WH Trump Resisters

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: Jon Estes

Re: WH Trump Resisters

Postby KeithE » Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:09 pm

Jim wrote:Woodward appeared with “Morning Joe” (onetime avid Trump supporter) again this morning explaining how he (Woodward) could be absolutely right despite having no firsthand knowledge of anything, just hearsay one presumes, from actual unhappy persons warning against Trump's incapacitation, (probably mostly lunacy-oriented?). All the denials by the Trump-officials with enough clout to actually do anything to harm Trump have put W in a hard spot. I believe he answered sorta like “What do you expect from them now, no matter they told me before?”. Reminds of the time CBS's Dan Rather advertised down the line of stations that he had set up Bush 41 and to not miss it, only to be left with a huge amount of dead air when Bush noted the violation of his agreement with Rather to talk about something else, not what Rather had brought up, and simply walked out. Rather seemed about to have a hernia. Maybe Morning Joe had hoped for a top job in the Trump administration and didn't get it, so turned democrat , which just suited NBC.


You are right that the Morning Joe program mostly supported Trump in early 2016. I remember that -somewhat before Trump had showed his xenophobic nature. Here’sthe history of Joe Scarborouh/Mika Brzezinski’s break with Trump by June 2016. Read it and you will see that Trump blew that support with religiously intolerant comments about Muslims, racist comments on immigrants (they’re “rapists”), the America born Hispanic judge who couldn't not possibly be unbiased, etc. IOW, Trump earned their non-support. By the time Trump had won (and was staffing), Morning Joe had already turned anti-Trump big time. So Jim’s statement in red is a product of Jim’s imagination.

As for Woodward’s content, no WH insider has explicitly denied the actual comments they gave him (albeit some 'this does not paint a real picture' non-denial denials). This is likely due to Woodward’s claim that he has tapes of their interviews. Woodward's chief message is that Trump is impulsively operating w/o meaningful data/facts/consultation with experts and WH insiders have to rescue him from his worst impulses. That message is confirmed by many others books (by Michael Wolff, David Cay Johnston, Amy Siskind), the NYT Ope-ed and probably more. Amy Siskind’s The List is the most detailed, documented and devastating to Trump that I have read/perused. I have read two chapters of Woodward’s book so far and it was mostly how Bannon took over the campaign post Manafort. The book that is inadequately undocumented is Russian Hoax by Fox News’s Gregg Jarrett with a faulty storyline full of ridiculous, unsupported assertions such as Jim’s fictions.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8819
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: WH Trump Resisters

Postby Jim » Thu Sep 13, 2018 9:26 am

KeithE wrote:
Jim wrote:Woodward appeared with “Morning Joe” (onetime avid Trump supporter) again this morning explaining how he (Woodward) could be absolutely right despite having no firsthand knowledge of anything, just hearsay one presumes, from actual unhappy persons warning against Trump's incapacitation, (probably mostly lunacy-oriented?). All the denials by the Trump-officials with enough clout to actually do anything to harm Trump have put W in a hard spot. I believe he answered sorta like “What do you expect from them now, no matter they told me before?”. Reminds of the time CBS's Dan Rather advertised down the line of stations that he had set up Bush 41 and to not miss it, only to be left with a huge amount of dead air when Bush noted the violation of his agreement with Rather to talk about something else, not what Rather had brought up, and simply walked out. Rather seemed about to have a hernia. Maybe Morning Joe had hoped for a top job in the Trump administration and didn't get it, so turned democrat , which just suited NBC.


You are right that the Morning Joe program mostly supported Trump in early 2016. I remember that -somewhat before Trump had showed his xenophobic nature. Here’sthe history of Joe Scarborouh/Mika Brzezinski’s break with Trump by June 2016. Read it and you will see that Trump blew that support with religiously intolerant comments about Muslims, racist comments on immigrants (they’re “rapists”), the America born Hispanic judge who couldn't not possibly be unbiased, etc. IOW, Trump earned their non-support. By the time Trump had won (and was staffing), Morning Joe had already turned anti-Trump big time. So Jim’s statement in red is a product of Jim’s imagination.

As for Woodward’s content, no WH insider has explicitly denied the actual comments they gave him (albeit some 'this does not paint a real picture' non-denial denials). This is likely due to Woodward’s claim that he has tapes of their interviews. Woodward's chief message is that Trump is impulsively operating w/o meaningful data/facts/consultation with experts and WH insiders have to rescue him from his worst impulses. That message is confirmed by many others books (by Michael Wolff, David Cay Johnston, Amy Siskind), the NYT Ope-ed and probably more. Amy Siskind’s The List is the most detailed, documented and devastating to Trump that I have read/perused. I have read two chapters of Woodward’s book so far and it was mostly how Bannon took over the campaign post Manafort. The book that is inadequately undocumented is Russian Hoax by Fox News’s Gregg Jarrett with a faulty storyline full of ridiculous, unsupported assertions such as Jim’s fictions.

