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

[iceberg]

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?

if i ask you if you wrote something, are you going to say "yes/no" or give me war and peace about the content?

But they were not asked, most of those that denied did so prior to being asked about it, they made public statements as quickly as they could

If you were going to comment on something that you knew was total bullshit, would you comment on the content or the authorship?

ok GG - you win. shine up the internet trophy today as my apathy prevents me from carrying on at this point.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

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.

Once again, addressing the author does not in any way deal with the content. Two separate issues.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Help me out here-- why do people think an anonymous White House insider wrote it?
I mean, it could have been Mary Poppins in Timbuctoo for all we know, couldn't it?

Wrong thread.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

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?

if i ask you if you wrote something, are you going to say "yes/no" or give me war and peace about the content?

But they were not asked, most of those that denied did so prior to being asked about it, they made public statements as quickly as they could

If you were going to comment on something that you knew was total bullshit, would you comment on the content or the authorship?

ok GG - you win. shine up the internet trophy today as my apathy prevents me from carrying on at this point.

Logic always wins in the end!

 

[Lesh]

Of course Trumpers wan to deny that the Times OP ED writer was ral...but then there's the Woodward book (as well as the Wolf Book)

Too much information there to be false. And the Times (regardless of your opinion of them) is not going to risk their reputation (especially in the face of the ongoing attacks on them by the right) on something that wasn't real.

The question of why they did it is something else.

They may be telling themselves that by doing it...they are easing the fears of the nation or something

My opinion is that they are trying to set themselves up for "after the fall".

when this whole mess crashes and burns..they want to be able to claim "Well I did what I could".

Bullshit

If that's how they feel they should resign. Publicly and send a detailed letter to Congress asking for investigative committees to do their job. And make THAT letter public.

 

[irosie91]

Help me out here-- why do people think an anonymous White House insider wrote it?
I mean, it could have been Mary Poppins in Timbuctoo for all we know, couldn't it?

then again----it could have been IVANKA

 

[Hiryuu]

Once again, addressing the author does not in any way deal with the content. Two separate issues.

It does mean something when the entire basis of the article is centered on who the person is, their position in the administration, and what they know because of that. You cannot twist it no matter how hard you try.

 

[Polishprince]

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.
.

That's an awfully big assumption to make- that the op-ed was written by someone in the WH. Nothing in the piece could not have been written by someone sitting in the Times newsroom.

The NYT and their biggest shareholder Mexican Oligarch Carlos Slim, really hate President Trump's voters and supporters and have been seeking to undermine and cancel the 2016 election results since they first came down.

I suppose the alleged mole if they exist could be an Obama holdover or a career civil servant, someone deep in the Deep State with obvious motives. But it isn't likely, more just an exercise in creative writing.

 

[ptbw forever]

Of course Trumpers wan to deny that the Times OP ED writer was ral...but then there's the Woodward book (as well as the Wolf Book)

Too much information there to be false. And the Times (regardless of your opinion of them) is not going to risk their reputation (especially in the face of the ongoing attacks on them by the right) on something that wasn't real.

The question of why they did it is something else.

They may be telling themselves that by doing it...they are easing the fears of the nation or something

My opinion is that they are trying to set themselves up for "after the fall".

when this whole mess crashes and burns..they want to be able to claim "Well I did what I could".

Bullshit

If that's how they feel they should resign. Publicly and send a detailed letter to Congress asking for investigative committees to do their job. And make THAT letter public.

Jeung destroyed the reputation of the Times. She even thinks writers and readers of the Times are idiots.

Only extreme partisan hacks and anti-white racists disagree.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Once again, addressing the author does not in any way deal with the content. Two separate issues.

It does mean something when the entire basis of the article is centered on who the person is, their position in the administration, and what they know because of that. You cannot twist it no matter how hard you try.

Your entire line of argument rests on the fact that all of these denials are accurate. That puts you on very shaky ground.

