All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

[Tero]

I wrote his obituary. Again.
https://twitter.com/P_Lepinkainen/statu ... 5499886593

[Tero]

haha...tricky

[Tero]

fuck the salmon
https://www.npr.org/2019/03/11/70120583 ... more-water

[L'Emmerdeur]

Why lie about something so trivial? The answer is simple--lying and attacking the source that demonstrates the lie is Trump's standard go-to response when he's 'defending himself.' There's no reason to believe that somebody who will lie about something like this will be honest in other contexts.

'Trump lied to RNC donors about "Tim Apple" video'

Republican donors in attendance called it one of Trump's weirdest lies ever. On Friday night, under a tent erected over the pool at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, President Trump claimed the media were spreading "fake news" when they said he called the CEO of Apple "Tim Apple."

Trump told the donors that he actually said "Tim Cook Apple" really fast, and the "Cook" part of the sentence was soft. But all you heard from the "fake news," he said, was "Tim Apple."

[Tero]

[Tero]

If he’s not pulling out of stormy or Paris or Nato, he is cutting:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... posal-cuts

[Seabass]

Trump is now saying that the Democrats hate Jewish people.





Goddammit I fucking hate him.

[Svartalf]

don't hate the liar, close his shithole instead.

[Brian Peacock]

Why lie about something so trivial? The answer is simple--lying and attacking the source that demonstrates the lie is Trump's standard go-to response when he's 'defending himself.' There's no reason to believe that somebody who will lie about something like this will be honest in other contexts.

'Trump lied to RNC donors about "Tim Apple" video'

...

Wikipedia: Confabulation.

Theories of confabulation range in emphasis. Some theories propose that confabulations represent a way for memory-disabled people to maintain their self-identity. Other theories use neurocognitive links to explain the process of confabulation. Still other theories frame confabulation around the more familiar concept of delusion. Other researchers frame confabulation within the fuzzy-trace theory. Finally, some researchers call for theories that rely less on neurocognitive explanations and more on epistemic accounts.

Neuropsychological theories

The most popular theories of confabulation come from the field of neuropsychology or cognitive neuroscience. Research suggests that confabulation is associated with dysfunction of cognitive processes that control the retrieval from long-term memory. Frontal lobe damage often disrupts this process, preventing the retrieval of information and the evaluation of its output. Furthermore, researchers argue that confabulation is a disorder resulting from failed "reality monitoring/source monitoring" (i.e. deciding whether a memory is based on an actual event or whether it is imagined).

Some neuropsychologists suggest that errors in retrieval of information from long-term memory that are made by normal subjects involve different components of control processes than errors made by confabulators. Kraepelin distinguished two subtypes of confabulation, one of which he called simple confabulation, caused partly by errors in the temporal ordering of real events. The other variety he called fantastic confabulation, which was bizarre and patently impossible statements not rooted in true memory. Simple confabulation may result from damage to memory systems in the medial temporal lobe. Fantastic confabulations reveal a dysfunction of the Supervisory System, which is believed to be a function of the frontal cortex.

Self-identity theory

Some argue confabulations have a self-serving, emotional component in those with memory deficits that aids to maintain a coherent self-concept. In other words, people who confabulate are motivated to do so, because they have gaps in their memory that they want to fill in and cover up.

Temporality theory

Support for the temporality account suggests that confabulations occur when an individual is unable to place events properly in time. Thus, an individual might correctly state an action he/she performed, but say he/she did it yesterday, when he/she did it weeks ago. In the Memory, Consciousness, and Temporality Theory, confabulation occurs because of a deficit in temporal consciousness or awareness.

Monitoring theory

Along a similar notion are the theories of reality and source monitoring theories. In these theories, confabulation occurs when individuals incorrectly attribute memories as reality, or incorrectly attribute memories to a certain source. Thus, an individual might claim an imagined event happened in reality, or that a friend told him/her about an event he/she actually heard about on television.

Strategic retrieval account theory

Supporters of the strategic retrieval account suggest that confabulations occur when an individual cannot actively monitor a memory for truthfulness after its retrieval. An individual recalls a memory, but there is some deficit after recall that interferes with the person establishing its falseness.
Executive control theory

Still others propose that all types of false memories, including confabulation, fit into a general memory and executive function model. In 2007, a framework for confabulation was proposed that stated confabulation is the result of two things: Problems with executive control and problems with evaluation. In the executive control deficit, the incorrect memory is retrieved from the brain. In the evaluative deficit, the memory will be accepted as a truth due to an inability to distinguish a belief from an actual memory.

In the context of delusion theories

Recent models of confabulation have attempted to build upon the link between delusion and confabulation. More recently, a monitoring account for delusion, applied to confabulation, proposed both the inclusion of conscious and unconscious processing. The claim was that by encompassing the notion of both processes, spontaneous versus provoked confabulations could be better explained. In other words, there are two ways to confabulate. One is the unconscious, spontaneous way in which a memory goes through no logical, explanatory processing. The other is the conscious, provoked way in which a memory is recalled intentionally by the individual to explain something confusing or unusual.

Fuzzy-trace theory

Fuzzy-trace theory, or FTT, is a concept more commonly applied to the explanation of judgement decisions. According to this theory, memories are encoded generally (gist), as well as specifically (verbatim). Thus, a confabulation could result from recalling the incorrect verbatim memory or from being able to recall the gist portion, but not the verbatim portion, of a memory.

FTT uses a set of five principles to explain false-memory phenomena. Principle 1 suggests that subjects store verbatim information and gist information parallel to one another. Both forms of storage involve the surface content of an experience. Principle 2 shares factors of retrieval of gist and verbatim traces. Principle 3 is based on dual-opponent processes in false memory. Generally, gist retrieval supports false memory, while verbatim retrieval suppresses it. Developmental variability is the topic of Principle 4. As a child develops into an adult, there is obvious improvement in the acquisition, retention, and retrieval of both verbatim and gist memory. However, during late adulthood, there will be a decline in these abilities. Finally, Principle 5 explains that verbatim and gist processing cause vivid remembering. Fuzzy-trace Theory, governed by these 5 principles, has proved useful in explaining false memory and generating new predictions about it.

Epistemic theory

However, not all accounts are so embedded in the neurocognitive aspects of confabulation. Some attribute confabulation to epistemic accounts. In 2009, theories underlying the causation and mechanisms for confabulation were criticized for their focus on neural processes, which are somewhat unclear, as well as their emphasis on the negativity of false remembering. Researchers proposed that an epistemic account of confabulation would be more encompassing of both the advantages and disadvantages of the process.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Why lie about something so trivial? The answer is simple--lying and attacking the source that demonstrates the lie is Trump's standard go-to response when he's 'defending himself.' There's no reason to believe that somebody who will lie about something like this will be honest in other contexts.

'Trump lied to RNC donors about "Tim Apple" video'

...

Wikipedia: Confabulation.

...

Could be, but he's been an incorrigible liar for his whole life, as far as I can tell. He's happily substituted another lie for the one recounted above.

At a recent round table meeting of business executives, & long after formally introducing Tim Cook of Apple, I quickly referred to Tim + Apple as Tim/Apple as an easy way to save time & words. The Fake News was disparagingly all over this, & it became yet another bad Trump story!

Donald J. Trump 7:12 AM - 11 Mar 2019

[L'Emmerdeur]

If he’s not pulling out of stormy or Paris or Nato, he is cutting:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... posal-cuts

Unremittingly disgusting. One person here likes Trump's policies, 'generally speaking,' and another harps about people never talking about things he's done that they agree with. I find his policies repugnant, 'generally speaking,' and have great difficulty coming up with anything he's actually done (as opposed to things he's bullshitted about) that I agree with. Personally, the man's a bloviating, habitually dishonest, militantly ignorant, narcissistic creep. So, shitty policies, shitty person--what's to like?

[Joe]

The one silver lining is that he is incompetent. Of course, he can still be played by the people around him. I wish John Bolton was somewhere far away from Washington.

[Tero]

Citing a recent New Yorker article that described the network’s “propagandistic” coordination with the Trump White House, the Democratic National Committee elected to bar Fox News from hosting its primary debates. What do you think?


“Yikes. This might have a really negative impact on the way Fox News portrays Democrats.”

ZACK FULLER • FRISBEE GOLF CRITIC

“I can’t believe they’d attack the president’s network so blatantly.”

SOFIA RICHMOND • HOT AIR BALLOON PILOT


“Clearly, none of the candidates can handle a serious question about Benghazi.”

MATEO OAKLEY • CARD PUNCHER

Onion

[Tero]

Trump Wants to Cut Medicare By 10%
That isn’t peanuts: it’s about 10 percent of total Medicare spending. (As usual with budgets, this is a ten-year number, not a cut for a single year.) In fact, this is so far from being peanuts that it’s nearly insane. Did Mick Mulvaney put this in without Trump knowing about it? Or is Trump testing the theory that he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and his fans wouldn’t care?

Anyway, this provides a great opportunity for creative attack ads from Democrats. We’ve already used images of pushing granny off a cliff, so we’ll have to come up with something different. Concrete shoes for granny?
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/ ... are-by-10/

[Tero]

Senators working on some kind of figleaf for Trump

The Senate is expected to vote on the measure Thursday, and as many as 15 GOP senators have expressed strong misgivings about Trump stepping on their power of the purse by declaring a national emergency after Congress appropriated only $1.375 billion for border barriers. Even Republican senators who have announced they will support the resolution to block Trump’s national emergency are coming under pressure.

“I am being lobbied on the issue,” said Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), the first Republican to announce her support for the measure, adding that she’s not going to change her mind. “I came out very, very early on this issue because to me it was such a clear-cut constitutional issue.”

Republicans led by Sens. Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Ron Johnson (Wis.) are trying to craft an alternate resolution that would express support for Trump’s desire to build border barriers while discouraging him or future presidents from declaring national emergencies to circumvent Congress.

No proposal, however, has yet emerged to compete with the main disapproval resolution, and some Republicans question the wisdom of voting on a second measure rebuking Trump’s action that could secure even more GOP votes.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/433 ... nate-fight