Senior administration official blasts Trump in anonymous NYT op-ed

[mystery-ak]

NY Times op-ed editor describes process behind publishing anonymous Trump official's op-ed
By Michael Burke - 09/05/18 08:24 PM EDT

The op-ed, published Wednesday afternoon, described coordinated efforts among Trump administration staff to counter President Trump.

The Times described the anonymous author in a note as "a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure."

The senior administration official that purportedly wrote it criticized Trump for his "amorality" and wrote that while officials “want the administration to succeed,” they have had to work against Trump’s “misguided impulses” and parts of his agenda.

Dao said the official reached out “several days ago” but didn’t reveal identifying details to CNN. Dao did not provide the person’s gender, although the author was described in a New York Times tweet as a “he” earlier Wednesday.

He added that the newspaper has “taken a number of special precautions to protect the person's identity” but wouldn’t be more specific, CNN reported. 

more
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/405284-ny-times-op-ed-editor-describes-process-behind-publishing-anonymous-trump

[corbe]

     Warming up in the BullPen for VP:

[Emjay]

How do I know that you didn't write the damned thing?

I was just watching Tucker Carlson about this and he said he is pretty close to knowing for sure who the source for this piece is.  I think he whispered, I am very concerned.  That could have been a hint.

[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.

Also.... that doesn't jive with this claim "whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure".

[Wingnut]

Wow....

We used to do unique keyword searches to ferret out trolls and sock puppets.  People always revert to words and phases even when they try to hide their identity.  It's like a finger print.  But you know that.

[XenaLee]

     Warming up in the BullPen for VP:

Cruz isn't dumb enough to take that job.

[Hoodat]

I was just watching Tucker Carlson about this and he said he is pretty close to knowing for sure who the source for this piece is.

Bob Woodward?

[Emjay]

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

That seems like a reasonable request.  How far does the press have the right to go in 'protecting its source' if the source is treasonous?

[txradioguy]

We used to do unique keyword searches to ferret out trolls and sock puppets.  People always revert to words and phases even when they try to hide their identity.  It's like a finger print.  But you know that.

That's always been the hardest part when I try to mole in Liberal hell holes like DU and Kos.  I have a certain writing style that I have to really be conscious of when I'm behind enemy lines.

On Conservative sites this is the screen name I've used since 2001 when I first logged on to FR.  That way there's no doubt it's me :D

[corbe]

                        I wrote that, you bunch of haters!

[Emjay]

Bob Woodward?

Seriously doubt it.  Woodward loves the publicity.  He probably hasn't been happy since Watergate.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

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

The "spot on" claims seem that way because they're so common that anyone could write them, regardless of whether or not they had inside access

[WilliamVA]

Seriously doubt it.  Woodward loves the publicity.  He probably hasn't been happy since Watergate.

However, we have to note that Woodward's Book is to be released soon.......publicity??

[Wingnut]

Seriously doubt it.  Woodward loves the publicity.  He probably hasn't been happy since Watergate.

It has been a hell of a dry spell for the one hit wonder.  44 years between a decent scandal trying to prove you are worth a shit must be a bitch.

[Emjay]

However, we have to note that Woodward's Book is to be released soon.......publicity??

The book is making a big splash as it is and there is no kind of stretch that could make Woodward pass as a White House employee.

[ABX]

We used to do unique keyword searches to ferret out trolls and sock puppets.  People always revert to words and phases even when they try to hide their identity.  It's like a finger print.  But you know that.

It also may be something the author dropped to prove they are in a certain circle if the term comes up in private conversations.

It could simplify be a hint as to the author's age and background. Unless It has been revived in pop culture like Harry Potter, it is likely someone old who is a student of old speeches or reads old biographies.

[Emjay]

It has been a hell of a dry spell for the one hit wonder.  44 years between a decent scandal trying to prove you are worth a shit must be a bitch.

The only thing worse that that you 'used to be Woodward,' would be that you 'used to be Bernstein.'

[Wingnut]

The only thing worse that that you 'used to be Woodward,' would be that you 'used to be Bernstein.'

Yep.   

[Maj. Bill Martin]

The word "lodestar" really isn't that unusual, especially among lawyers.  So, if you want to assume that the leaker is more likely to be a lawyer....

Doesn't really narrow it down much in D.C..

[Emjay]

Mr. Anonymous is a bad ass ain't he?

What the heck happened to the New York Times?  I know it's been happening for years.  I took the Dallas Morning News when I lived in the Dallas area and the DMN was a very liberal paper.  They had no national staff at all and got all their stories (except for sports and local news) from the NYTimes and AP.

But the NYTimes has descended from being liberal into being absolutely traitorously liberal, aka Lying Liberal.

Here is what they said about the source: "The newspaper said the person's identity was known to the Times and their "job would be jeopardized" by their name being disclosed.

That is one of the dumber sentences I've read.  Ya think their job would be jeopardized?  And why would they want the job if they hate Trump so much.

It sounds so two-faced.  Like this person is the only one holding the fort against Trump's excesses.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

It sounds so two-faced.  Like this person is the only one holding the fort against Trump's excesses.

Sounds like someone with delusions of grandeur....

[INVAR]

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

So Trump goes and hands public legitimacy of this 'Anonymous source'????

What a freaking IDIOT.

So - the appearance of evil is that apparently this source's claims have legitimacy.

[XenaLee]

So Trump goes and hands public legitimacy of this 'Anonymous source'????

What a freaking IDIOT.

So - the appearance of evil is that apparently this source's claims have legitimacy.

Sounds to me like he's just calling their bluff.   If it's really an ""anonymous"" source, give it up or else.  If not, and if the NYSlimes is just lying again and as usual, they've gone too far this time.

[Hoodat]

NY Times op-ed editor describes process behind publishing anonymous Trump official's op-ed
By Michael Burke - 09/05/18 08:24 PM EDT

The op-ed, published Wednesday afternoon, described coordinated efforts among Trump administration staff to counter President Trump.

This is an open admission that the Deep State exists and that it is subverting our democratically elected leader.

[XenaLee]

This is an open admission that the Deep State exists and that it is subverting our democratically elected leader.

So....

pitchfork time yet???