• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Video shows Trump with mob figure he denied knowing

Because the OP was talking about Trump the Presidential candidate, and comparing his behavior and associations to other Presidential candidates.

I don't care about who Mario Cuomo associated with. I don't believe his name is on the ballot right now.

The OP is making assumptions based on a line of logic. I am testing the bounds of that logic to see if it extends beyond their target. If their logic does NOT extend to Cuomo or anyone else in the picture or video then I can safely assume that the logic, and the conclusion drawn from it, is a product of their personal feelings about Trump rather than objective review of their evidence.
 
Sigh.

Trump has been involved with shady characters his whole career.

There's plenty more to talk about.
 
She's running for president now?

You people are a hoot! I am using your logic and applying it to other people.

Like...

2F2C5B0100000578-3351235-image-a-1_1449596890177.jpg

OMG!! Hillary Clinton is a member of the Gambino Crime Family!!
 
The OP is making assumptions based on a line of logic. I am testing the bounds of that logic to see if it extends beyond their target. If their logic does NOT extend to Cuomo or anyone else in the picture or video then I can safely assume that the logic, and the conclusion drawn from it, is a product of their personal feelings about Trump rather than objective review of their evidence.

The OP didn't mention Mario Cuomo, so why did you? Nobody cares about Cuomo. He isn't running for POTUS. He never ran for POTUS>

But if you want to deflect from the discussion of Trump, then have at it if it makes you feel better about things. But this thread is about Trump, so you'll probably find people talking about him and not Mario Cuomo.
 
Why would that impact the logic? It doesn't. Do you think Mario Cuomo was mobbed up?

Crushing logic jmotivator. The scattering and refusal to engage on the point illuminates the logical answer.

I once sat next to Danny Glover on a flight from New York to Los Angeles. I'm a communist now........
 
Crushing logic jmotivator. The scattering and refusal to engage on the point illuminates the logical answer.

I once sat next to Danny Glover on a flight from New York to Los Angeles. I'm a communist now........

I laugh-snorted out loud at work.
 
The OP didn't mention Mario Cuomo, so why did you? Nobody cares about Cuomo. He isn't running for POTUS. He never ran for POTUS>

But if you want to deflect from the discussion of Trump, then have at it if it makes you feel better about things. But this thread is about Trump, so you'll probably find people talking about him and not Mario Cuomo.

Again, and for the last time, the assertion is that from a picture of Trump in the same frame as a mobster we can deduce he knew the mobster personally and lied about it... if that was a logical conclusion then we would have to ALSO conclude that Mario Cuomo was also mobbed up. I am attacking the underlying logic of the assertion which is most certainly on topic, or it should be given that this is a debate website.
 
Again, and for the last time, the assertion is that from a picture of Trump in the same frame as a mobster we can deduce he knew the mobster personally and lied about it... if that was a logical conclusion then we would have to ALSO conclude that Mario Cuomo was also mobbed up. I am attacking the underlying logic of the assertion which is most certainly on topic, or it should be given that this is a debate website.

He's had financial relationships with a variety of shady characters. His extensive involvement with Russian crony capitalists close to Putin is just the latest.

https://www.amazon.com/Making-Donal...1478177744&sr=1-1&keywords=david+cay+johnston
 
Is anyone surprised? Trump is a real estate developer. He's been associating with the seediest of characters for probably his entire adult life. Just a different kind of seedy than the ones the Clintons have associated with.
The Clintons went to Trump's wedding. Sounds like the exact same kind of seedy to me.
 
JFK had more integrity and class on his little finger than Trump has on his whole orange body. And I'm sure JFK had at least 30 I.Q. points on Trump.

And don't forget JFK actually served in the military in a war zone even though he was from a wealthy family with connections. Trump weaseled his way out of serving.

"Ask not what you country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" is the opposite of what Trump is about. It's all about Trump as far as Trump is concerned.

There's no comparison.

Kennedy was banging women by the dozen, including a suspected spy.

More class huh? Goes to show how little you know about what class.
 
And what exactly was JFK's "record of repeated social and business dealings with mobsters, swindlers, and other crooks"? Link, please. Because that's what the OP was talking about. Actually, you also brought up JFK's family, and nobody mentioned Trump's family IIRC.

Yes, the OP was quite simple for some of us.

Poor attempt at deflection.

Do your own homework and then come back to me when you actually understand the Kennedy family background.
 
Kennedy was banging women by the dozen, including a suspected spy.

More class huh? Goes to show how little you know about what class.

Affairs were common then. Most presidents had them.

JFK served his country, there was never any doubt about his allegiance. Trump's allegiance is to Trump.

No comparison.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/video-shows-trump-with-mob-figure-he-denied-knowing-090025964.html

But this is not the only mob figure Trump has been close to. He even once referred to John Gotti as "My boss".

"No other presidential candidate in American history has anything close to Trump’s record of repeated social and business dealings with mobsters, swindlers, and other crooks."

Just What Were Donald Trump's Ties to the Mob? - POLITICO Magazine

I guess we should just refer to the Donald as "The Teflon Don - Redux".

a5fa0b1d821cc168cef0a4e4303c508f.png


Hillary would never meet with someone whose father is a known heroin kingpin or anything...

This is federal politics. The mob is involved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Poor attempt at deflection.

Do your own homework and then come back to me when you actually understand the Kennedy family background.

The thread is about Donald Trump, and you bring up the Kennedy family and say I'm deflecting. Now that's funny.

I'm sure everyone would enjoy a thread about the Kennedy family, which by the way I do know a thing or two about. But this thread isn't about them.
 
The thread is about Donald Trump, and you bring up the Kennedy family and say I'm deflecting. Now that's funny.

I'm sure everyone would enjoy a thread about the Kennedy family, which by the way I do know a thing or two about. But this thread isn't about them.

Note how they are quietly avoiding my bringing up Trumps career. Or Trump's obvious narcissism.

Trump got one thing right, losers lose.
 
Crushing logic jmotivator. The scattering and refusal to engage on the point illuminates the logical answer.

I once sat next to Danny Glover on a flight from New York to Los Angeles. I'm a communist now........

Why is Mario Cuomo relevant to a discussion about Trump?

It's very strange to watch the Trump devotees do everything in your power to avoid discussing the topic at hand. Hint - it isn't Mario Cuomo. Also, given the fact that he's dead, he's probably not ever going to run for POTUS anyway.

Focus, ocean. Focus on the topic.
 
Note how they are quietly avoiding my bringing up Trumps career. Or Trump's obvious narcissism.

Trump got one thing right, losers lose.

The deflection is typical. It's always "But but but.....look over there! Don't talk about Trump!"

So instead of discussing Trump, they're talking about JFK, his family, Mario Cuomo and Danny Glover. Just another day of interaction around here.
 
The thread is about Donald Trump, and you bring up the Kennedy family and say I'm deflecting. Now that's funny.

I'm sure everyone would enjoy a thread about the Kennedy family, which by the way I do know a thing or two about. But this thread isn't about them.


The thread started off with comparing Trump to others........lmao

I guess we should just refer to the Donald as "The Teflon Don - Redux".


And you sit there acting smug thinking you did something............carry on little man.
 
Again, and for the last time, the assertion is that from a picture of Trump in the same frame as a mobster we can deduce he knew the mobster personally and lied about it... if that was a logical conclusion then we would have to ALSO conclude that Mario Cuomo was also mobbed up. I am attacking the underlying logic of the assertion which is most certainly on topic, or it should be given that this is a debate website.

Mario Cuomo is dead. He has nothing to do with Trump, again and for the last time. You are deflecting from the topic. You're better than this. The others, not so much, but I'm surprised to see you do it.

I think anyone who is honest knows that he associated with mobsters. He's a real estate developer in NYC. And it doesn't even bother me that he did it - it probably won't bother most people. Just as SlyFox said in his first post in here. So you don't have to dishonestly deflect to Mario Cuomo. Just say there's no meat to this story - you wouldn't be the only one to say it - and stop the dishonest posts.

By the way, I'm sure Mario Cuomo associated with mobsters. He was an Italian-American from Queens. Okay, so we've covered that. Now back to Trump.
 
The thread started off with comparing Trump to others........lmao

I guess we should just refer to the Donald as "The Teflon Don - Redux".


And you sit there acting smug thinking you did something............carry on little man.

The pink icon in my avatar means I'm a "little girl". Not a "little man".

Okay, keep deflecting from the topic. I'm out of here. Watching the dishonest mental gymnastics is pretty creepy.
 
The pink icon in my avatar means I'm a "little girl". Not a "little man".

Okay, keep deflecting from the topic. I'm out of here. Watching the dishonest mental gymnastics is pretty creepy.

I see.....

You tolerate comparisons only when it fits your own dim witted views........... got it!
 
I see.....

You tolerate comparisons only when it fits your own dim witted views........... got it!

I'm dim witted because I'm a little girl?

It isn't up to me to "tolerate comparisons". You can compare Joe Kennedy to Trump all day long if you want. But this story, from Yahoo, isn't about Joe Kennedy. It's about Trump.

Look, just like the others, if it helps you to deflect away from the discussion, then have at it.
 
Why is Mario Cuomo relevant to a discussion about Trump?

It's very strange to watch the Trump devotees do everything in your power to avoid discussing the topic at hand. Hint - it isn't Mario Cuomo. Also, given the fact that he's dead, he's probably not ever going to run for POTUS anyway.

Focus, ocean. Focus on the topic.

LOL

I understand it's necessary for some to try and run from the facts.

One part of debate is the application of analogies and equivalents to establish the validity of an argument position.

An accusation has been made regarding Trump, based on his proximity to a mob figure in a video/picture. It is relative to introduce other examples analogous to the primary argument, in order to demonstrate the original theory is flawed.

Obviously such evidentiary examples are difficult for some to deal with, since they simply show how the primary argument is flawed, and the conclusion reached by such evidence extremely weak.

Continuing to insert this argument of yours only demonstrates the examples indeed show the primary theory is flawed since you seem desperate to run from them.
 
LOL

I understand it's necessary for some to try and run from the facts.

One part of debate is the application of analogies and equivalents to establish the validity of an argument position.

An accusation has been made regarding Trump, based on his proximity to a mob figure in a video/picture. It is relative to introduce other examples analogous to the primary argument, in order to demonstrate the original theory is flawed.

Obviously such evidentiary examples are difficult for some to deal with, since they simply show how the primary argument is flawed, and the conclusion reached by such evidence extremely weak.

Continuing to insert this argument of yours only demonstrates the examples indeed show the primary theory is flawed since you seem desperate to run from them.

Okay, well, have a great day and I hope we don't find out about any more mobsters Trump lied about. I think his loss would simply kill a lot of his supporters.

Hopefully you'll get some justice against Mario Cuomo, too.
 
Okay, well, have a great day and I hope we don't find out about any more mobsters Trump lied about. I think his loss would simply kill a lot of his supporters.

Hopefully you'll get some justice against Mario Cuomo, too.

Have a good day :2wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom