Why do you think this NY Times Op-Ed was written?

[hadit]

Not even close to the same. Pence and Pompeo were not asked shit, they went out of their way to make public statements that they did not write the piece.

Pence and Pompeo didn't say they wrote it either. No one in the Administration said they wrote it, which means no one in the Administration is saying it is anything other than bullshit. Until someone says they wrote it, the administration's response could only be that it is bullshit. You cannot twist into meaning something it doesn't.

Yes! Does Gator even know how Trump feels about the media? It’s a given he and his own would deny it at any cost. That or they’d adeptly skirt the question like all politicians do.

But that is just it, Trump is not denying the content, in fact he is talking about using the DOJ to find out who wrote it. If it were fiction, it would not matter.

Yes it would. A high ranking official spreading lies and trying to undercut the president is a big deal. You can't run an administration with that going on.

What's Trump supposed to say, "Am not"? That's a democrat level of communication.

 

[hadit]

Because they personally didn’t write it and they don’t know if someone else did or not.

You apparently don’t understand what logic is.

But they know if the basic content is accurate or not. If the piece was total BS and did not match reality, then the logical thing to do is say so, not claim you did not write it.

your devotion to Trump keeps you from using logic

there's more than 1 flow to logic as it is also derived from our own experiences. to pin it to 1 way or you're wrong seems rather convenient.

If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.

If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.

Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?

I think the reason you’re not understanding our POV here is bc you think the author is being completely truthful. You think whoever wrote this would not have possibly written it if any of the content was a lie and that’s not how we see it.

I think the actions of the Trump and his admin lead to the conclusion that it is accurate. Why talk of having the DOJ find out who the insider is if there really is not one?

Because someone on the inside spreading lies can cause a great deal of damage.

 

[Mike473]

But they know if the basic content is accurate or not. If the piece was total BS and did not match reality, then the logical thing to do is say so, not claim you did not write it.

your devotion to Trump keeps you from using logic

there's more than 1 flow to logic as it is also derived from our own experiences. to pin it to 1 way or you're wrong seems rather convenient.

If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.

If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.

Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?

I think the reason you’re not understanding our POV here is bc you think the author is being completely truthful. You think whoever wrote this would not have possibly written it if any of the content was a lie and that’s not how we see it.

I think the actions of the Trump and his admin lead to the conclusion that it is accurate. Why talk of having the DOJ find out who the insider is if there really is not one?

Because someone on the inside spreading lies can cause a great deal of damage.

Whats the difference between this anonymous Op-Ed and Wikileaks?

 

[AceRothstein]

Because Donald Trump is mentally ill.

 

[Rustic]

There's something that isn't making sense to me on this.

Let's assume that this whole thing is true, that an important person at the White House wrote this editorial as an account of this group of people who are manipulating as much as possible around Trump to protect the country.

Why would they expose this plot, one which they seem to think is working? Surely the person who wrote this knew they'll ultimately be exposed. Surely they know this will change things at the White House. So why would they let the cat out of the bag at this time?

The only two reasons I can come up with are (a) that they want to influence the November elections for some help in decreasing Trump's overall power, and (b) that they're hoping that we take a serious look at the 25th. What are your guesses?

I was going to start this in the CDZ, but let's see if we can get some serious thought here.
.

Anything that damages the federal government is a good thing

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.

If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.

Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?

I think the reason you’re not understanding our POV here is bc you think the author is being completely truthful. You think whoever wrote this would not have possibly written it if any of the content was a lie and that’s not how we see it.

I think the actions of the Trump and his admin lead to the conclusion that it is accurate. Why talk of having the DOJ find out who the insider is if there really is not one?

and where do we hear about this actions of the admin?

from the media?

who is trump at war with?

the media.

it would seem a selective use of a source we know isn't going to tell the truth to suddenly find morality and get it right THIS TIME.

I did not hear about them, I heard them straight from the people in the admin themselves. I cannot help if you rely totally on the media to tell you what people said, but you might try just reading their own words instead.

Just a thought.

just a thought - i don't know too many people in the admin. i never get up to DC much.

Oddly enough people in the admin make public statements and publish them to their official website.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Because they personally don’t agree with the content....

You can’t get any more basic than that.
.

How can you know that since they have not addressed the content?

Dude just shut up.

What is it with certain posters that they seem to think they have the power to tell other posters to shut up?

Shut Up.

Yup. I also possess the power.

