Hacker News Reader

Comment by antonvs | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

While I disagree with this perception that Trump is a "Russian asset", whatever this means, I agree that his whole goal in the second term is to punish the people who opposed him in the first term. He'll do everything he can to make their lives miserable for the foreseeable future, and he doesn't care if this will destroy the country.

"Russian asset" implies that the Russian government has compromising information on Donald Trump, or otherwise has leverage over him, which enables them to exert some level of control over his actions. People often point to the fact that, though Trump loudly and frequently criticizes our closest military and economic allies, he seems completely incapable of saying a single negative thing about Russia or Putin. As well as Trump's apparent desire to leave NATO (Putin's number 1 wet dream) and allow Russia to take Ukraine (or otherwise end the war in ways beneficial to Russia).

The fact that someone agrees with Russia's position doesn't immediately prove that he's an asset owned by them. All you said could be explained if he thinks that peace with Russia would be much better for the US than NATO expansionism, since it would reduce the tremendous cost of maintaining a war machine, put less money on the pockets of the war industry, and increase the opportunities for someone like him who wants to invest in real estate abroad.

Russia can end the war it started whenever it would like. It could probably get formal recognition of Crimea as part of the deal, at the very least. Instead, Russia continues to choose war.

> The fact that someone agrees with Russia's position doesn't immediately prove that he's an asset owned by them

“Asset” in the officer/agent/asset trio of terms for relations to foreign intel/influence operations does not denote ownership, and refers to people who provide access and information or other support without necessarily having the kind of formal control relationship and commitment that makes an agent. (One analogy I've seen used is with romantic relationships, where an agent is like a committed partner and a asset is in a friend-with-benefits relationship.)

But this is not the meaning assigned in the case of Trump. The conspiracy theory is that he is "owned" in the sense of having some secret that can be exploited by Russia.

There is a belief that he is an agent turned by kopromat, but the view that he is an asset is broader (since assets include agents, people using the “asset” description may hold to the stronger or weaker form, and often, in practice, believe that is af least the weaker form and possibly the stronger.)

In other words, this is all nonsense. Trump is the product of American idiot policies, not someone invented by Russia.

> While I disagree with this perception that Trump is a "Russian asset", whatever this means

If you don't understand what it means, how can you know you disagree with it?

It's an undefined term that changes with whatever conspiracy they want to push. That's why I disagree with it. I don't like Trump, but he's the result of bad decisions made in America, not by some foreign power.

I think the problem here is that there isn't just one way in which Donald Trump is unduly influenced by Russia in ways that are difficult to explain. I can understand being skeptical, but there's several independent actions Trump has taken that are all inexplicably sympathetic to Russian interests.

Just some quick examples:

* Recommending American de-nuclearization while stating that Russia is no longer a threat to America.

* Dismantling cybersecurity programs that are intended to identify and counter Russian hacking efforts.

* Peace negotiations with Ukraine and Russia that require no concessions made by Russia.

All of these actions are being taken despite polling poorly with Americans. You could say that none of these definitively proves that there is Russian leverage over Trump and you would be technically correct. The flip side of that coin is that you also can't explain why these actions are in America's best interest.

You forget that Trump's enemies are all married to this narrative of Trump as Russian asset. So I'm very clear that he will try to destroy as many as these people as possible during his second term. This includes all the people pushing support for Ukraine, which is seen as a Biden project. It has nothing to do with helping Russia and more with his personal preservation in power.

Respectfully, you're chalking a lot of this administration's questionable behavior that consistently benefits Russia up to temporarily aligned goals based on his fragile ego and fear of rightful imprisonment.

I'm not saying that you're wrong, but that is an awful lot of accidental benefit for Russia and precious few others. Far too much for my tastes.

> Trump's enemies

Do you mean political rivals or do you have actual evidence the Democratic party is trying to kill him.

The definition of "enemy" is not limited to "people that are trying to kill you"

You don't have to be murderous to be an enemy. They clearly want to throw him in prison, so isn't that enough for someone in that position to call them enemies?

> several independent actions Trump has taken that are all inexplicably sympathetic to Russian interests

Is it really inexplicable though? Or is it more plausible that you simply don't understand the motives, and probably haven't really tried?

Well, we can't understand the motives, because Trump won't tell us, and even if he did, it's not like we shouldn't be skeptical of whatever he might say.

I do think another plausible explanation is that Trump has dictator envy and idolizes Putin, and so he tries to emulate him and do things that would make him happy.

But it's not clear how far something like that would go. I think it's reasonable to suspect that Putin has something that he can use as leverage over Trump, but that's of course near-impossible to prove at this point.

You obviously understand how these actions benefit the country of which Donald Trump is the President.

Why don't you explain it to the rest of the class?

Incredibly well said. That's also the pattern of conspiracy theorists who compensate for their struggles in life and simply refuse to accept the world they live in.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com