Why the 9 Sentences After Agreeing 100%?

by

Jonathan Karl asked Donald Trump whether he would be willing to testify under oath contradicting James Comey’s claim that Trump asked him to pledge his loyalty.

MY QUESTION IS ABOUT WHAT TRUMP SAID AFTER “AGREEING” TO TESTIFY:

  • What did Trump mean by the 9 sentences of weasel words that followed his agreement to Testify under Oath — 100%?
  • It seems needlessly complicated when, if he meant to agree, he could have stopped talking after “100%.”

WHAT THE MEDIA REPORTED:

Karl: So, [Comey] said those things under oath. Would you be willing
to speak under oath to give your version of events?

Trump: 100%.

TRUMP’S ACTUAL FULL ANSWER:

Trump: 100%. 1

  1. I didn’t say under oath — 2
  2. I hardly know the man,
  3. I’m not going to say I want you to pledge allegiance.
  4. Who would do that?
  5. Who would ask a man to pledge allegiance, under oath? 3
  6. I mean, think of it.
  7. I hardly know the man.
  8. It doesn’t make sense.
  9. No, I didn’t say that, and I didn’t say the other.

Full Transcript

Notice the 9 sentences of *weasel words* that didn’t get reported
because they weren’t a good soundbite.

Trump acts as if he’s answering his own invented question:

  • Did Trump ask for Comey’s loyalty, and
    did he have Comey place his hand on a Bible (pledge allegiance under oath)? 4
  • It doesn’t seem like these weasel words are accidental because
    its not credible that Trump misheard the question that way.

How does this make any sense?

  • Trump wasn’t under oath. He was just answering a reporter’s question; and lying doesn’t seem to be against his principles, so why add the weasel words?
  • Trump has established an expectation of testifying, regardless of weasel words5
  • By employing weasel words, he adding to his risk, because the
    weasel words confirm to a savvy audience that he intended to mislead.
  • So what purpose do the weasel words serve?

My theory: “Donald does Deception as a Sport”

  • It seems to me that Trump wants to be able to tell himself that
    he didn’t lie because what he said was technically not untrue,
    although highly deceptive.
  • Maybe “Donald does Deception for Sport”.
    • Trump wants to tell himself that he “cheated fair and square”.
    • The weasel words are his way of telling himself that he technically gave the press and public a chance, but he outsmarted the losers.

What’s your Theory?

  1. Are these 9 sentences of weasel words just accidental?
    • If Trump really meant to affirm, he could have simply said: “Yes. 100%” and left it there.
    • Or is this just a Trump brain fart?
    • What’s Your Theory?

Suggestion:

  • Next time reporters might try reading Comey’s statements verbatim (without tripping up) to see whether Trump’s tactics change.  My suspicion is that when Trump says “I didn’t say that” he means that you didn’t pin him down with the exact words.

I’ve posted more on my blog:  openpolitics.com

Tim Langeman
Akron, PA
717-723-9898 (cell)
timlangeman@gmail.com

  1. This is a perfect soundbite that Trump knew would get picked up by all the news shows, but the remainder of his answer does not make for a good soundbite, so he knew it would get ignored.↩

  2. Why would Trump say this? It sounds as though he’s deceptively trying to give a soundbite-perfect answer, and then immediately negate it.↩

  3. Why would Trump say this? It sounds like he is implausibly pretending he heard the question wrong: “Did Trump ask Comey to pledge his loyalty, with Comey’s hand on the Bible.”↩

  4. Line #5: “Who would ask a man to pledge allegiance, under oath?”↩

  5. If Scott Adams is right, I don’t expect him to actually testify, just as he hasn’t released the tax returns he previously offered. Likely he will back away from his original remarks, perhaps saying that his lawyers don’t recommend it, or even saying that Mueller’s staff is partisan and out to get him.  He himself recommended that Bill Clinton take the 5th.  But he made it sound as though he wants to testify, which is what he wants people to believe.↩

Do Single People Read the Bible Differently? *

by

In this article, I’m going to attempt to persuade you that no one really interprets the Bible literally.  Rather, we weigh different parts of the Bible against one another, looking for the reading that seems most persuasive.  As part of this process, a person’s background can affect one’s biblical interpretation, making people of different backgrounds better able to see each other’s blind spots.  These claims may seem obvious to some and sacrilegious to others.

I’ll start, by revisiting one of the most commonly read parables in the Bible — the Parable of the “Prodigal Son”.

How Americans Interpret the Parable of the Prodigal Son  Differently

If you were to ask a North American Christian why the Prodigal Son returned, you would get a variety of answers, but one of the more common responses I’ve heard is that the Prodigal Son squandered his money on prostitutes and chose to return to his father once his money ran out.  In fact, the allegation about the prostitutes that we remember is not explicitly part of the story’s original narrative, (Luke 15:13) but rather it is an accusation made by the older son when the younger son returns (Luke 15:30).  It is the older son’s accusation that is stuck in our memories.

How Others Interpret the Parable of the Prodigal Son

By contrast, if you were to ask Christians from another part of the world, particularly a place that has experience with famine, you would find that a greater number of them would mention the word “famine” in their answer. (Luke 15:14)

How Experience Affects How We Read

The story of the Prodigal Son illustrates how our own experience shapes how we read the Bible and what we remember.  North Americans below the age of 80 do not have direct experience with famine and so our memories don’t connect to this part of the story as strongly as do the older son’s allegations of sexual immorality.

