It came from him. The person who "wrote" it is a probably a cabinet member.

[Claritie Pixie]

Last edited Thu Sep 6, 2018, 03:04 PM - Edit history (1)

I think the op ed was concocted and provided to the NYT so that he can rage at them and play victim, while his cadre of accomplices fellates his ego.

As this goes on with letters of denial and public comments of denial and outrage, can’t shake the feeling that he started it.

[ProfessorGAC]

1. NYT Has A Name

They would not have otherwise printed it. It was printed anonymously but they have a name, so that doesn't work.

[GusBob]

2. They have 2 names

The writer approached the NYT thru a go-between. So they have a name and another source witness

[unblock]

3. that doesn't disprove much.

it could be a cabinet member or other "senior official" who discussed this whole thing with donnie and donnie approved, or even had the twisted idea himself. if it is a false flag designed to give the pretense for a purge, this would at least be consistent with that.

if it were donnie personally, it raises the question of whether or not the nytimes would knowingly run an op-ed that was that deceptive.

i would certainly hope that they would not run it, so that cast considerable doubt on it actually being donnie directly. but it still could be him indirectly.

[Claritie Pixie]

6. That's exactly what I was thinking. It's like a reality tv show.

[ProfessorGAC]

8. Not Following That Logic

Not even a little.

There is a name attached to it. The worst case for the NYT is that they publicly call the writer a liar and make it clear that the White House was involved in creating fake news. That's the antithesis of what that gang wants people to believe. They want people to believe THEY are the truth, not creators of fake news.

[unblock]

11. i'm with you on the logic of donnie being involved not making much sense,

i'm just saying that the fact that the nytimes has a name isn't what makes it not make much sense. the nytimes won't reveal the source unless and until the source say it's ok to do so, and the nytimes won't recant the story unless they have fairly hard evidence it was fabricated.

in a white house that leaks like a sieve, the author may well be revealed, and possibly exposed as a donnie loyalist rather than part of "the resistance". but that doesn't mean that donnie or a loyalist can't think they can pull this off.

keep in mind that donnie's been creating fake news for decades, he's gotten away with it even after it's become obvious that he's behind it all and it was all fake.


again, i'm inclined to take the op-ed at face value and believe there likely plenty of people in the white house who think donnie goes too far (though they may be very extreme themselves) and see themselves has protecting the nation from donnie's excesses even while they allow donnie to do what we see as tearing the nation apart.

[ProfessorGAC]

17. Same Page

I lost your train of thought
We're back on the same route

[Whiskeytide]

7. That doesn't prevent it from being ...

... a farce. The NYT knows who brought it to them claiming to be the author. They don't necessarily know where it originated or who actually helped write it. It could have been trump, and they wouldn't know.

However, I don't think it was trump. I think it is a CYA by several senior people who want to be able to portray themselves as heroes rather than enablers when massive amounts of orange shit is having to be wiped off of the walls. Someone will eventually cop to writing it, but many will claim to be part of the "we" referenced in the op-ed.

[ProfessorGAC]

10. Still Not Buying It, But. . .

. . .i completely agree with your second paragraph.

Your premise and that of Unblock, presumes that NYT is run by blithering idiots. I can't accept that.

[unblock]

12. nonsense.

many people have said, in one way or another, that donnie need reining in at times.

it's not at all hard to believe the nytimes would take the article at face value even if it came from an obvious loyalist, and especially if it came from someone else.

it's not at all saying the nytimes are "blithering idiots" if they couldn't guess that this was done with donnie's blessings behind the scenes, if indeed that happened.

[Whiskeytide]

14. Not blithering idiots. Just ...

... people who want a story that sells.

Let's say it's Dan Coates who approached them. He tells them he wants to publish an anonymous op-ed because, holy shit, the crazy is off the charts in the WH.

They know Coates. They obviously know who he is and the access he has. But there is no way they can fact check his opinions because - well, they're opinions. And they can't fact check his accounts of these various events because that would entail calling other people at the WH and asking "Dan says trump picks his nose and eats the boogers - is that true?" - which kind of defeats the whole anonymous thing. I suppose they could have called others and said we have an anonymous tip that there is some booger eating going on in the oval office, but that's about it.

In the end - Dan Coates providing this op-ed is still a huge story and a major scoop. It being Dan Coates, I would presume, probably stands alone as the only fact check they would have to have to print the op-ed as an anonymous insider spilling the beans.

As I said, I personally DON'T think it's trump - but for other reasons (ego too big to voluntarily dis himself, don't see the strategy of concocting a ruse to fire people - he'd just fire them, and his public reaction really does seem to be genuine surprise), NOT because its not possible. It is possible. Just not logical.

[leftynyc]

4. I think that theory is ludicrous

You think he WANTED it to be said he, once again, made a moronic hire? That he's so incompetent he, once again, doesn't realize his own people are treating him like a wayward child? That he wanted to be called amoral? All so he can whine about the NY Times? Nope, sorry, someone with an outsized ego like donnie would never agree to that.

[Claritie Pixie]

9. Narcissists need attention to survive. Even really awful attention.

Besides, it’s not something we haven’t heard before. He gets to play victim and go on the attack.

[leftynyc]

15. I couldn't possibly disagree

more strongly. His ego would never allow this.

[onenote]

16. narcissists react to criticism with narcissistic rage

they don't seek out criticism.

[Faux pas]

5. I don't know if

he knows anyone literate enough to have written it. Maybe Kelly Ann? She's slimy enough.

[dawnie51]

13. Dump is scriptin a reality show....

and this would really be a barnburner episode. I can't really see it, but then, we don't think like Dump thinks. His ONLY concern is keeping himself in the news and getting tweets and likes. If he thought this would help, he'd do it in a heartbeat.

[0rganism]

18. i'm betting on Kelly as the cabinet auteur

with or without input from His Orangeness. definitely seeded to create discord and allow for additional media bashing. maybe it's working, maybe it's backfiring, who cares? Trump is gobbling up all the headlines and providing cover for nominee KKKavanaugh. at this point, it's clear that the strengths of our democracy are being used for purposes of self-destruction. i am not optimistic about the next decade.