Bite me...ohhh we all have the power

 

[ptbw forever]

I got a special twist on this....

I think the op-ed is from Mike Pence (Mr. lodestar) and Donald Trump himself. This radical combo gains from diverting attention from the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation.
Should he get confirmed and the op-ed taken in as credible:

• Extra protection to Trump from judiciary.
• Evangelicals (Pence) get closer to the reality of RoeVWade reversals.
• The entire staff is forced into officially denying the reality described by the op-ed (and Woodward's book)
• Management by fear is solidified.
• The potential of dictatorship closer to reality.

Lodestar/Trump combo makes sense.

I would rule that out immediately, as I don't think Trump is capable of condoning anything that impinges on his fragile, inflated ego.

I think he's twisted enough to create a 'fake' op-ed platform calling himself out and then use it to attack the actual 'fake' op-ed he himself created.
The ultimate goal would be to discredit the NYT, gain 'fake' credibility with this outrageous fabrication and once again distract from real and critical issues.

Remember that WTF moment when he masqueraded as a publicist. (John Miller)
The voice is instantly familiar; the tone, confident, even cocky; the cadence, distinctly Trumpian. The man on the phone vigorously defending Donald Trump says he’s a media spokesman named John Miller, but then he says, “I’m sort of new here,” and “I’m somebody that he knows and I think somebody that he trusts and likes” and even “I’m going to do this a little, part time, and then, yeah, go on with my life.”
Donald Trump masqueraded as publicist to brag about himself

The New York Times discredited itself a long time ago.

If Trump is going this angle to destroy the media then I say Trump really is the Godemperor.

 

[hadit]

there's more than 1 flow to logic as it is also derived from our own experiences. to pin it to 1 way or you're wrong seems rather convenient.

If you claim you did not write it, then that does not address the content at all.

If you claim it is untrue, that addresses both the content and the fact that you did not write it.

Which is the more logical way to go if the content is untrue?

I think the reason you’re not understanding our POV here is bc you think the author is being completely truthful. You think whoever wrote this would not have possibly written it if any of the content was a lie and that’s not how we see it.

I think the actions of the Trump and his admin lead to the conclusion that it is accurate. Why talk of having the DOJ find out who the insider is if there really is not one?

Because someone on the inside spreading lies can cause a great deal of damage.

Whats the difference between this anonymous Op-Ed and Wikileaks?

WikiLeaks has a person taking responsibility for leaks.

 

[hadit]

Because Donald Trump is mentally ill.

When did you examine him?

 

[JoeB131]

I don't like any of this, really. Nor would I like it if it happened with Obama.

This is ugly. But it's also a reflection of us.
.

again, Stormy Mac will be going down to the Rape Crisis Center later today and tell those sluts they shouldn't dress like tramps.

No, it's not the fault of the people who are opposing Trump. It's the fault of Trump and his enablers...

What should happen is that his cabinet, if they are indeed doing things like ignoring Trumps orders and pulling papers off his desk to keep him from doing more damage, should invoke the 25th Amendment.

 

[JoeB131]

Since we have all read the piece and aren’t just talking out of our asses, what is the most damning thing in the piece?

To my mind, that the author thinks that Trump is tolerable as long as they get the whole litany of otherswise bad Republican ideas.

 

[DOTR]

What an interesting question, I wish I'd thought of it. Off hand I can think of two answers; one, that the author is doing some private arse covering to alleviate the shame of belonging to the current administration; two, that the author has an agenda he/she believes will be advanced by this letter.
I don't know what that agenda may be but it seems obvious to be negative to Trump. Whether it's to shame the relevant parties into Art 25 action, to influence the mid-term elections, to undermine Trump for 2020, to encourage Congress to legislate limits on Trump's options, or all or none of the above is beyond me.

You bring up some good points. I have an answer for the OP but for now yours is interesting to address. Assuming the piece is even real (which is not a given)...

About the ass covering...stay with that but with a slightly different slant.

"Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing..."

A plea for the opposition press to be aware that there are moles who are actually on the side of the ruling elites working within the administration. They are warning of the effects of friendly fire and asking that care be taken. They consider themselves to be behind enemy lines in the White House and waiting for their press liberators but they dont want to become collateral damage.

And two that the "author has an agenda". Well that would be sort of obvious. The author states he has an agenda.

"Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright."