Woodward and FBI Director Wray were both on the CBS clambake this morning. Woodward said he has myriads of tapes but won't release any of them unless the matter becomes a legal issue. Perhaps he's forgotten the Judith Miller matter (2005), in which the lady went to jail for not reporting a source. He will not take that chance, of course, so his tapes, if they exist, will somehow get lost. Wray simply said Woodward's descriptions of the White House operation were not true.
Jim
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: WH Trump Resisters

Postby Sandy » Thu Sep 13, 2018 12:04 pm

Jim's comparisons and examples are always good for a laugh. Aside from a huge difference in credibility, which Woodward has in abundance, and which Judith Miller doesn't have any, her jail time resulted in her refusal to reveal a source in a case that directly involved an ongoing national security issue under investigation. She waded in with inaccurate information that disrupted the investigation, which is why she got arrested for not revealing the source, and it turned out her source had a political motivation for using her that way. She served prison time because of it. The NYT dumped her because of her inaccuracies in reporting on the Iraq war, during which she made up information about Iraq's nuclear capabilities and WMD development, which Bush administration officials cited as if it were accurate. She then cited the Bush administration's quotes as proof for her story. The Times doesn't put up with that kind of exaggeration and lying, so they fired her, and she went to work for Fox News. A good reporter knows the difference between protecting a source, and getting caught up in the middle of an ongoing investigation to try and change or fix the outcome.

I've watched a couple of Woodward's interviews. He's a class act. He reacts to facts, so if his accuracy is questioned, and there's factual information to support a different perspective, he'll acknowledge he made a mistake. Those incidents are rare, though, because he is so thorough. And all of the information in this book is about the conduct and activity going on in the White House. Nothing about national security is being revealed. His book just corroborates what many of Trump's White House staff have already said goes on.
Sandy
 
Posts: 8800
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: WH Trump Resisters

Postby Jim » Thu Sep 13, 2018 1:18 pm

Sandy wrote:Jim's comparisons and examples are always good for a laugh. Aside from a huge difference in credibility, which Woodward has in abundance, and which Judith Miller doesn't have any, her jail time resulted in her refusal to reveal a source in a case that directly involved an ongoing national security issue under investigation. She waded in with inaccurate information that disrupted the investigation, which is why she got arrested for not revealing the source, and it turned out her source had a political motivation for using her that way. She served prison time because of it. The NYT dumped her because of her inaccuracies in reporting on the Iraq war, during which she made up information about Iraq's nuclear capabilities and WMD development, which Bush administration officials cited as if it were accurate. She then cited the Bush administration's quotes as proof for her story. The Times doesn't put up with that kind of exaggeration and lying, so they fired her, and she went to work for Fox News. A good reporter knows the difference between protecting a source, and getting caught up in the middle of an ongoing investigation to try and change or fix the outcome.

I've watched a couple of Woodward's interviews. He's a class act. He reacts to facts, so if his accuracy is questioned, and there's factual information to support a different perspective, he'll acknowledge he made a mistake. Those incidents are rare, though, because he is so thorough. And all of the information in this book is about the conduct and activity going on in the White House. Nothing about national security is being revealed. His book just corroborates what many of Trump's White House staff have already said goes on.

Nice but laughable try. Miller had the guts to face down everybody and moved on, no surprise since the NYT didn't want somebody with actual integrity to stick around. The paper watched her go down on principle but the WAPO will demand that Woodward destroy any evidence of any wrongdoing or titillating material he claims to have, lest both he and especially the paper be exposed for charlatanism. Don't hold your breath. Perhaps you've noticed that the newest emails vis-a-vis the FBI gang treat of leaks from the right places (many or most anonymous, of course) to the right destinations such as the MM members, otherwise known as the democrat or progressive machines poised to save the country. The interesting thing is that all of this stuff originated with Obama long before his term ended, including the Clinton-bought dossier falsely submitted to the FISA Court multiple times, with the sure knowledge by the FBI top honchos that this info (the buyer) was not given to the Court. Meanwhile, the dem hopefuls for 2020, Senators Pocahontas and Spartacus and Congresswoman Smash-mouth, are ginning up for the big bonanza.
Jim
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Previous

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jon Estes and 2 guests