*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 8466
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13400 on: July 29, 2025, 08:41:20 AM »
Where is your evidence that cheating is occurring here? In the video you can see that one of the caddies appears to be looking for something in the tall dead grass as the other caddie drops a new ball into the nearby good green grass area.

Learn moar golf:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules/rules-2019/players-edition/rule-16.html

Recap: When a golf ball lies on an abnormal course condition, such as a cart path, ground under repair, or temporary water, the player is typically allowed to take free relief. This involves dropping the ball within a designated relief area, which is determined by the nearest point of complete relief
And which one of those conditions occurred?  Because from what I see the answer is: none.  At best you can say he hit the water hazard.  But given how the caddy just dropped it in what looked like a sneaky way, it doesn't seem so.  Also, the player must decide which relief to persue when it gets into the water hazard.

Considering that it is permissible to move the golf balls around in some situations, you should probably figure out what occured before claiming that cheating is happening from a 14 second clip.
Yet here you are, claiming a sudden dropped ball before the golfer arrives and determines how to proceed, indicates it could be legitimate?
In all of the scenarios, the golfer, Trump, would need to decide what to do.  Not only that but the ball would be carefully placed, not tossed while walking by a caddie.

So you want me to what occurred?  Fine.
Two men wearing what appears to be caddy uniforms, pull up in a golf cart, walk, then one takes a ball from his pocket and tosses it behind him as he walks.

Moments later, Trump drives up in his golf cart and gets out, walking towards his ball.

None of this is standard golf behavior.


However!

It's a moot point as Trump wasn't playing in a tournament and just for his own fun.  Basically, he's cheating himself because it's just him and it's possible he has a standing rule if 'if it's in a sand trap, just put it on the green's.

Be cause he plays on easy mode.


Now.. why didn't Trump let the secret service stay and eat for free at his course?
« Last Edit: July 29, 2025, 08:43:36 AM by Lord Dave »
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 7017
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13401 on: July 29, 2025, 11:26:44 AM »
"Privilege"



What a strange word to use. He is an odd man.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11136
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13402 on: July 29, 2025, 04:21:46 PM »
Where is your evidence that cheating is occurring here?
lol

The psychology of Trump is interesting, as is the psychology of his cult members who pretend they can't see what's in front of their nose so they can do anything other than find any fault in their cult leader.

There isn't anything which establishes fault in in this case. There are multiple golf rules which allow movement of the golf ball. Maybe you should become more familiar with the rules of golf before you randomly accuse people of cheating.

Here is another rule:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules-hub/topics/out-of-bounds-lost-ball-provisional.html

    If you hit your ball out of bounds or lose it (you have three minutes to search for your ball before it becomes lost), your only option is to go back to the spot of your previous stroke to play under stroke and distance. There are only a few exceptions to this when it is known or virtually certain what happened to your ball.

    There is also an optional Local Rule which provides an alternative to stroke and distance relief when it is in effect. This Local Rule is recommended for casual play and not for competitions involving highly-skilled players. If it is in effect, for two penalty strokes, you can estimate the spot where your ball is lost or went out of bounds and then find the nearest fairway edge that is not nearer the hole than the estimated spot. You can drop a ball in the fairway within two club-lengths of that fairway edge point, or anywhere between there and the estimated spot where your ball is lost or went out of bounds.

    If you think that your ball might be out bounds or that you might not find it, you can play a provisional ball to save time. You must announce that you are playing a provisional ball before doing so. If you are then unable to find your original ball, or you find it out of bounds, your provisional ball is your ball in play under stroke and distance, and you don’t have to take the time to walk all the way back to the spot of your previous stroke.

Again, instead of relying on assumptions and YouTube video comments, you should show that cheating actually occurred.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2025, 04:53:28 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Trump
« Reply #13403 on: July 29, 2025, 04:44:04 PM »
I consider myself privileged to be numbered amongst Tom's "you Guys", but I've seen little in the way of context for the ball-drop, or whether it constitutes a rule break.  Surely there's more relevant critiques of the big inept, arrogant, orange man-baby clown. 

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 7017
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13404 on: July 29, 2025, 05:03:13 PM »
There is also an optional Local Rule which provides an alternative to stroke and distance relief when it is in effect. This Local Rule is recommended for casual play and not for competitions involving highly-skilled players. If it is in effect, for two penalty strokes, you can estimate the spot where your ball is lost or went out of bounds and then find the nearest fairway edge that is not nearer the hole than the estimated spot. You can drop a ball.
You forgot to quote the rule where your caddy may chuck a ball down casually while walking as if he's performing a magic trick and hoping no-one sees him.

