Blog

Categorically Untrue Statement

This is, without a doubt, the most uninformed, imbecilic, toady, poorly-written, categorically untrue statement I have ever seen from a president of the United States. A complete disgrace. https://t.co/9eqoWFeroX

— Joe Cirincione (@Cirincione) November 20, 2018

 
 Later the US Senate got closer to the truth. From the Congressional Record:

Trump doesn't trust the press, but believed Mohammad bin Salman. Weird.

From the Senate:
SUPPORTING A DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION IN YEMEN AND CONDEMNING THE MURDER OF JAMAL KHASHOGGI
(Senate – December 13, 2018)
Text available as: TXT, PDFhttps://t.co/0nkvohYEyq pic.twitter.com/Tz7cl006l8

— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) December 16, 2018

Saudi National Security Apparatus Is Bearing the Brunt of the Blame for Killing

It's clear from the Saudi report their national security apparatus is bearing the brunt of the blame for killing #Khashoggi. Remains to be seen whether intel officers are solely responsible or being scapegoated. The evolving narrative makes everything they say hard to believe. pic.twitter.com/H7TMXWcYBf

— Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) October 21, 2018

The Crown Prince Totally Denied Any Knowledge

Trump says the crown prince told him “maybe five different times” and “as recently as a few days ago” that he had nothing to do with the #Kashoggi killing.

Believe women? No.
Believe scientists? No.
Believe the FBI? No.
Believe authoritarians? Of course! https://t.co/tVAg3cw7Jz

— Nick Knudsen 🇺🇸 (@DemWrite) November 19, 2018

 more
 

“I would love if he wasn’t responsible,” Trump said of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. To Trump, MBS is “a strong person, he has very good control.”https://t.co/2tXfPSoOKK

— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) November 20, 2018

 more

Putin & Trump, Helsinki, 2018-07-16

The changes in the transcript.

== VOX ==
PUTIN: […] We have solid reason to believe that some intelligence officers, guided these transactions. So we have an interest of questioning them. That could be a first step. We can extend also it. Options abound. They all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
REPORTER (Jeff Mason from Reuters): President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
PUTIN: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal.
(Source: VOX, by @jennieneufeld)

== White House (as of 2018-07-09, “Issued on: July 16, 2018 […] 5:56 P.M. EEST”) ==
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted) […] We have solid reason to believe that some intelligence officers, guided these transactions. So we have an interest of questioning them. That could be a first step. We can extend also it. Options abound. They all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
Q[uestion:] And did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal.
(Source: White House)

== White House (as of 2018-08-09, but still “Issued on: July 16, 2018 […] 5:56 P.M. EEST”) ==
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted) […] So we have a solid reason to believe that some intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions. So we have an interest of questioning them. That could be a first step, and we can also extend it. Options abound, and they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
Q[uestion:] President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election? And did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal.
(Source: White House)

 
The White House had to correct the official transcript. The error seems to have been caused by technical problems. But as for the issue date, the White House keeps providing wrong information: The final transcript was not issued on July 16th, 2018. The corrected version was issued on August 9th.

No Collusion

The Bellman’s rule: “What I tell you three times is true!”

Kelly Ramsdell Fineman told us …

… that President Theodore Roosevelt and Edith Wharton were huge fans of the Snark. On one visit to the White House, Wharton learned of the following exchange that occurred between the President and the Secretary of the Navy (undoubtedly unaware of Carroll’s poem, or at least unaware that Roosevelt was quoting):

During discussion, Roosevelt said to the secretary of the Navy,

“Mr. Secretary, what I tell you three times is true!”

The Secretary replied stiffly,

“Mr. President, it would never for a moment have occurred to me to impugn your veracity.”

So far for three times. But 16 times is fine too:

Trump sat for 30 minutes at his golf club with the Times. He said “no collusion” 16 times https://t.co/BOwHyvlCUb

— Amy Fiscus (@amyfiscus) December 29, 2017

001    “Just the place for a Snark!” the Bellman cried,
002        As he landed his crew with care;
003    Supporting each man on the top of the tide
004        By a finger entwined in his hair.

005    “Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
006        That alone should encourage the crew.
007    Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
008        What I tell you three times is true.”

329    “’Tis the voice of the Jubjub!” he suddenly cried.
330        (This man, that they used to call “Dunce.”)
331    “As the Bellman would tell you,” he added with pride,
332        “I have uttered that sentiment once.

333    “’Tis the note of the Jubjub! Keep count, I entreat;
334        You will find I have told it you twice.
335    ’Tis the song of the Jubjub! The proof is complete,
336        If only I’ve stated it thrice.”

 

The Bellman’s Rule is stated in Lewis Carroll’s The Hunting of the Snark, line #7 and line #335. I said it in Lua – wrote it in Python, I made that indeed, but I wholly forgot (when finally done), that Haskell is what you need! So, here is an example for how to implement that rule:

#! /usr/bin/haskell
import Data.List
statementList :: [String]
statementList =
  ["No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"I am a stable genius!"
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"I am a stable genius!"
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"I am a stable genius!"
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"1+1=2."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"No collusion."
  ,"Collusion is not a crime."
  ,"Collusion is not a crime."
  ,"Collusion is not a crime."
  ]
atLeastThrice :: [String] -> [String]
atLeastThrice sL =
  [head grp | grp <-
    group $ sort sL, length grp >= 3]

Result (if loaded and executed in GHCi):

*Main> atLeastThrice statementList
["Collusion is not a crime.","I am a stable genius!","No collusion."]

 
meme4trump 1 | meme4rtrump 2

GDPR Cookie Consent with Real Cookie Banner