Evaluating Evidence: Trump Dossier Ep. 3 – Let the Smackdown Begin

Smackdown

Posted February 28th, 2017

Scott, Matt, and Glenn begin reading from the Trump Dossier.  You know… Infant Smackdown style.  The text is linked below if you want to read along.  And don’t skip the easter egg at the end of this episode.  Unless you just really really want to.

 

 

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html

Glenn

Matt

Scott

  • David Skidmore

    I cannot wait for the smackdown of this smackdown.

    • There’s a movie called Sons of Provo that’s kind of a cute send-up of Mormon culture. Having grown up in Utah, I got more than one chuckle out of it. As was the rage in those days they had a commentary track on the DVD where they all watched the movie together and critiqued it and explained how they made it, etc., etc. But what really endeared the film makers to me was that they also had a “commentary on the commentary” track, a third audio track on which they explained and critiqued the making of the commentary track.

      Your “smack down of the smack down” made me think of that. Yes they should.

  • Jason Jordan Smith

    I was almost able to stomach the post-dossier-reading circle jerk…that is, until this part: 1:16:45. “So many of his supporters support him because of that neo-fascist nationalism”
    I realize that you don’t mean that all of his supporters are neo-fascists, but you did juxtapose that with Reagan’s BBQ-style nationalism, which really makes it out to look like you believe Trump sympathizers are neo-fascist. As such, I take offense. IMHO, that was an atrocious thing to say. And you guys are wondering where this nationalism is coming from? You have GOT to be kidding me! Well, let me lighten the cognitive load for you. When I see people in the streets of Portland destroying shit, waving black and red flags while wearing bandannas, and blocking traffic…just because they’re pissed that they didn’t win, I feel a little nationalistic. When I can be accused of virtually anything (including non-existent microagressions) because I happen to be a white male (aka, the oppressor) and not have any recourse, I feel a little nationalistic (because that shit shouldn’t happen in America). When people can come this country illegally and get state benefits (the net worth of which can rival a lot of household incomes) yeah, I feel a little nationalistic! When people lose jobs because there’s some new species of owl or fish that the yuppie-liberal treehuggers in La La Land want to protect, then yeah….I’m going to feel a little nationalistic.The aberrant nationalism you speak of didn’t just pop up out of nowhere and in a vacuum. It’s the result of decades of progressive failure, and people…are….pissed! If this wasn’t clear enough, then go ahead and give this so-called “neo-fascist nationalist” a call and I’ll clue you in.

    • Matt

      I see. Your comment here sure proved us . . . wrong?

      • Jason Jordan Smith

        No Matt, it didn’t prove anything. I expressing frustration by being pigeon-holed by loaded language. I’m sure that I’m not going to be the only one interpreting it that way either.

        • Matt

          “So many of his supporters”

          So many. Not all, not a large majority, not most.

          You went a little Vizzinian. You start by saying clearly we don’t mean that, but that clearly we do.

          I’m not sure why you insist on attributing beliefs to us that we don’t hold.

          We aren’t your enemy and we aren’t the other side.

          I understand you’re angry, but you’re anger is misdirected here. (I’d argue your nationalism is misdirected anger as well).

          I stand by what we said. So many of his supporters do support him because of a neo fascist nationalism.

          That isn’t to say everyone of his supporters do.

          Come on man, we. both deconstructed Mormonism we can use those same tools here to at least have a conversation without attributing ill will.

          How about this, I’ll not assume things about you and you’ll not assume things about me. Cool? Let’s both try to abandonr identity politics and othering.

          We can disagree and you can challenge us but please don’t attribute to us something we never said and I’ll do the same for you.

          Now, what did you think about the contents of the dossier so far?

    • Glenn

      So are you saying that your nationalism is fueled by anger? Aren’t the tree-huggers from example #3 and the “losers” picketing in the streets from example #1 also your fellow Americans? Also part of your nation? Able to express themselves in ways that disgust you because of the rights and freedoms provided to them by this nation?

      Maybe “nationalism” isn’t exactly the right word to describe your disgust. But if it is…. yikes.

      And why do you choose to listen to a podcast you consider a circle jerk? That was a pretty stupid thing to say.

      I think you sort of illustrated Scott’s point.

      • Jason Jordan Smith

        Said people are part of our nation, but that doesn’t mean that what they’re doing isn’t destroying our country. And sure, they can express themselves…as long as they don’t break laws, block people from getting home from work, and set things on fire. I think you would agree that those are bad things. Committing crimes are not part of “the rights and freedoms provided them by this nation.”
        And why do you think that I listen to I podcast that I consider to be a circle jerk? I never said that. I specifically mentioned the “post-dossier-reading circle jerk.” Most of the podcast is great. The reading from this episode was fine for me….up until the point I quoted above.
        So if I said “I consider your podcast a circle jerk,” that would indeed be a “stupid” thing to say….it that’s what I said….which I DIDN’T. What’s stupid is you saying that I said that, which means you didn’t really read what I typed, unless, of course, you consider rioting and looting to be “one of the freedoms provided them by this nation.” That seems kinda stupid too.

        • Matt

          Dude, why do you jump to criminal activity based on what Glenn said?

          Why are you so quick to conflate protesters with rioters and looters?

          That would be like conflating neo fascist nationalists with all Trump supporters.

          You’ll certainly agree that a person can support and agree with one while simultaneously condemning the other.

          • Jason Jordan Smith

            Matt,
            Please reread my original post. I’m not conflating the two. Glenn assumed I was talking about protestors when in fact I was talking about rioters to begin with. Based on what he said, I could only surmise that he didn’t read the post carefully. I’m cool with picket signs and shouting. I’m not cool with lawlessness. If I wasn’t clear enough in my original post, I apologize. But I thought I was pretty clear about what I meant.

        • Glenn

          Calling our post-dossier discussion a “circle jerk” is intentionally insulting. If you’re fine being a guy who listens to our stuff and responds by insulting us, so be it. But I’m gonna think that’s stupid.

          • Jason Jordan Smith

            I’m sorry you’re offended by that comment, Glenn. But I’ve seen far worse criticism posted here than what I’ve said.

        • Gabriel von Himmel

          I thought our forces (very very good people) were employed to kill people and break stuff while blasting “heavy metal” on their head sets.
          “Don’t do stupid stuff,” while doing stupid stuff.
          When to strt and when to stp with stupid stuff.

          You decide xircle xgeurrk

    • Ryan Gregson

      “…just because they’re pissed that they didn’t win”
      You don’t get it.

  • Charles

    Thanks, guys. That was educational. Keep up the good work.

  • Gabriel von Himmel

    Embrae the ambiguity through time and eternity.
    We all can vamp while the trumpster gathers his wits to drain the swamp.
    Personally I’m not jealous of his 3rd trophy wife or brand,
    and I “don’t share the fantasy”

  • Amen to Glenn’s intro. You’re not crazy, Glenn. This is how it starts. Read up on the run up to WWII.

    I had to dig out Holiday Road and listen to it again. One of the charms of IoT is being reminded of music that I actually own but have forgotten all about. Go Thronees!

  • LoTfan

    Thanks for the shoutout Glenn 😘

    • LoTfan

      But to clear a few things up:

      1) I wasn’t offended by the political views. It’s possible to not like a Trump but also not want to hear Trump-bashing everywhere I turn.

      2) my comment was probably of a reflection of my inability to move beyond Mormonism as quickly as it seems all of you have.

      3) I don’t speak in a whiny voice with Charlie Brown music in the background (usually)

      4) Glenn, you are my favorite infant. Keep it up.

      • Ryan Gregson

        Okay, but what does LoTfan mean?? 🙂

  • Mugatu

    I found the irony of this “Smackdown” absolutely hilarious. A few guys who were able to see through the bullshit of Mormon apologists who stretch and twist and strain to find any way to corroborate the Book of Mormon turning around and employing exactly the same flawed “reasoning” and using exactly the same fallacious arguments in attempt to corroborate the Trump dossier. My favorites included:

    “Why would Steele/Joseph Smith make this up?” (Obvious answer: Steele/Smith made money by writing the dossier/BOM).

    “Steele/Smith hasn’t denied the dossier/BOM.” (Oh, yeah, the old “if he hasn’t denied it, it must be true” argument.)

    “If Steele/Smith just made all this shit up, he sure left out a lot of stuff and could have done a much better job making it up, which only goes to show that he didn’t make up the dossier/BOM.” (SMF.)

    “Source A/an angel from heaven told me such-and-such.” (Oh, right, an anonymous source that nobody can contact to verify your claim; totally trustworthy “evidence.”)

    “Source B/another angel from heaven confirmed what Source A/an angel from heaven told me.” (Holy shit, that’s two anonymous sources confirming the same thing! It must be true!!)

    “We know that Trump visited Russia just like the dossier says/that Columbus discovered America just like the BOM says.” (Holy shit! We have external corroborating evidence of what the dossier/BOM says!)

    “Russia doesn’t want us to believe the dossier/Satan doesn’t want us to believe the BOM.” (Don’t you see?! Russia/Satan doesn’t want us to believe the dossier/BOM! Don’t do what Russia/Satan wants you to do! Am I the only one who sees this?!! I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!!!)

    Thanks for the laughs, guys. This was the most brilliant unintentional comedy you’ve ever produced.

    • Jason Jordan Smith

      I was thinking this too, but got triggered and distracted by Scott’s neo-fascism comment. I like the way you illustrated your point. Definitely some parallels.

    • David Skidmore

      Do you have a podcast, Mugatu??? Asking for a friend.

  • Mugatu

    Oh my God, I just got the point of this whole series, and it’s fucking brilliant.

    WARNING: MAJOR SPOILERS

    Matt and Scott are doing the ultimate Andy Dick-style performance art. They’re using their anaysis of the Trump dossier to demonstrate to those arrogant exmos who think their critical thinking skills are vastly superior to TBMs’ that exmos are still just as capable of making the same cognitive errors, engaging in the same fallacious reasoning, and falling for the same bullshit arguments that Mormon apologists make in attempt to corroborate the BOM, Book of Abraham, etc.

    Because their performance art demands that they stay in character, they will deny they are engaging in performance art as I’ve explained here. So when they deny it, you’ll have corroboraration that what I’m saying is true.

    Channeling Vezzinni: Or, because they know I have warned you to expect them to stay in character and deny they are engaging in performance art to demostrate exmos’ susceptibility to fall for fallacious reasoning, they may attempt to throw the audience off the scent by not responding to my comment at all, pretending to ignore me. Which of course will only corroborate the truth of what I’m saying.

    By the way, sources A-Z told me all of this is true and can back me up on every single word I’m saying. And the angels Moroni and Nephi can too. Too bad I can’t tell you how to reach them to verify what I’m saying because, you know, it’s a classified top secret.

  • Darin

    I finally got around to listening to this episode that’s sat on my playlist for months. I went with episode 3 only, missing the allegedly heated debate of the previous Trump Dossier episodes. I don’t think I’ll listen to those anyway since so much time has passed…Which brings me to…Oh what has transpired since these episodes were posted two long months ago! That was before all the Manafort stuff, the Devin Nunez debacle, the Susan Rice sham, the reports of increasing corroboration of the dossier and even the latest, yesterday (today is 4/20) with the info in the dossier being used in the FISA court to obtain wire taps on Page (which leads us back to Flynn, Nunez, Rice, etc.).

    As the reported evidence is coming out, it is increasingly coming into focus that Scott’s assertion that there is wrongdoing afoot is correct. Based on the conversation, it seems that Jake was skeptical of this without verified sources. Does that remain true with all of the information coming out on this story through the past few months? (same question to the Trump die-hards who commented so angrily)

    And to the infants: I welcome discussions about topics other than Mormonism. I know it’s your bread and butter, but Mormonism is boring; especially four years out of it. It was sexy for a while with all the dirty little secrets, but it’s nice to hear my little podcast community discussing topics other than why we’re angry that the church lied about X topic. Good work, folks.