Putting aside the asskicking we gave the Democrats in 2016...we first handed out one to the Republican elites. And that may be the most important one of the two. Donald Trump had to first defeat the nevertrumper old guard of the GOP before crushing Hillary....the Koch brothers alone threw hundreds of millions against him. And that is the complaint above. Read it again. It basically says "the Party cant control this guy".

What they are complaining about is that he is doing exactly what he promised to do when he ran. No more business as usual. Enough with the Republican cucks making a token opposition to the Democrats and then folding. And enough with the caricatures of conservatism used to shut down decent opposition to leftist lunacy. Donald Trump promised to drain the swamp and he didnt exclude Republicans from that threat. So the swamp fights back by joining forces.
You could see it here on USMB. Once Trump was elected every Marxist here began complaining that he wasnt a conservative. Look it up. Use the search function.

So yes there is an agenda: that being that Trump refuses to adjust himself to Washington rather than the people who elected him. He refuses to step into the old role that kept the elites in power for so long.

 

[DOTR]

There's something that isn't making sense to me on this.

Let's assume that this whole thing is true, that an important person at the White House wrote this editorial as an account of this group of people who are manipulating as much as possible around Trump to protect the country.

Why would they expose this plot, one which they seem to think is working? Surely the person who wrote this knew they'll ultimately be exposed. Surely they know this will change things at the White House. So why would they let the cat out of the bag at this time?

.

Good questions. Whether the letter is fiction or not is really irrelevant here. The goal is the same. Either it was the work of deep state moles reaching out through the press OR it is a work of fiction the press is using to attack Trump. Whats the difference?

We discussed previously that the press, the media, Hollywood are out of the closet. They no longer even deny that they are an opposition party basking in special privileges. For years they claimed to be neutral and fulfilling some Constitutional role in an impartial manner. We always knew better but they are quite open about it now. (Desperation I think..cornered rats snarling and snapping)

So maybe this takes it up a notch? Two decades of hidden opposition and two years of open opposition have made no discernible headway against Trump. The desperation deepens. They just saw the Supreme Court slip away for a generation...despite an all out assault which even included attempts at shutting down our institutions of government. They have no hope of taking the Senate or White House back and their internal polls, I am sure, are showing little hope for the House. They have been hammered in the states. One more state, think of it, one more state in Republican hands and suddenly Constitutional amendments become feasible.
So maybe the next escalation is to announce that they have indeed embraced their title as "enemy of the people". With a stab in the eye to the country. A statement and a warning:

"Even if you do get your choice past us we will undermine him until we can get one of ours back in office. There is nothing you can do to stop us. There is no safe place free from moles and saboteurs"

 

[DOTR]

`
Wouldn't surprise me for a moment.
.

Then you are extremely gullible and I am greatly disappointed.

 

[Mac1958]

Wouldn't surprise me for a moment.

Then you are extremely gullible and I am greatly disappointed.

Hey, I "disappoint" wingers on both ends every day here. I've just found a way to come to terms with the hideous disgrace of it all.
.

 

[DOTR]

I can't imagine the author won't be outed at some point.
.

So...should New York Times reporters be working and sleuthing to out this author? What would those vaunted journalistic ethics demand in this case?

 

[Mac1958]

I can't imagine the author won't be outed at some point.

So...should New York Times reporters be working and sleuthing to out this author? What would those vaunted journalistic ethics demand in this case?

Screws me. I don't know if the editors would allow it.
.

 

[DOTR]

Wouldn't surprise me for a moment.

Then you are extremely gullible and I am greatly disappointed.

Hey, I "disappoint" wingers on both ends every day here. I've just found a way to come to terms with the hideous disgrace of it all.
.

By silly comments like that? Evangelicals want Pence? LOL. I understand the desire to drive a wedge, any wedge. But I have always maintained you people suffer from a basic misunderstanding of the people you oppose. And this is a great example. If there are fault lines..and there always are...they do not include a trump-Pence/Evangelical divide.
But have at it.

 

[Mac1958]

Wouldn't surprise me for a moment.

Then you are extremely gullible and I am greatly disappointed.

Hey, I "disappoint" wingers on both ends every day here. I've just found a way to come to terms with the hideous disgrace of it all.
.

By silly comments like that? Evangelicals want Pence? LOL. I understand the desire to drive a wedge, any wedge. But I have always maintained you people suffer from a basic misunderstanding of the people you appose. And this is a great example. If there are fault lines..and there always are...they do not include a trump-Pence/Evangelical divide.
But have at it.

Okie doke, thanks!
.