For North Americans, “Sexual Immorality” is a more familiar concept than famine; we focus on it more easily; and it imprints itself more strongly in our memories. [Read more…]

The Art of the “Deceptive Answer”

by

How Trump used “Weasel Words” to Trick Us into Thinking He Agreed to Testify Under Oath.

There is so much media attention to President Trump that it amazes me that I haven’t heard anyone else debunk the conventional wisdom that President Trump agreed to testify under oath — “100%.”  This would be true if he had stopped speaking at that point, but in the 9 quick sentences that followed, Trump used a tricky distraction technique to take back his word.

What Trump actually agreed to:

  • Trump may, or may not have asked James Comey for his loyalty, but if he did, Trump didn’t ask Comey to put his hand on the Bible when Comey’s allegiance was requested.

 

Trump’s tricky answer is either a strange accident, or an example of a “master manipulator”1 practicing his craft.  The creator of the Dilbert comic strip, Scott Adams, has been arguing for a long time that Trump’s “persuasion skills” are the best he’s seen.

In the rest of this post, I’ll compare Trump’s skill at the “trick answer” to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s attempts to trick the public, showing you how Trump takes deception to a whole new level.

What is a “Non-Denial Denial”?

The non-denial denial is a statement that is designed to appear to the uninitiated like a legitimate denial of an allegation.  It is used to deceive the public, often by answering a different question than what was asked or implied.

Let’s compare how Bill, Hillary, and Trump execute assertions and denials using various tricks:

Jump to Section on: Bill | Hillary | Trump

1) Bill Clinton: Use a Word with a Private Definition

Sometimes a non-denial denial hinges upon the definition of the word, which the politician has carefully selected to mislead the public.

Watch Bill Clinton slyly slip in the term “sexual relations” into this press event so as to give hope to supporters looking for an excuse to still believe in him.  (The term “sexual relations” was chosen because it was defined to not include oral sex).

This word trick gave those who wanted to believe in Clinton a reason to withhold judgement for a while.  If I were to score this trick on execution, I would give it a 9 out of 10, but note, Bill still got impeached.

2) Hillary Clinton: “Wipe Like with a Cloth”

[Read more…]

  1. Dilbert creator Scott Adams says that “persuasion” is not good or bad in itself.  Persuasion is a tool that can be used for either good or evil. When persuasion becomes “manipulation”, I no longer see that as neutral.↩

Digital Marketing Ideas for Writers

by

I originally wrote this post for Emtiaz Zourob, but others may find it useful.

One of the things writers and other artists often need to do is promote their work, so learning some basic marketing skills can be helpful.

One of the simplest things an artist can do is to purchase the rights to a website address (or domain name).  After this is done, consider signing up for this username on a variety of social networking sites, even if you don’t plan on using the social media site immediately.

  1. Get your own domain name.
    • A domain name is a permanent internet address that you can own the rights to
    • Examples:
      1. openpolitics.com (my domain name)
      2. emtiazzourob.com,  or
      3. emtiazalnahhal.com
    • I found Emtiaz’s site on blogspot:
      1. emtiazalnahhal.blogspot.com
      2. Blogspot is good, but it would be better if the Emtiaz owned her own address, independent of blogspot.com.
    • Having your own domain name is sort of like owning your own home rather than renting.  The owner of a domain name can customize the site, add additional features, and switch to a different hosting provider without having to change the site’s address.
    • You can purchase your own domain name for about $10-15/year.
    • There are many different companies through which you can purchase  a domain.
      1. I use namecheap.com.
      2. I would recommend gandi.net if your site might be controversial because I think gandi will be more likely to stand up for you if others are trying to censor you.
  2. Optional: Switch Your Blog to Your Own Domain Name.
    • After you have purchase your own domain name, you no longer need to rely upon a company like blogspot or wordpress.com for hosting and you have the future flexibility to switch providers.  For example, you can switch from emtiazalnahhal.blogspot.com to emtiazalnahhal.com (or whatever name you choose).
    • I can help you with the hosting and transfer if you like.  Talk to me more if you’re interested in this.  This would likely also mean a switch in software from blogspot to the free version of wordpress.
  3. Register for Twitter.
    1. If you don’t already own your username on twitter (@timlangeman in my case), I would sign up, if for no other reason than to reserve your name.  (It’s free to sign up)
    2. Unlike Facebook, Twitter is public by default.  If you want to get a message out to the public, Twitter can be more effective than Facebook, but Facebook is good for restricting shared material to friends.
  4. Get Business Cards to hand out at readings.
    • On your business card, list the domain name that you purchased in step 1, your twitter username, your email address, and any other info you want, such as phone number
    • Your physical address may change if you move to a different apartment, but your gmail address and domain name can always stay the same.
    • There are many places to get business cards.  I don’t have experience ordering my own cards.
      1. I’ve heard advertisements for vistaprint.com and moo.com but I don’t know how good they are.
  5. Get your own Email Lists
    • You can collect email addresses from people at readings and put a signup form on your website.   As you collect email addresses you can categorize them based on language or interest.  You can send some emails to the whole group and others to a subgroup (like English speakers).
    • The advantage of email lists is that you can target different types of people when you have a book to sell, or an event to publicize, even if those people don’t necessarily follow you on Facebook or Twitter.
    • There are many sites that offer group email functionality.
      1. Constant Contact is a popular site for non-profits
      2. I recommend MailChip if you’re starting with a small list because MailChip is free for lists smaller than 2000 people.