 :D

But well done for seeing 5 fingers when you're looking at 4. There's a good cult member, pats head
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 8569
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13405 on: July 29, 2025, 08:43:20 PM »
There isn't anything which establishes fault in in this case. There are multiple golf rules which allow movement of the golf ball. Maybe you should become more familiar with the rules of golf before you randomly accuse people of cheating.
Which of those rules allows the caddy to move the ball before the player gets to it?

Again, instead of relying on assumptions and YouTube video comments, you should show that cheating actually occurred.
How about relying on what's clearly visible in the video.  You have seen the video, haven't you?

Then again, maybe we're all looking at this wrong.  It was the caddy who dropped the ball, not Trump.  That means the caddy cheated, not Trump.  IMPEACH THE CADDY!!!  >o<
« Last Edit: July 29, 2025, 08:45:17 PM by markjo »
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Online honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3716
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13406 on: July 30, 2025, 02:48:31 AM »
In the past, I've supported bringing up relatively minor criticisms of Trump on the grounds that it's not right to ignore faults that we'd bash other politicians for, and that these minor stories add to the problems with having Trump as the president instead of distracting from them. But I no longer think this, probably because of the current state of scandal surrounding Trump, and I honestly think it's ridiculous that anyone is wasting time analyzing this video or discussing whether or not it truly constitutes cheating. Like, yeah, Trump probably does cheat at golf, because he seemingly has every single moral failure that any one person can ever have, but at the end of the day, it's no one's business but Trump's and whomever he plays with whether his game is honest - and let's be real, anyone who chooses to play golf with Trump in this day and age has to know the score by now. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they all have to sign secret contracts where they promise to tell anyone who asks that Trump won easily and is in fact the greatest golfer they've ever played with. More important things are going on. Here's one of them:

https://apnews.com/article/jeffrey-epstein-congress-ghislaine-maxwell-justice-department-3ca45e130deb5f2eee8deff36d99734f

The story of how Trump bravely took a stand against Epstein and his criminal ways two decades ago and that's how they fell out has long been assumed to be true, even though the only supposed witness who could vouch for it being true was Trump himself. I suspect this story was given the benefit of the doubt for so long because it was a lawyer representing Epstein's victims who spread it around rather than Trump himself, even though he had no evidence for it being true beyond, as I said, Trump's own word. I personally never thought that Trump simply washing his hands of the matter by kicking Epstein out of his club (instead of, you know, trying to stop him by going to the police) made him look all that great to begin with, but the point is moot, because now Trump has admitted that wasn't what happened. His feud with Epstein was never about him being a creep or sex trafficker at all. It was just that Epstein supposedly "stole" Virginia Guiffre from him. Not that he raped her. Not that he hurt her. That he "stole" her - from Trump. Trump is always the victim.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 7017
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13407 on: July 30, 2025, 09:14:05 AM »
I honestly think it's ridiculous that anyone is wasting time analyzing this video or discussing whether or not it truly constitutes cheating.
I don't think anyone but Tom is doing that. To all normal people it's clear what happened, and Trump's long and pathetic history of cheating at golf is well documented from many sources. I think that is relevant because it speaks to his character, and I happen to think the character of our leaders is important. But this particular incident, people are just taking the piss because it's obvious what happened and it's funny. Only Tom is trying to turn it in to a debate because he's a troll or a contrarian or so deep in the cult he will twist anything that speaks ill of his "dear leader".

I don't think the Epstein stuff is going away and it's the first thing which even the MAGA cult are split about.
For years they've been going on about how Trump will "drain the swamp" and release the files. The fact he won't speaks volumes.
The revelation from Trump that he fell out with Epstein because Epstein poached one of his staff is a hilarious own goal.
His increasingly desperate attempts to deflect from it only make people focus on it more.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 8466
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13408 on: July 30, 2025, 09:44:33 AM »
In the past, I've supported bringing up relatively minor criticisms of Trump on the grounds that it's not right to ignore faults that we'd bash other politicians for, and that these minor stories add to the problems with having Trump as the president instead of distracting from them. But I no longer think this, probably because of the current state of scandal surrounding Trump, and I honestly think it's ridiculous that anyone is wasting time analyzing this video or discussing whether or not it truly constitutes cheating. Like, yeah, Trump probably does cheat at golf, because he seemingly has every single moral failure that any one person can ever have, but at the end of the day, it's no one's business but Trump's and whomever he plays with whether his game is honest - and let's be real, anyone who chooses to play golf with Trump in this day and age has to know the score by now. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they all have to sign secret contracts where they promise to tell anyone who asks that Trump won easily and is in fact the greatest golfer they've ever played with. More important things are going on. Here's one of them:

https://apnews.com/article/jeffrey-epstein-congress-ghislaine-maxwell-justice-department-3ca45e130deb5f2eee8deff36d99734f

