Senior administration official blasts Trump in anonymous NYT op-ed

[Bigun]

The other thing about that Op-Ed is that the author claims to want the Trump agenda to succeed -- the "we're only trying to help" claim.  But the truth is that this Op-Ed obviously does nothing of the sort.  If anything, it would intensify suspicion and dysfunction within the White House.  The publication of that Op-Ed is destructive, not constructive.  That's something the author surely would have known, and yet went ahead with it anyway.  Proving that the "we're only here to help" claim is simply false.

And, as I'm quite sure someone has already said, I seriously doubt that this was written by anyone at the Whitehouse.  Well, perhaps someone on the custodial staff.

[Frank Cannon]

You make an excellent point.  Maybe the slimes should try to prove that meeting happened. 

I am sure the Anonymous sources are all lined up as we type this and the quotes are being fabricated.

This article reminds me of an episode about 20 or 25 hours ago where a sainted Liberal source claimed absurd things were happening in the WH only to have those folks who were "quoted" come out and say they were all lies.

[Hoodat]

The other thing about that Op-Ed is that the author claims to want the Trump agenda to succeed -- the "we're only trying to help" claim.  But the truth is that this Op-Ed obviously does nothing of the sort.  If anything, it would intensify suspicion and dysfunction within the White House.  The publication of that Op-Ed is destructive, not constructive.  That's something the author surely would have known, and yet went ahead with it anyway.  Proving that the "we're only here to help" claim is simply false.

Agreed.  Furthermore, it suggests that unelected officials are subverting the agenda of an elected President, which in turn undermines our democratic republic.

[Wingnut]

This article reminds me of an episode about 20 or 25 hours ago where a sainted Liberal source claimed absurd things were happening in the WH only to have those folks who were "quoted" come out and say they were all lies.

As i said above.  Woodword must be pissed the Post didn't get the scoop. 

[Concerned]

Given that Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the person should resign, it certainly seems like she's willing to accept that this source is an actual member of the administration:

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders excoriated the piece's anonymous author in a response statement Wednesday, calling the writer a "gutless anonymous source." "The individual behind this piece has chosen to deceive, rather than support, the duly elected president of the United States," Sanders inveighed. "This coward should do the right thing and resign."

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/politics/sarah-huckabee-sanders-slams-gutless-anonymous-source-for-bombshell-nyt-op-ed/ar-BBMVqbf

[Bigun]

Given that Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the person should resign, it certainly seems like she's willing to accept that this source is an actual member of the administration:
 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/politics/sarah-huckabee-sanders-slams-gutless-anonymous-source-for-bombshell-nyt-op-ed/ar-BBMVqbf

Maybe she knows something I don't and maybe she doesn't.

[mystery-ak]

My first thought when I read this is Kelly-Ann Conway's husband..but he has been outspoken so I doubt he would write as anonymous

[endicom]

The other thing about that Op-Ed is that the author claims to want the Trump agenda to succeed -- the "we're only trying to help" claim.  But the truth is that this Op-Ed obviously does nothing of the sort.  If anything, it would intensify suspicion and dysfunction within the White House.  The publication of that Op-Ed is destructive, not constructive.  That's something the author surely would have known, and yet went ahead with it anyway.  Proving that the "we're only here to help" claim is simply false.

Thanks. You saved me the trouble and did it better.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Given that Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the person should resign, it certainly seems like she's willing to accept that this source is an actual member of the administration:
 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/politics/sarah-huckabee-sanders-slams-gutless-anonymous-source-for-bombshell-nyt-op-ed/ar-BBMVqbf

1)  Given that there are literally millions of people employed by the federal government, it's certainly possible that she's a "member of the Administration" in some capacity.  I'd say almost a certainty.  However;

2) Whether or not the person is employed by the federal government isn't the point.  The author may well be a federal employee, but be ascribing to himself/herself access or knowledge that they do not possess.  It would hardly be the first time someone tried to make themselves sound more important than they really are.  Again, I'd bet my last buck that the stuff about the cabinet removing Trump under the 5th Amendment is bogus.

Sanders saying that whomever it is should resign is not an acknowledgment that the person has a major position within the Administration, or that the things they claimed happened are true.  That's the relevant point.

[Concerned]

Sanders saying that whomever it is should resign is not an acknowledgment that the person has a major position within the Administration, or that the things they claimed happened are true.  That's the relevant point.

Of course and fortunately, I didn't claim otherwise.

[catfish1957]

How much credibility do you give to the claim that the cabinet met to discuss removing Trump under the 25th Amendment but decided not to because it would mean a constitutional crisis?

Seems implausible an event of that magnitude could be kept that secret.  Then again, that is why I think it is possible that the NYT might be using new tactics for hit pieces.  I wouldn't put anything past those bastards.

OTOH...some of the other claims seem almost spot on.  Very weird

[jpsb]

Of course it does. You are a rabid Trump hater. You love the Establishment and their preferred news sources like the Slimes. This manufactured fraud piece fits your unsubstantiated and manufactured memes about the President.

This shit is tailor made for haters and that's why they ran it. Foment more hate.

BTW MAGA!!!

 

[Hoodat]

1)  Given that there are literally millions of people employed by the federal government, it's certainly possible that she's a "member of the Administration" in some capacity.

I don't have a problem handing out a couple million pink slips, just to be sure.

[mystery-ak]

Trump demands NYT turn anonymous source over to government ‘for National Security purposes’
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/405283-trump-lays-into-ny-times-over-op-ed-demands-they-turn-source-over-to

[txradioguy]

Maybe she knows something I don't and maybe she doesn't.

I'm guessing the former and not the latter.

And she's right...they should resign.

[catfish1957]

Trump demands NYT turn anonymous source over to government ‘for National Security purposes’
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/405283-trump-lays-into-ny-times-over-op-ed-demands-they-turn-source-over-to

Are you kidding?

I think DJT has been baited.

[Bigun]

I'm guessing the former and not the latter.

And she's right...they should resign.

If she doesn't she most certainly should and I still don't believe that this article was written by anyone at the Whitehouse.

[ABX]

Hmmmm. Lodestar, such an odd word.... and the one senior administration official who can't be fired.



https://mobile.twitter.com/danbl00m/status/1037431005349642240/photo/1

[XenaLee]

Hmmmm. Lodestar, such an odd word.... and the one senior administration official who can't be fired.



https://mobile.twitter.com/danbl00m/status/1037431005349642240/photo/1

?

I'm confused.

What's the relevance here?   

[Frank Cannon]

?

I'm confused.

What's the relevance here?

He's saying Pence is the Rat.

[ABX]

?

I'm confused.

What's the relevance here?

The term lodestar was used in the article. It is an archaic term mostly out of use. That's the one reference anyone has found to it in use by anyone in the administration. It also fits a tweet that implied the source can't be fired.

[catfish1957]

He's saying Pence is the Rat.

Pence?  I figured Sessions got a red bat phone hot line to the NYT.

Where's a Briefer Poll when you need it?

[ABX]

He's saying Pence is the Rat.

Or the term and hint is a plant. Or it is someone like a speechwriter who works for Pence.


Or a coincidence.

[XenaLee]

The term lodestar was used in the article. It is an archaic term mostly out of use. That's the one reference anyone has found to it in use by anyone in the administration. It also fits a tweet that implied the source can't be fired.

So... it couldn't possibly be some ahole that wants to make it "look" like it's Pence?  Nah!

I smell another setup.

[txradioguy]

Hmmmm. Lodestar, such an odd word.... and the one senior administration official who can't be fired.



https://mobile.twitter.com/danbl00m/status/1037431005349642240/photo/1

Wow....