6 ms·

The op-ed was a plant, personally approved by Trump. This has literally been his standard MO for decades: plant fake stories and weaponize the press for his own

The op-ed was a plant, personally approved by Trump. This has literally been his standard MO for decades: plant fake stories and weaponize the press for his own use. And it works. He effectively ended the entire Manafort/Cohen news cycle overnight. Think about the plausibility of this story for even a moment. There's a list of less than 10 people that could have possibly written the op-ed, and what it amounts to legally is a written admission of high treason, a felony punishable by death. Do you seriously think any reasonable person would ever do that and assume they would get away with it? The entire administration has been one massive psy-ops campaign against the American public. Don't listen to a single word they say. Just watch their actions, and react with your own judgement accordingly.

blazespin 8y ago
Its a good theory .. it completely supports the deep state argumment and allows for Trump an excuse to root out moles. I can even see nyt editor falling for it to sell newspapers. Everyone wins, right. Amusingly, the analysis concluded that Trump was actually behind it. The whole thing is pretty stupid
- blazespin 8y ago
  For the downvoters, you have to appreciate how stupid the whole is. Nothing was revealed we didn't already know. Republicans widely panned the entire thing. Trump has already talked about taking on the establishment, and that's who this is. He now has an excuse to fire if anyone doesn't do exactly what he asks.
  - gamblor956 8y ago
    Trump could already fire people. This changes nothing.
learc83 8y ago
>and what it amounts to legally is a written admission of high treason, a felony punishable by death. Here is the legal definition of treason in the US (at the federal level). "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." Nothing in that letter comes close to fitting that definition. > He effectively ended the entire Manafort/Cohen news cycle overnight. The Manafort Cohen news cycle was already ended by the Woodward book preview. All this letter did was make the accusations in the book look even more plausible.
- cabaalis 8y ago
  I haven't heard anything at all from my peers about the Woodward book. I have heard about the essay. So if it was a plant, it was geared towards the book and not recent trials.
vharuck 8y ago
> Do you seriously think any reasonable person would ever do that As the other reply points out, this really isn't treason. The President is not the country. > and assume they would get away with it? I don't think they even thought that far. They probably wrote this in an emotional state after watching (or even attending) John McCain's funeral. McCain's referenced with respect near the end of the article. This seems like a short-sighted attempt to announce heroism as an inspiration to others. It certainly hasn't had that effect, but I try to keep Hanlon's razor in mind: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
ceejayoz 8y ago
> This has literally been his standard MO for decades: plant fake stories and weaponize the press for his own use. Trump's history of planting fake stories involves positive stories about his sexual prowess and popularity - "an anonymous source says Trump is great with the ladies" sort of stuff. Planting highly negative stories about himself would be a massive shift in MO.
Bluestrike2 8y ago
This goes a bit beyond his past attempts to manipulate the press with fake personas. The op-ed claims that staffers genuinely considered his removal via the 25th amendment due to his being mentally unfit. That's a damning admission, and one that effectively substantiates a great deal of the insider criticism and evidence of dysfunction that's been published. That's not a conversation any president would be willing to further. It'd be like an 18th-century king trying to sniff out would-be usurpers by announcing to his court that he's illegitimate. It might throw enough blood in the water to get someone to bite, but even after lopping off a few heads, the statement--true or false--is going to haunt you. Some statements can't be taken back. Not to mention that it doesn't really fit with his personality; he has incredible difficulty accepting even meaningless criticism, or letting it go for that matter. Approving an op-ed to go out that implicitly suggests that he's mentally unfit is not something he'd go along with for any reason or perceived benefit.

blazespin 8y ago

Its a good theory .. it completely supports the deep state argumment and allows for Trump an excuse to root out moles. I can even see nyt editor falling for it to sell newspapers. Everyone wins, right. Amusingly, the analysis concluded that Trump was actually behind it. The whole thing is pretty stupid

blazespin 8y ago
For the downvoters, you have to appreciate how stupid the whole is. Nothing was revealed we didn't already know. Republicans widely panned the entire thing. Trump has already talked about taking on the establishment, and that's who this is. He now has an excuse to fire if anyone doesn't do exactly what he asks.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  Trump could already fire people. This changes nothing.

learc83 8y ago

>and what it amounts to legally is a written admission of high treason, a felony punishable by death. Here is the legal definition of treason in the US (at the federal level). "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." Nothing in that letter comes close to fitting that definition. > He effectively ended the entire Manafort/Cohen news cycle overnight. The Manafort Cohen news cycle was already ended by the Woodward book preview. All this letter did was make the accusations in the book look even more plausible.

cabaalis 8y ago
I haven't heard anything at all from my peers about the Woodward book. I have heard about the essay. So if it was a plant, it was geared towards the book and not recent trials.

vharuck 8y ago

> Do you seriously think any reasonable person would ever do that As the other reply points out, this really isn't treason. The President is not the country. > and assume they would get away with it? I don't think they even thought that far. They probably wrote this in an emotional state after watching (or even attending) John McCain's funeral. McCain's referenced with respect near the end of the article. This seems like a short-sighted attempt to announce heroism as an inspiration to others. It certainly hasn't had that effect, but I try to keep Hanlon's razor in mind: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

ceejayoz 8y ago

> This has literally been his standard MO for decades: plant fake stories and weaponize the press for his own use. Trump's history of planting fake stories involves positive stories about his sexual prowess and popularity - "an anonymous source says Trump is great with the ladies" sort of stuff. Planting highly negative stories about himself would be a massive shift in MO.

Bluestrike2 8y ago

This goes a bit beyond his past attempts to manipulate the press with fake personas. The op-ed claims that staffers genuinely considered his removal via the 25th amendment due to his being mentally unfit. That's a damning admission, and one that effectively substantiates a great deal of the insider criticism and evidence of dysfunction that's been published. That's not a conversation any president would be willing to further. It'd be like an 18th-century king trying to sniff out would-be usurpers by announcing to his court that he's illegitimate. It might throw enough blood in the water to get someone to bite, but even after lopping off a few heads, the statement--true or false--is going to haunt you. Some statements can't be taken back. Not to mention that it doesn't really fit with his personality; he has incredible difficulty accepting even meaningless criticism, or letting it go for that matter. Approving an op-ed to go out that implicitly suggests that he's mentally unfit is not something he'd go along with for any reason or perceived benefit.