Molson Hart

I'm glad I amuse you, you condescending prick.

You've been amusing me since 2010 on the Sinica podcast, lol. Notwithstanding your silly remark, I have a lot of respect for your podcast and your work on it. That said, I'm right. You can criticize Trump for bullshit, but if you think he believes it, you're just wrong.

I don't care whether he believes it or not. It debases public discourse, it erodes the crucial epistemic norms that need to be in place. And he's the fucking president doing it. It's indefensible.

Let me get this straight: The guy who's worried about public discourse being debased just went ad-hominem by calling me a condescending prick and then dropped an f-bomb? Kettle calling the pot black!

No, you're not president, but you're actually a prominent intellectual with a very wide platform, so practice what you preach! I wouldn't break "epistemic norms" as president, but I can forgive it, if for a good cause and the quality of Trump's causes are up for debate.

It was the pot calling the kettle a condescending prick, which was what you were being. ("I find it amusing" in retweeting something I said – yep. Pretty fucking prickish). And if you think the quality of Trump's causes is even up for debate, I have other good names for you.

It wouldn't be, because I have zero problem with public discourse being debased. Kaiser, here's what I suggest. Let's debate Trump's handling of the trade war on the Sinica podcast. I actually know what the fuck I'm talking about and I got a track record you'd appreciate.

Ummm... no thanks. You see, I have a problem with both public discourse and Sinica being debased and have more control over the latter. If you listen to the most recent show I've already had someone defending Trump's handling of trade. It's not a debate show, never has been.