conversation and language style.Who in the Trump administration is leaking these? And what is being done about it.

Do we have any one qualified on the forum to make a diagnosis of mental competency? This man is and Enigmas wrapped in a Paradox. A version of what Winston Churchill said about Russia many years ago.

cpd wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

Tugger wrote:

Apologies but I must nitpick this, it's taken out of context unfairly. When you read the full sentence it is clear that although clumsily stated ("I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country") he is saying that he is "the greatest advocate of not letting people in the country" (and he probably means "bad" people... ).

Thanks for speaking our for at least a bit of reason. In our dislike of the man we (and the purveyors of "news") are prone to twisting every quirk of speech in order to present a story in the most negative way possible.

I knew the Washington Post was doing it, and not just in opinion pieces. But I didn't know, until just recently, how bad the situation was generally among online "news" sources and blogs. Straight reporting of Trump-related political news is difficult to find. Mr. Trump's complaints about "fake news" are not totally unwarranted.

Once a feeding frenzy starts it is difficult to stop until the food runs out.

Are these transcripts fake then?

The conversation with Turnbull doesn't seem fake, it has his conversation and language style.Who in the Trump administration is leaking these? And what is being done about it.

Yeah the leaks are definitely the most concerning part of all this.

cpd wrote:

Are these transcripts fake then?

The conversation with Turnbull doesn't seem fake, it has his conversation and language style.Who in the Trump administration is leaking these? And what is being done about it.

No. I think the transcript is being quoted correctly. It is the spin put on the news story that leans toward fakery.

Mr. Trump no more means literally that "This will kill me" any more than he means literally that he really is "the world’s greatest person".

He is quoted as having said "I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country". By that he means "No one feels more strongly about that than I do".

Mr. Trump is guilty of using extremely clumsy language. Many in the media are guilty of failure to report on the story with fidelity to the truth.

And, yes, it is perhaps not unreasonable to think that Mr. Trump believes that there is no one in the world greater than him.

Different story.

BobPatterson wrote:

cpd wrote:

Are these transcripts fake then?

The conversation with Turnbull doesn't seem fake, it has his conversation and language style.Who in the Trump administration is leaking these? And what is being done about it.

No. I think the transcript is being quoted correctly. It is the spin put on the news story that leans toward fakery.

Mr. Trump no more means literally that "This will kill me" any more than he means literally that he really is "the world’s greatest person".

He is quoted as having said "I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country". By that he means "No one feels more strongly about that than I do".

Mr. Trump is guilty of using extremely clumsy language. Many in the media are guilty of failure to report on the story with fidelity to the truth.

And, yes, it is perhaps not unreasonable to think that Mr. Trump believes that there is no one in the world greater than him.

Different story.

You can't really spin those transcripts, they are there for all to read. And it confirms very clearly the tense mood between the new USA President and our PM. It's very hard to spin that in any direction. And it does confirm that the staff of both leaders at the time of the rumours were indeed trying to do their own spinning (trying to put a positive gloss on this). These transcripts paint it in a different light.

So I wonder, if it's not okay for the media to spin things, then why should the minions of Politicians also be excused for spin?

cpd wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

cpd wrote:

Are these transcripts fake then?

The conversation with Turnbull doesn't seem fake, it has his conversation and language style.Who in the Trump administration is leaking these? And what is being done about it.

No. I think the transcript is being quoted correctly. It is the spin put on the news story that leans toward fakery.

Mr. Trump no more means literally that "This will kill me" any more than he means literally that he really is "the world’s greatest person".

He is quoted as having said "I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country". By that he means "No one feels more strongly about that than I do".

Mr. Trump is guilty of using extremely clumsy language. Many in the media are guilty of failure to report on the story with fidelity to the truth.

And, yes, it is perhaps not unreasonable to think that Mr. Trump believes that there is no one in the world greater than him.

Different story.

You can't really spin those transcripts, they are there for all to read. And it confirms very clearly the tense mood between the new USA President and our PM. It's very hard to spin that in any direction. And it does confirm that the staff of both leaders at the time of the rumours were indeed trying to do their own spinning (trying to put a positive gloss on this). These transcripts paint it in a different light.

So I wonder, if it's not okay for the media to spin things, then why should the minions of Politicians also be excused for spin?

They should not be. I advocate no spin, just reporting of facts.

I'm not naive enough to think that the spin doctors will ever be put out of work.

But the media can and should report when politicos spin or twist the facts. They should not themselves do so.

BobPatterson wrote:

cpd wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

No. I think the transcript is being quoted correctly. It is the spin put on the news story that leans toward fakery.

Mr. Trump no more means literally that "This will kill me" any more than he means literally that he really is "the world’s greatest person".

He is quoted as having said "I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country". By that he means "No one feels more strongly about that than I do".

Mr. Trump is guilty of using extremely clumsy language. Many in the media are guilty of failure to report on the story with fidelity to the truth.

And, yes, it is perhaps not unreasonable to think that Mr. Trump believes that there is no one in the world greater than him.

Different story.

You can't really spin those transcripts, they are there for all to read. And it confirms very clearly the tense mood between the new USA President and our PM. It's very hard to spin that in any direction. And it does confirm that the staff of both leaders at the time of the rumours were indeed trying to do their own spinning (trying to put a positive gloss on this). These transcripts paint it in a different light.

So I wonder, if it's not okay for the media to spin things, then why should the minions of Politicians also be excused for spin?

They should not be. I advocate no spin, just reporting of facts.

I'm not naive enough to think that the spin doctors will ever be put out of work.

But the media can and should report when politicos spin or twist the facts. They should not themselves do so.

What's been twisted? The "world's greatest person" comment? Tugger presented 1 interpretation, which I understand, but to conclusively and unilaterally decide that's what the guy meant and accuse others of "twisting the facts" has the potential of being as guilty as the party you're criticizing. As you said, it's certainly within character for him to think it, not to mention have a brain fart and go in another direction. There are plenty of historical examples.

jetero wrote:

What's been twisted? The "world's greatest person" comment? Tugger presented 1 interpretation, which I understand, but to conclusively and unilaterally decide that's what the guy meant and accuse others of "twisting the facts" has the potential of being as guilty as the party you're criticizing. As you said, it's certainly within character for him to think it, not to mention have a brain fart and go in another direction. There are plenty of historical examples.

I don't understand where you think I accused anyone (in this thread) of twisting the facts. I did say:

"In our dislike of the man we (and the purveyors of "news") are prone to twisting every quirk of speech in order to present a story in the most negative way possible."

By the way, in that sentence I include myself in "we are prone to.....".

BobPatterson wrote:

rfields5421 wrote:

Trump is in the same position as Nixon was, trying to control the people he hired who can no longer stand to do his dirty work.

Then they should resign with honor rather than to betray with dishonor.

Totally agree.

Tugger wrote:

OMG... I just thought about what the conversations with Putin must have been like. Can you imagine how impressed Putin must have been?

Who knows how good his Russian is....

best regards
Thomas

The transcripts also show that Turnbull is nasty. Completely nasty. Will tread on or walk over anyone to get what he wants.

Take his comment about knowing everything about the asylum seekers still locked up. Even Trump was shocked at that point.

BobPatterson wrote:

What I would like to know (haven't seen mention of it) is whether the document/transcript received by the Washington Post bore any notation about the contents being classified.

I checked back over some notes from my past.

The transcripts could not legally be classified documents. Because the conversations were not conducted over secure phone lines and the information is know to foreign government officials.

Yes, the conversations were likely conducted over scrambled encrypted phone lines, but they would not meet the definition of secure communications for classified information because the US had no control over who was listening, recording, translating in Mexico or Australia.

The transcripts could be unclassified appendix's to a classified document which discusses US government policies or possible responses/ actions related to what the US learned in the conversations.

The transcripts are certainly not "Top Secret, Sensitive Compartmented Information" classification as I've seen in two 'smoking gun' Facebook links currently circulating.

scbriml wrote:

mbmbos wrote:

The most shocking thing about the transcripts is incapacity to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with other world leaders.

Never mind a conversation, Trump can't string a single intellectually cogent sentence together!

Well Turnbull (Australia's biggest waffler) cant even put 2 words together let alone a sentence with one of those words being 'um' or 'ah'.

cpd wrote:

The transcripts also show that Turnbull is nasty. Completely nasty. Will tread on or walk over anyone to get what he wants.

Take his comment about knowing everything about the asylum seekers still locked up. Even Trump was shocked at that point.

What do you mean, could you give us a quote from Mr. Turnbull?

Several commentators are suggesting the White House allowed the leaks to happened. WaPo obtained the transcripts, went to the WH and received no pushback from the administration.

Makes you wonder if the transcripts are genuine at all.

Maddow already warned several outlets about publishing things hastily without verifying them.

mbmbos wrote:

Dementia. Time for the 25th Amendment.

The most shocking thing about the transcripts is incapacity to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with other world leaders.

Why is that shocking? I don't expect Trump to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with anyone.

cledaybuck wrote:

Why is that shocking? I don't expect Trump to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with anyone.

There's nothing more annoying to me than someone who postures they are wiser or more jaded than others. If you're not shocked, then goody for you!

I am fully aware of the President's cognitive failings. But to see them in action, when he's off-camera and articulating not in broad strokes as he would do with a large audience but to a fellow leader...well, that's shocking.

Does that add clarity now?

einsteinboricua wrote:

Several commentators are suggesting the White House allowed the leaks to happened. WaPo obtained the transcripts, went to the WH and received no pushback from the administration.

Makes you wonder if the transcripts are genuine at all.

Maddow already warned several outlets about publishing things hastily without verifying them.

WaPo, NYT, Reuters, BBC are all reputable outlets. They have certain standards they meet before a story like this is published.

https://www.poynter.org/2013/new-resear ... on/203728/

Also, that this came out weeks later should tell people that it had to be verified. Maybe it was leaked from the White House. The journalist who received it had to make sure it was accurate. Sometimes, that takes time.

mbmbos wrote:

cledaybuck wrote:

Why is that shocking? I don't expect Trump to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with anyone.

There's nothing more annoying to me than someone who postures they are wiser or more jaded than others. If you're not shocked, then goody for you!

I am fully aware of the President's cognitive failings. But to see them in action, when he's off-camera and articulating not in broad strokes as he would do with a large audience but to a fellow leader...well, that's shocking.

Does that add clarity now?

I don't claim to be wiser or more jaded than others. It's just that we have all watched Trump for long enough now to realize there isn't any more to him than what we see. What you see is what you get. The interviews, press conferences, twitter rants etc. are not some sort of political show. This is who Trump is. I would be shocked if he started acting sophisticated and articulate.

qf789 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

mbmbos wrote:

The most shocking thing about the transcripts is incapacity to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with other world leaders.

Never mind a conversation, Trump can't string a single intellectually cogent sentence together!

Well Turnbull (Australia's biggest waffler) cant even put 2 words together let alone a sentence with one of those words being 'um' or 'ah'.

Bit like Bob Hawke then?

rfields5421 wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

What I would like to know (haven't seen mention of it) is whether the document/transcript received by the Washington Post bore any notation about the contents being classified.

No idea.

There is a 'kind of classified' category called "For Official Use Only".

If the transcript was classified as 'Confidential' technically the contents could not be disclosed/ discussed with political supporters.

It is normal in the US to have many Confidential documents which have nothing to do with National Security, but are marked as so because they are embarrassing to the government.

It is also normal for many of those documents to be leaked.

Leakers almost always are members of the party in power who either have personal disagreements or policy disagreements with the person whom the documents are about.

Personally I think these probably came from Spicer or Preibus. Maybe even Scaramucci. All would have been ina position to see/ have them.

By now any Obama holdovers are gone from the offices which might have seen the transcripts.

The release serves no purpose except to embarrass Trump. It has no impact on foreign policy. How can anyone say it hurts relationships with Mexico or Australia.

Trump is in the same position as Nixon was, trying to control the people he hired who can no longer stand to do his dirty work.

The transcripts could have been leaked by someone associated with someone on the other end of the phone conversation.

Trump is still Da Man! And he is #MAGA!

Only the Libs, Rinos, and Deep State are not content.

Dutchy wrote:

And that is the reason why he is becoming more and more isolated and thus more irrelevant in the international stage. You can't just threaten another state. Diplomacy isn't the same as getting a project off the ground.

Trump is no genius, but I don't think he is alone in this category. One can only guess what sort of garbage Juncker blabbers when he is drunk, Macron openly threatened Poland during his campaign (as if someone with his own country for years in the state of emergency and anarchy in Calais has any moral authority in this regard), we have a senile drunkard at the Prague Castle, so on and so forth.

Dano1977 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Never mind a conversation, Trump can't string a single intellectually cogent sentence together!

Well Turnbull (Australia's biggest waffler) cant even put 2 words together let alone a sentence with one of those words being 'um' or 'ah'.

Bit like Bob Hawke then?

Turnbull is no Bob Hawke

Dutchy wrote:

cpd wrote:

The transcripts also show that Turnbull is nasty. Completely nasty. Will tread on or walk over anyone to get what he wants.

