Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
3/4/2025, 10:43:51 PM
X
In reply to:
Dan
@KettlebellDan
·
300d
@GaryMarcus Agree it’s really hard to trust or distrust sources like these

I find it hard to believe that Russian was that interested in Trump in 1987 but maybe they do that for any American remotely important like a portfolio
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
300d
@KettlebellDan doesn’t mean what they said isn’t true, and there is a ton of collateral evidence that seems to fit with their story.

even Russia admits, even bragged, how happy they are with Trump.
Dan
@KettlebellDan
·
300d
@GaryMarcus It’s really hard to determine the legitimacy of former kgb officials who stand to make a lot of money by writing books like these
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
300d
At this point, we have to take allegations like these seriously.
𝕄𝕒𝕣𝕘𝕒𝕣𝕖𝕥🌴Siegien 🐦📷
@margaretsiegien
·
300d
@johnpavlovitz @PawlowskiMario Multiple Former KGB Agents All Have the Same Story: Trump Was Recruited as a KGB Asset Almost 40 Years Ago
https://www.politicalflare.com/2…

The statement 'oh they were surely interested' is a part of a broader conversation about the legitimacy of claims regarding Donald Trump's alleged recruitment by the KGB. This conversation involves public figures and addresses significant public concerns about political influence and international relations, thus constituting public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm, but it does contribute to a potentially harmful narrative without providing evidence, which could be seen as a minor violation. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, thus upholding this principle. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is a dismissive remark that does not contribute constructively to the discussion. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, but it also does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, thus it neither upholds nor violates this principle significantly.
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement is part of a public discourse and should be made responsibly. However, it lacks substantive engagement or evidence, which is a minor violation of using the platform responsibly. [-1]