 

[hadit]

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.

Holy crap, hadn't thought of that, and it should be at the top of the list: Some kind of personal professional agenda.

This is DC, after all.

Surely this person would know they would be outed, and is anticipating/hoping for some kind of reward or advancement.
.

I have to wonder about the hope for advancement. Just like someone who is willing to cheat on their spouse to have an affair with you, this person has publicly revealed that they cannot be trusted.

 

[ptbw forever]

What they said is not the same as saying it was bullshit. Saying "I did not write it" does not equate to "it is not true"

What you are suggesting is the age old gag joke of, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet".

That routine is old as heck, and doesn't get any better no matter how you try and make it. The Administration's response would be the same as the person answering the other question with, "I never beat my wife to start with". Sorry if you aren't satisfied they aren't falling for your crap.

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.

Which means they didn’t....

Yep, it means those two did not write it, if they are telling the truth, and it also means they did not dispute a single thing in the writing.

Again, you are a fucking idiot.

 

[Mac1958]

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.

Holy crap, hadn't thought of that, and it should be at the top of the list: Some kind of personal professional agenda.

This is DC, after all.

Surely this person would know they would be outed, and is anticipating/hoping for some kind of reward or advancement.
.

I have to wonder about the hope for advancement. Just like someone who is willing to cheat on their spouse to have an affair with you, this person has publicly revealed that they cannot be trusted.

Well, people can be nuts.


.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.
.

I agree. Even if the 25th is not possible, I believe this is a heads up to this and the next congress to let them know that there are quite a few in the admin who would testify before congress and that they have a story to tell.

There really is no other benefit for a republican to do so right before the midterms.

 

[skews13]

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.
.

It’s not true. Trump did it to deflect from the Kavanaugh hearings. That’s his get out of jail free card.

On the federal level. Nobody can help him at the state level.

 

[hadit]

Something doesn't fit here, but hopefully they'll be outed.

Why do you hope they'll be outed?

You seem more upset that Trump's staff thinks he's crazy than Trump being, you know, a Crazy Nazi who throws children into concentration Camps.

Boy, am I glad that's not happening. That would be almost as bad as having a democrat in the White House.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What they said is not the same as saying it was bullshit. Saying "I did not write it" does not equate to "it is not true"

What you are suggesting is the age old gag joke of, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet".

That routine is old as heck, and doesn't get any better no matter how you try and make it. The Administration's response would be the same as the person answering the other question with, "I never beat my wife to start with". Sorry if you aren't satisfied they aren't falling for your crap.

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.

Which means they didn’t....

Yep, it means those two did not write it, if they are telling the truth, and it also means they did not dispute a single thing in the writing.

Again, you are a fucking idiot.

That means so very much coming from a mindless Trump sheep.

It is not my fault your head is too far up Trump's ass to understand that "I did not write that" does not mean the same thing as "That is untrue".

 

[Polishprince]

Help me out here-- why do people think an anonymous White House insider wrote it?
I mean, it could have been Mary Poppins in Timbuctoo for all we know, couldn't it?

then again----it could have been IVANKA

Ivanka? Only if the President asked her to, in order to catch the NYT 's in an embarrassing "gotcha" moment.

Remember that the media is playing checkers when Trump is playing 4D chess.

Of course the media is easy to play, if you'll remember the Killian letters that Dubya and Rove gave to Dan Rather, and Rather was a sucker and put them right on the air. President Trump is a lot more sophisticated than President Bush was or even Karl Rove. This whole event could be very interesting.

 

[Mac1958]

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.
.

It’s not true. Trump did it to deflect from the Kavanaugh hearings. That’s his get out of jail free card.

On the federal level. Nobody can help him at the state level.

You're saying TRUMP did this?
.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Remember that the media is playing checkers when Trump is playing 4D chess.

This is a true statement because checkers is a real thing while 4d chess is a made up fantasy, like much of what Trump has to say.