Take his comment about knowing everything about the asylum seekers still locked up. Even Trump was shocked at that point.

What do you mean, could you give us a quote from Mr. Turnbull?

Turnbull said a deal is a deal. He also offered to take the 31 Guantanamo prisoners to get Trump to agree with the deal, this is what the 31 in the transcript refers to.

CPD is right, Turnbull will tread on or walk over anyone to get what he wants

Some examples include - he used other MP's to do his dirty work to take down Abbott, those MP's then got the boot last year, Turnbull to this day has stayed silent, didnt thank them for their service or anything. He has also thrown several ministers under the bus, basically he will get them to sell a policy and then if it didnt wash with public he would dump then in a heap. Malcolm Turnbull only cares about Malcolm Turnbull and he always thinks that he is the smartest person in the room. If I were Trump I would not trust Turnbull and I think the transcript shows that

scbriml wrote:

mbmbos wrote:

The most shocking thing about the transcripts is incapacity to hold a intellectually cogent conversation with other world leaders.

Never mind a conversation, Trump can't string a single intellectually cogent sentence together!

Not without being bragadocious and therefore bigly screwing up any positive PR the White House has left.

qf789 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

cpd wrote:

The transcripts also show that Turnbull is nasty. Completely nasty. Will tread on or walk over anyone to get what he wants.

Take his comment about knowing everything about the asylum seekers still locked up. Even Trump was shocked at that point.

What do you mean, could you give us a quote from Mr. Turnbull?

Turnbull said a deal is a deal. He also offered to take the 31 Guantanamo prisoners to get Trump to agree with the deal, this is what the 31 in the transcript refers to.

CPD is right, Turnbull will tread on or walk over anyone to get what he wants

Some examples include - he used other MP's to do his dirty work to take down Abbott, those MP's then got the boot last year, Turnbull to this day has stayed silent, didnt thank them for their service or anything. He has also thrown several ministers under the bus, basically he will get them to sell a policy and then if it didnt wash with public he would dump then in a heap. Malcolm Turnbull only cares about Malcolm Turnbull and he always thinks that he is the smartest person in the room. If I were Trump I would not trust Turnbull and I think the transcript shows that

Turnbull is a businessman, firstly. Very smooth talking, very sophisticated on the surface - but will put a knife in your back the moment it is appropriate.

He runs rings around Trump. I've spent a lot of years around those kinds of people...

Where you can see it is in Turnbull mentioning very casually that we know everything about the refugees locked up in detention centres for years and years. I thought we were told that they couldn't establish anything about them because they all destroyed their documents/passports/IDs, etc. Seems it is one thing when speaking to the general public, another totally different story when speaking to the President of the USA.

Our President, Enrique Peña Nieto is more incompetent than corrupt. He is corrupt, sure, but his presidency is rather more noticeable for the incompetence, ignorance, lack of character, lack of personality, and chronism he has exhibited since he was elected.

So how do you really know that Trump is an idiot, a narcisist, an ignorant, a liar, a nepotist, and a deranged lunatic?

When for the first time in decades, Trump/POTUS makes someone like Peña Nieto, as I´ve described him, look like a true Statesman and a Patriot.

Good luck, Americans,

jetero wrote:

Yeah the leaks are definitely the most concerning part of all this.

Just a thought maybe the Australian and Mexicans leaked the documents to the Washington Post. What is classified in the US might not be considered classified elsewhere.

BobPatterson wrote:

rfields5421 wrote:

Trump is in the same position as Nixon was, trying to control the people he hired who can no longer stand to do his dirty work.

Then they should resign with honor rather than to betray with dishonor.

Are you saying the people who "betrayed" Nixon did so dishonorably?

LMP737 wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

rfields5421 wrote:

Trump is in the same position as Nixon was, trying to control the people he hired who can no longer stand to do his dirty work.

Then they should resign with honor rather than to betray with dishonor.

Are you saying the people who "betrayed" Nixon did so dishonorably?

Depends on what you consider to be betrayal. Give names and circumstances.

If someone on the White House staff resigns and THEN tells all, that is not betrayal in my book.

Neither is giving evidence under oath an act of betrayal.

qf789 wrote:

Turnbull is no Bob Hawke

I hadn't thought of Bob Hawke for some time. Didn't he study at Oxford in his youth? Certainly a strong mind and a top notch fighter. Would have been interesting to see Trump having to call a PM Hawke and try to give Bob a bunch of crap.