The story of how Trump bravely took a stand against Epstein and his criminal ways two decades ago and that's how they fell out has long been assumed to be true, even though the only supposed witness who could vouch for it being true was Trump himself. I suspect this story was given the benefit of the doubt for so long because it was a lawyer representing Epstein's victims who spread it around rather than Trump himself, even though he had no evidence for it being true beyond, as I said, Trump's own word. I personally never thought that Trump simply washing his hands of the matter by kicking Epstein out of his club (instead of, you know, trying to stop him by going to the police) made him look all that great to begin with, but the point is moot, because now Trump has admitted that wasn't what happened. His feud with Epstein was never about him being a creep or sex trafficker at all. It was just that Epstein supposedly "stole" Virginia Guiffre from him. Not that he raped her. Not that he hurt her. That he "stole" her - from Trump. Trump is always the victim.

This story makes it seem like Trump was a pedo at his own resort and Epstein poached victims from Trump.

The sad part is that no one can help any of these victims.  Last time Epstein had a full investigation, he got a slap on the wrist.  The best plea deal in the history of plea deals.  So good that his GF/Helper is claiming it applies to her.

And now Trump is president again, with full control of the justice Department.  No victim can be protected.  Not in America.


On the other side, Ghislaine Maxwell is currently the most powerful woman on the world.
Anyone she fingers as a pedo?  Gets believed by alot of people.  Doesn't matter if it's true, she could get the population against anyone just by speaking their name.  She's the Abigail Williams of pedophiles.

And I'm damn sure she's going to milk her power.  Trump gives her a good deal?  His name never leaves her lips but Clinton? Biden?  Obama?  Anyone else whose Trump's enemy?  Yep.
On the other hand, if Trump doesn't play ball, she'll name him and his friends.

Ohhf.  To be in her position, holding everyone by the balls.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11136
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13409 on: July 30, 2025, 07:55:46 PM »
The reason there is a focus on a 14 second golf video clip with zero context analysis and sweeping assumptions is that the left is desperate to "get" Trump. They are losing politically in America and worldwide, and this among the little they have left.

A similar phenomena is occurring with the Epstein narrative. In the liberal news articles Trump's name has always been brought up either first or second as a powerful friend of Epstein. The left has been trying to portray Trump as a participant for years, and keep using that old picture of them standing together as their "evidence".

However, the only way to get Trump involved is to create a broad assertion that anyone associated with Epstein is an affiliated pedo client participant and that his scheme was bigger and involved more people. This is why the Democrats are pushing this mass-pedophile-ring theory.

Look up the Juliette Rose Bryant interview, she is a Epstein victim and says the claims are false:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y9ZDZ_ieV8

@17:18

    "like you know with the Epstein story. Look how they've lied to us about the Epstein story and where are all the victims? You know, victims aren't able to speak out. Like they won't interview me, the media. They just won't. So, you know, and that's why, you know, 200 victims claim from the fund, but where are the victims? And people want to blame the victims. They want to say, "Oh, these girls were made to have sex with the government and the politicians." And that's not true because I didn't see. Well, I mean, as far as my story goes, that's not true. I didn't see any girls being got um trafficked to politicians or anything. They've completely lied about it. I was never trafficked to anyone other than Epstein when I was taken there. There's a lot more going on and they're trying to cover it up. They've labeled it as sex trafficking."

Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted for supplying girls to Epstein, not to other people. The dispositions of the sex trafficking victims were released publicly, and surprise, they do not describe a mass-trafficking ring with many Johns. See this link: https://d.newsweek.com/en/file/468909/jeffrey-epstein-documents-full.pdf

In the above link there are at least a dozen girls who say that they were sex trafficked only to Epstein. The only other involved people that are brought up in these interviews are a couple of Epstein's close friends like Prince Andrew and the Victoria's Secret guy, who already had public lawsuits surrounding this. Considering this, what reason is there to believe in the theory which involves many celebrities and politicians? The reason this narrative is pushed, along with pictures of Trump and Epstein at a celebrity event, is because this narrative is desperate and almost completely manufactured.

