Octopus Overlords

Chaz wrote: ↑Wed May 23, 2018 8:04 pm Wouldn't the US interpreter translate Kim, and the NK interpreter translate Trump? I'd assume you'd want your person to tell you what the other leader said, rather than relying on their interpreter to translate accurately.

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Wed May 23, 2018 8:27 pm I'm feeling proactively sorry for the poor translator who has to try and decipher Trump-speak.

ook, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.

Yes, that's an actual quote

Last year, President Trump spoke with Vladimir Putin at a Group of 20 summit without an American interpreter present, relying only a Kremlin-provided interpreter.

For what reason, I don’t know — probably to keep everything to himself and his staff.

Nixon had the same habit — he relied, in virtually all important meetings, solely on the senior diplomatic interpreter for English in Moscow, Viktor Sukhodrev, whose father, by the way, was a Soviet spy in the United States for 12 years. And he also worked for the KGB. That was the person that Nixon trusted and Kissinger trusted!

Having set this example in the Putin meeting, there is always a chance that this particular White House might say, “We don’t want an American interpreter in the Kim Jong Un meeting.” I wouldn’t be surprised if that happened.

Why is it so important to have an American interpreter present?

One reason is that the interpreter traveling with the president gets to see his talking points and all documents that the president needs for this particular meeting. This is doubly important with a president like Trump. Why? Because he doesn’t read his briefing book. The packet for such a meeting — and I’ve worked hundreds of them — may be as much as between 80 and 200 pages.

The second reason, especially for a person like Trump who thinks he is one of the greatest negotiators in the world: He might insist on a one-on-one, just him and him, with the interpreter or interpreters. If such a meeting takes place, there’s one important product that comes out of it — a written record that’s always done by the interpreter. The interpreter, then, is the only American who can record this meeting for posterity, for the National Archives, for the Secretary of State to read. If you don’t have an American interpreter in there, there will be no American record.

...

How do you see a meeting playing out between Trump and Kim?

If each side brings a professional interpreter, whatever the two tell each other will come across the way it was said. But it will be a quite different meeting if there is only a North Korean interpreter present, and no American interpreter. In that kind of a meeting, our leader is bound to get into trouble.

Holman wrote: ↑Wed May 23, 2018 8:30 pm

Chaz wrote: ↑Wed May 23, 2018 8:04 pm Wouldn't the US interpreter translate Kim, and the NK interpreter translate Trump? I'd assume you'd want your person to tell you what the other leader said, rather than relying on their interpreter to translate accurately.

Yeah, the ethic of professional translation is strict accuracy. Plus there will probably be other staffers in the room who speak both languages (not just Trump and Kim and one translator each), so any deviations would be noticed.

I definitely don't envy Kim's translator, though. The poor soul learned English for just this one glorious national moment, and now they have to deal with Trumpian word salad. Can you imagine?

EDIT: Ninja'd by Skinypuppy.

hepcat wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 8:34 am If there is a meeting (and that's a pretty big if) it will end up being one guy who barely speaks English...and Kim Jong Un.

Unagi wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 10:41 am Also, I mean it's totally irrelevant - but it was them that wanted this meeting first.... Not that we didn't want it and it's our fault that it didn't happen - but to be clear, it's their fault it didn't happen and they are the ones that asked for it first - but again, that's irrelevant.

Holman wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 11:00 am So today we watch Trumpers swivel from "Nobel Prize!" To "Nuke Pyongyang!" on a dime, right?

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 12:18 pm Who's Jeffrey?

Adam Blickstein wrote:Along with the breakup letter, Trump also sent Kim half of the Peace Summit Coin, imploring him to wear it around his neck until they're reunited, in love

El Guapo wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 12:41 pm

Dignity. Always dignity.

Holman wrote:Wait--they're *selling* those coins??

I saw them and assumed they were "challenge coins" that servicepeople and others might receive for being part of the diplomatic mission.

I had no idea they were just more straight-up MAGA grift.

Unagi wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 12:47 pm

El Guapo wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 12:41 pm

Dignity. Always dignity.

I could actually see that catching a prize in 20 years...

President Trump’s decision to cancel his planned summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un (for now) isn’t just a blow to a major policy goal of Trump’s (stopping North Korea’s nuclear program) or the president’s ego (his supporters were talking about Trump winning a Nobel Peace Prize). It could have a clear political downside too.

Polling shows that more Americans disapprove than approve of Trump’s handling of a whole host of issues. On immigration, trade and other policy areas, Trump gets net negative marks. But then there’s North Korea.

Fifty-two percent of Americans liked how Trump was handling the North Korea issue, according to an average of polls taken since April, compared with just 39 percent who disapproved. I’m not sure 52 percent of people would approve of Trump eating eggs at breakfast, as polls suggest a plurality of Americans oppose virtually anything he does. North Korea and the economy are the only issues on which he gets net positive marks (and only barely on the economy).

Max Peck wrote: ↑Fri May 25, 2018 10:46 am He is desperate to gain the approval of the American people, and this is the one issue where that is clearly within his grasp.

Sepiche wrote: ↑Fri May 25, 2018 10:59 am

Max Peck wrote: ↑Fri May 25, 2018 10:46 am He is desperate to gain the approval of the American people, and this is the one issue where that is clearly within his grasp.

Well... sitting down for a meeting is, perhaps, within his grasp. Actually coming to a comprehensive agreement that favors the American people is, I think, well outside his abilities or understanding.

Add to that new reports that it was infighting between Bolton and Pompeo that helped sink the current meeting, and I have even less hope they will actually get somewhere in negotiations.

But Trump’s shift from aggressive rhetoric to potential peacemaking with North Korea was clearly well-received by American voters. Sixty-six percent of Americans approved of Trump’s decision to have direct talks with Kim, while only 27 percent disagreed, an April poll by Quinnipiac University found. A Pew Research Center poll conducted in late April and early May found that 71 percent of Americans approved of direct talks with North Korea, compared with just 21 percent who did not. In other words, Trump had found an idea that even some Democrats liked — something I had begun to think was not possible.

Foreign policy experts were more skeptical about the idea of direct diplomacy with Kim. On the substance, they may have been correct — Kim is probably not going to give up his nuclear program (Trump’s chief demand). But I can see why Trump really wanted this summit. If he could have reached some kind of deal with Kim, polls suggest that the public, even some Democrats, would have viewed that favorably. The president’s backers were already touting the slogan “peace and prosperity” for the GOP to run on in 2018 and 2020. And Trump’s overall approval rating has been rising of late — perhaps a bit of that upward trend was due to the diplomatic push on North Korea.

malchior wrote: ↑Tue May 29, 2018 6:18 am Because our President is a complete wack-a-doodle he is tweeting like the meet is back on...maybe it is...or he forgot. Who the fuck knows. It's Trump.

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea's will for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula remains "unchanged, consistent and fixed," said leader Kim Jong Un, according to the North's state news agency on Friday.