Who "hacked" Trump's Twitter account?

[usmbguest5318]

​

You know goddamned well that Trump didn't write that. For cryin' out loud...It's got a properly punctuated appositive, no words in all-caps, no single-word expressions used in place of an emoji, no double negatives, and consists entirely of complete sentences that don't read like toddler-talk.

​

Now though the tweet at the start of this post makes some sense to me, it nonetheless bids one to ask several questions. Even so, it's a few thoughts put together in a coherent way. It flows. In short, I know what it says and what it does not say.

• "I agree" --> That's clear; it's unequivocal.
• "Disciplined approach" --> I know exactly what a disciplined approach is and is not, who participates in them, what each person's role is, etc. I know what are the steps to a disciplined approach and if I spend a moment to consider the context of what exactly the "disciplined approach" is being applied to, I can put together a high level workplan for executing on whatever process it is he's talking about.
• "I have full confidence in" --> I know what that means when any other principal says it...It means they know the people they've got doing a given job are capable of doing that job to the highest standards of expectation and that they are indeed performing it to that standard. I'm not exactly sure what it means when Trump says it. It could mean only the first part or no part of what I described earlier in this paragraph. He does, after all, say things like that, and then a few days or weeks later, he's undermining the person and/or firing them.
• "Fully advised throughout each phase of this process" --> Great. Unfortunately, that doesn't tell me whether he fully understood all that he was told, but I do know he says has been told everything there is to be told. Whatever be the reality as goes the extent of what he's been told and the nature of his understanding of it remains to be seen.

Of course, it's a tweet, so there's plenty of missing information; thus I cannot form inferences/conclusions about its message/assertions. Although it's ambiguous, one knows immediately the apt questions to ask to arrive at a comprehensive understanding of Trump's thoughts on the matter.

• I don't know what specific process he's referring to/agreeing with.
• I don't know who or what he thinks has been "historically cooperative."
  -- Does he mean the approach was in the past a cooperative (rather than adversarial) one?
  -- Does he mean he/the WH has in the past been cooperative with Muller's disciplined approach?
  I really don't know.

Obviously, the initial conclusion a rational person would want to make about the statements in the tweet -- whether the statements themselves are in fact true -- cannot be made without answers to the above questions; however, unlike real Trump tweets, there are just a few unanswered elements. One doesn't have to hunt down myriad facts and details to assess the qualitative veracity of the remarks. That one doesn't is what makes it clear that someone may have "hacked" Trump's Twitter account.

​

 

[AVG-JOE]

​

 

[Two Thumbs]

It's him, someone just put some Jack in his morning joe

 

[gipper]

Trump....Trump....Trump.....

 

[sparky]

It was only a matter of time before anything Trump said would be construed as fake news

~S~

 

[cnm]

I bet he put the bit about the Clintons in it.