The left's response to this is to say that the victimized girls were too afraid of the powerful johns to mention them to the police, but were not afraid of sleezy multi-millionaire Jeffery Epstein enough to implicate him directly. This, of course, is laughable.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2025, 08:33:19 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16445
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13410 on: July 30, 2025, 08:10:17 PM »
However, the only way to get Trump involved is to create a broad assertion that anyone associated with Epstein is an affiliated pedo client participant and that his scheme was bigger and involved more people. This is why the Democrats are pushing this mass-pedophile-ring theory.
Lucky, Trump is very keen on publishing the Epstein client list (which doesn't exist btw), so this facade won't last much longer. Truth always wins! 🦅🇺🇸✈️🏢🏢
« Last Edit: July 30, 2025, 08:37:20 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 7017
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13411 on: July 30, 2025, 09:41:13 PM »
Remember when Epstein was asked about this and took the 5th?

Question: “Have you ever socialised with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18”

Epstein: “Though I’d like to answer that question at least today I’m going to have to assert my 5th, 6th and 14th amendment rights, sir”

I think that clears this up once and for all, now can we all move on from this Epstein nonsense? There’s clearly nothing to see here.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11136
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13412 on: July 30, 2025, 09:58:33 PM »
Remember when Epstein was asked about this and took the 5th?

Question: “Have you ever socialised with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18”

Epstein: “Though I’d like to answer that question at least today I’m going to have to assert my 5th, 6th and 14th amendment rights, sir”

I think that clears this up once and for all, now can we all move on from this Epstein nonsense? There’s clearly nothing to see here.

This is a terrible take. He also pled the 5th on almost every question, which almost every lawyer would advise in this situation. Answering a simple "No" to that question could lead to prosecutors bringing up some forgotten event where he had a conversation in front of Trump's daughter, giving a demonstration that Epstein is lying to federal officials.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 7017
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13413 on: July 30, 2025, 10:16:54 PM »
This is a terrible take.
From the man who is trying to pretend that a caddy trying (and hilariously failing) to subtly drop a ball was actually Trump taking a drop.
Chuckle.

Quote
He also pled the 5th on almost every question
He seemed happy enough to answer the question about whether they socialised   :).
I wonder why he wouldn’t answer the one about whether they socialised with under 18 year old females? Why not just say no?
Or if the answer was yes and it was perfectly innocent, like with a relative as you suggest, then say that.
Unless… :)

I wonder what Trump thinks about people taking the fifth?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-62499027

D’oh!
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11136
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13414 on: July 30, 2025, 10:42:05 PM »
Why are you cutting out the parts in my comment which answer this question?

Why not just say no?

Answering a simple "No" to that question could lead to prosecutors bringing up some forgotten event where he had a conversation in front of Trump's daughter, giving a demonstration that Epstein is lying to federal officials.

Lawyers in America advise to plead the fifth on all questions by the police. There is no reason to give them information which can be used against you in unforeseeable ways. Pleading the fifth is common in serious legal cases, can't be used against you, and is regular advise from a US lawyer.

I understand your confusion, however. The UK you do have the ability to remain silent, but your silence be used against you in a legal proceeding. You are speaking to us from a backwards authoritarian regime.

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 8569
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13415 on: Today at 01:46:36 AM »
Pleading the fifth is common in serious legal cases, can't be used against you, and is regular advise from a US lawyer.
It isn't supposed to be used against you, but juries are funny and will often wonder why you're pleading the 5th, even though they aren't supposed to.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11136
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #13416 on: Today at 05:23:08 AM »
Pleading the fifth is common in serious legal cases, can't be used against you, and is regular advise from a US lawyer.
It isn't supposed to be used against you, but juries are funny and will often wonder why you're pleading the 5th, even though they aren't supposed to.

It all comes down to jury instruction on the standards they must impose. In the United States juries are instructed that in their verdict they can only accept evidence which proves beyond reasonable doubt and are specifically told that silence isn't enough. In contradiction, juries in United Kingdom are told that they can accept silence as guilt and are essentially told that they can make weak rulings in absense of sufficient evidence.

From the above link, the following trial was referenced as a 'commonsense' approach to UK law:

Quote
McLernon introduced a trend which commentators have termed the
Court's 'commonsense' approach of the application of the Order. This
approach was delineated in R v. KS Murray. At trial, the defendant Kevin
Murray, was convicted of attempted murder of a part-time member of the
Ulster Defence Regiment ("UDR"). While his house was being searched,
Murray made a short statement in which he told police he had been at a
friend's house at the time of the murder.  Murray further explained that
the mud on jeans found in his possession resulted from a hunting trip that
had occurred two days before. [Murray made no further statements after
his arrest, and remained silent during his trial. Judge Kelly not only
drew adverse inferences from Murray's failure to give testimony, but also
signaled that silence equaled guilt.

Here we have a UK judge, a representative of the Crown, signaling to the court that silence equates to guilt. None of this would be acceptable in the United States and would be completely aborent to every US judge and lawyer.
« Last Edit: Today at 06:04:03 AM by Tom Bishop »