• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

NY Times editorial bombshell

It reads to me like it was written by Kissinger, who used the word "lodestar" at McCain's funeral.

Kissinger isn't a member of the administration.

Pence has used the word "lodestar" repeatedly throughout the years, and also spoke at McCain's funeral.

I think the two most likely explanations for the use of the word are: 1) the op-ed was written by Pence, 2) it was used deliberately as a red herring to protect the identity of the author.
 
Whomever wrote it should stop being such a pussy and work to invoke the 25th.

That'd be pretty pointless. They need 2/3 support from Congress anyway. Both that and impeachment would lead nowhere anyway. Resigning would just leave Trump more able to do whatever he wants. Staying and undermining him might be the best choice, though I'm not quite sure why they felt the need to publish this Op-Ed.
 
Last edited:
Trump's and Huckabee Sanders' reactions seem to indicate that the source is genuine, which helps corroborate Woodward's and Wolff's books. And everything else we suspected and heard about.

To be honest, there is very little in the letter that would surprise anyone who followed the news and Trump's press conferences.

Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.
“There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.

We know all this!

Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.

Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.

On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.

We know this too! Trump says nice things about Putin, but his administration continues treating Russia largely as it has done before.
 
Anyone checked in to see what FoxNews has to say about it? Or are they covering Uranium 1 this week?
 
Staying and undermining him might be the best choice, though I'm not quite sure why they felt the need to publish this Op-Ed.

Because publishing the op Ed is itself an act to undermine. They've just sent the White House into another paroxysm of paranoia, witch hunting, and backstabbing. The serpents are biting each other in a frenzy. Everyone knows the fastest path to rattle Trump's cage good and hard is to announce to the press that he's not in control of things. He's probably tripled his Diet Coke consumption to rehydrate from all the spittle he's lost from screaming in the last two days. Another couple of leaks and he'll need an IV drip!
 
To be honest, there is very little in the letter that would surprise anyone who followed the news and Trump's press conferences.



We know all this!



We know this too! Trump says nice things about Putin, but his administration continues treating Russia largely as it has done before.

Which all leads me to wonder if the letter/op-ed piece could have been written by someone well outside the White House, with the simple intent of turning the knob up to eleven in an already paranoid Oval Office.
I know, that's crazy talk, never mind, forget I said it.
 
That'd be pretty pointless. They need 2/3 support from Congress anyway. Both that and impeachment would lead nowhere anyway. Resigning would just leave Trump more able to do whatever he wants. Staying and undermining him might be the best choice, though I'm not quite sure why they felt the need to publish this Op-Ed.

Well, at least the editorial clarifies one thing: the "deep state" of entrenched bureaucrats is real, and is really working to undermine the Executive branch.
 
Kissinger isn't a member of the administration.

Pence has used the word "lodestar" repeatedly throughout the years, and also spoke at McCain's funeral.

I think the two most likely explanations for the use of the word are: 1) the op-ed was written by Pence, 2) it was used deliberately as a red herring to protect the identity of the author.

Nikki Haley is friends with Kissinger and is a member of the admin, tho.

The "Kissinger crowd" sees itself as sort of a "government in exile" at the moment. I think she was transmitting their ideas in the letter, and sees herself as one of them.

eta: Kissinger used the word "lodestar" just last week at McCain's funeral.
 
Last edited:
Well, at least the editorial clarifies one thing: the "deep state" of entrenched bureaucrats is real, and is really working to undermine the Executive branch.

Not really. Not unless you have evidence that the op-ed was written by an entrenched bureaucrat rather than a Trump appointee.
 
Well, at least the editorial clarifies one thing: the "deep state" of entrenched bureaucrats is real, and is really working to undermine the Executive branch.

I disagree on the framing, but we could go back and forth on that forever.

But there is no particular reason to believe this is an "entrenched bureaucrat". It could as easily be someone appointed by Trump, and my guess is that it is.

And on that point, the "executive branch" consists of more than just the President. Stopping the President from doing stupid things is not undermining the executive branch.
 
Which all leads me to wonder if the letter/op-ed piece could have been written by someone well outside the White House, with the simple intent of turning the knob up to eleven in an already paranoid Oval Office.
I know, that's crazy talk, never mind, forget I said it.

There's really no way the editorial board of the NYT would give op-ed space to an opinion piece that was truly anonymous even to them. They know who wrote it, and I sincerely doubt they'd go along with such a thing.
 
Which all leads me to wonder if the letter/op-ed piece could have been written by someone well outside the White House, with the simple intent of turning the knob up to eleven in an already paranoid Oval Office.
I know, that's crazy talk, never mind, forget I said it.

There's really no way the editorial board of the NYT would give op-ed space to an opinion piece that was truly anonymous even to them. They know who wrote it, and I sincerely doubt they'd go along with such a thing.

There's also the dog that didn't bark evidence here. Trump and Sanders have been calling the writer of the Op-Ed GUTLESS and a coward rather than claiming it is just made up.
 
The NYT knew this op-ed would be a big deal, and they know who the author is. I don't think the NYT would allow an outsider claim to be an insider of the administration.

ETA: Note to self - remember to refresh page to avoid being ninja'ed by RecoveringYuppy.
 
Last edited:
There's really no way the editorial board of the NYT would give op-ed space to an opinion piece that was truly anonymous even to them. They know who wrote it, and I sincerely doubt they'd go along with such a thing.

Yeah, in the NYT podcast I linked to above, the editor says it was given to him by an intermediary who he trusts, and then he personally confirmed authorship with the purported author.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom