Anonymous Op-Ed from the NYT

[rogue06]

When they're in a reputable outlet such as the NY Times they are trustworthy.

The New York Times has allowed its reputation to be shredded, burned and the ashes spread to the winds in recent years.

[Tassman]

The New York Times has allowed its reputation to be shredded, burned and the ashes spread to the winds in recent years.

As opposed to the lying, immoral sociopath Donald Trump, you mean?

[Mountain Man]

...a reputable outlet such as the NY Times...

Do you have any idea how many times The New York Times has been busted for printing blatant lies? They have quite the history.

Source: New York Times: Reporter routinely faked articles

(2003) The New York Times has concluded, after an extensive internal investigation, that one of its former reporters committed "frequent acts of journalistic fraud."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast...imes.reporter/

© Copyright Original Source

Here's a 2004 editorial from the Times itself half-heartedly apologizing for its own false reporting:

Source: The New York Times

...we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged -- or failed to emerge.

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/w...-and-iraq.html

© Copyright Original Source

Here's a 2011 story about the Times using sketchy, one-sided sources and (almost certainly deliberately) failing to report a certain fact that would have undermined their anti-fracking narrative:

Source: Public Editor Admits NYT�s Fracking Article: �Went Out On A Limb, Lacked An In-Depth Dissenting View�

https://www.mediaite.com/online/publ...view%e2%80%99/

© Copyright Original Source

Here's an archived Times article from 2015 where they blame Wisconsin governor Scott Walker for teacher layoffs that happened before he even took office.

Here's an example from 2016 where the Times blatantly misreported the facts to rehabilitate the image of a member of the Black Panthers:

Source: New York Times Caught in Lies Defending Black Panthers

https://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016...k-panther-lie/

© Copyright Original Source

Here's a 2017 story about The New York Times using a misleading photograph to make it seem like the delegation from a visiting sports team was smaller than the one that had previously visited Obama when the delegations were, in fact, the same size. Here's the actual Twitter post; notice the number of heads in the foreground in the 2017 photo.

Another one from 2017

Source: Journos Slam New York Times For �Garbage� Hit Piece On Rick Perry

https://dailycaller.com/2017/01/19/j...totally-bogus/

© Copyright Original Source

Summary of a 2018 story where the Times made a false claim about something said in a White House briefing:

Source: Media Double Down After New York Times Gets Busted Peddling Fake News

http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/28/...ing-fake-news/

© Copyright Original Source

I could easily dig up another dozen examples if I wanted to invest the time, but, no, you go ahead and trust The New York Times as a "reputable" source, especially when they're telling lies that you want to hear.

[rogue06]

Jayson Blair and his totally made up reporting was the beginning of the end. The faked quotes from several Miss USA contestants about Trump early on in the 2016 presidential campaign that were angrily denied and vehemently repudiated by the women signaled the point of no return. And the recent hiring of a virulent unrepentant racist, Sarah Jeong, as an editor is just the cherry on top.

[rogue06]

As opposed to the lying, immoral sociopath Donald Trump, you mean?

I'm not holding up Trump as the standard for honesty and integrity. And since I'm not your point as usual fall flat.

[lilpixieofterror]

[Cow Poke]

When they're in a reputable outlet such as the NY Times...

Tass, you're a comedian!!!! Did you say that with the obligatory straight face?

[Zymologist]

Who does the term "senior official" encompass?

[carpedm9587]

Look up the word "anonymous".

It's anonymous to us. The source is presumably known to the NYT, for those who haven't succumbed to Trump's "fake news" mantra. The MSM may lean to the left, but I have seen no evidence they are outright duplicitous.

[Sparko]

When they're in a reputable outlet such as the NY Times they are trustworthy.

Go on, pull the other one!

IF this is an actual white house staffer it is probably some intern. But I suspect it is entirely fake. Not sure if the NYT is actually in on it, or if they are just being fooled. I suspect the first.

My question is, if this really IS a senior WH Staffer and he/she and others are actively working against Trump to "save 'Murica!" why in the world would the reveal what they are doing to the NYT and pretty much tank their own scheme by revealing it to Trump?

[Sparko]

You think Pence is trying to "institute Dominionist government in the USA...and by extinction the world." and then call Trump supporters "deluded?"

[carpedm9587]

Last night, this op-ed was published in the Atlantic. After reading it, I find that I am reversing my initial opinion about the anonymous op-ed. While I do believe it is genuine (I have no real reason to think otherwise, and the responses from those on the right here are certainly no surprise), I also think it was ill-informed, for all of the reasons the author cites.

But it creates a quandary. Impeaching Trump or applying the 25th Amendment simply makes Pence president. I would not be in favor of that. If the internal situation is as bad as Woodward, the anonymous op-ed, and Trump's own public behavior suggest (which I think is highly likely), the constitutional way to deal with it is as described, leaving a simple choice: continue the unconstitutional internal resistance (apparently by conventional Republicans - not the so-called "deep state") until Trump is replaced in 2020, or take the constitutional avenue and let Pence take over. Unfortunately, the constitutional avenue is highly unlikely to work. I cannot see Trump's cabinet aligning behind the 25th, and I cannot see the House impeaching (unless it changes hands on 11/6) or the Senate convicting (even if both houses change hands).

Still, if we are to defend our constitution - the constitution avenue really is the one that should be taken. I agree with the author of the Atlantic op-ed: the anonymous op-ed has made things worse, and the author should come forward, put his/her name to his story, and take his/her evidence to the proper venue: Congress. Our institutions have done a reasonable job of keeping Trump in check. We have to hope they will continue to do so until January 2021.

[Sparko]

Last night, this op-ed was published in the Atlantic. After reading it, I find that I am reversing my initial opinion about the anonymous op-ed. While I do believe it is genuine (I have no real reason to think otherwise, and the responses from those on the right here are certainly no surprise), I also think it was ill-informed, for all of the reasons the author cites.

But it creates a quandary. Impeaching Trump or applying the 25th Amendment simply makes Pence president. I would not be in favor of that. If the internal situation is as bad as Woodward, the anonymous op-ed, and Trump's own public behavior suggest (which I think is highly likely), the constitutional way to deal with it is as described, leaving a simple choice: continue the unconstitutional internal resistance (apparently by conventional Republicans - not the so-called "deep state") until Trump is replaced in 2020, or take the constitutional avenue and let Pence take over. Unfortunately, the constitutional avenue is highly unlikely to work. I cannot see Trump's cabinet aligning behind the 25th, and I cannot see the House impeaching (unless it changes hands on 11/6) or the Senate convicting (even if both houses change hands).

Still, if we are to defend our constitution - the constitution avenue really is the one that should be taken. I agree with the author of the Atlantic op-ed: the anonymous op-ed has made things worse, and the author should come forward, put his/her name to his story, and take his/her evidence to the proper venue: Congress. Our institutions have done a reasonable job of keeping Trump in check. We have to hope they will continue to do so until January 2021.

Your new op-ed said the same thing I did. If this really IS a senior staffer who along with others is acting against the President, then they just tanked their own scheme. Trump will be on the lookout for any such actions now, right?

Which makes me think this is NOT really a Trump staffer, but someone who thinks this would be a good way to sew distrust and paranoia in the Administration.

[Mountain Man]

The faked quotes from several Miss USA contestants about Trump early on in the 2016 presidential campaign that were angrily denied and vehemently repudiated by the women signaled the point of no return.

Then there's this...

Source: Woman in NYT piece about Trump's mistreatment of women fires back

One of the women quoted in a New York Times article headlined "Crossing the Line: How Donald Trump Behaved With Women in Private" is pushing back Monday and saying that she was taken out of context and Trump never made her feel uncomfortable.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...lane/84435570/

© Copyright Original Source

Source: 'They spun it': Trump's ex-girlfriend accuses The New York Times of distorting her story in bombshell report

"They did take quotes from what I said, and they put a negative connotation on it," she said. "They spun it to where it appeared negative. I did not have a negative experience with Donald Trump. And I don't appreciate them making it look like that I was saying that it was a negative experience. Because it was not." [...] "He never made me feel like I was being demeaned in any way," Brewer Lane said. "He never offended me in any way. He was very gracious. I saw him around all types of people, all types of women. He was very kind, thoughtful, generous. He was a gentleman."

https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...k-times-2016-5

© Copyright Original Source

They're a bastion of integrity alright.

[Mountain Man]

It appears Mike Pence is the internet's #1 suspect for authorship of the piece, particularly based on the presence of the unusual word "lodestar" in the article which is a Pence favorite.

Just reading the article myself I found the language quite weirdly polished in general for a staffer, but a career politician like Pence writing it would explain it.

Source: Pence, Pompeo, Coats deny penning anonymous op-ed ripping Trump

As Washington entered into a whirlwind round of "Who Dunnit" after the New York Times published an anonymous op-ed Wednesday afternoon detailing a resistance-style effort inside the Trump White House to undermine the president's authority, senior administration officials are now stepping forward to say it wasn't them.

On Thursday during an overseas visit to India, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo denied being the author, telling reporters at an embassy meet-and-greet that it should not be a surprise that a "liberal newspaper" which has "relentlessly attacked" the administration chose to print the opinion piece.

He said that the Times should not have chosen to take the word of a "disgruntled deceptive bad actor" and issued a warning to the person who wrote the piece: "leave."

"I come from a place where if you're not in a position to execute the commander's intent, you have a singular option, that is to leave," Pompeo said.

Meanwhile, Vice President Mike Pence's office also denied the president's number two was behind the piece. Pence's Deputy Chief of Staff Jarrod Agen plainly tweeted that unlike the author in Wednesday's article, the vice president "puts his name on his op-eds."

[...]

Agen added that the Times "should be ashamed and so should the person who wrote the false, illogical, and gutless op-ed. Our office is above such amateur acts."

On Wednesday morning, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats chimed in with a denial, calling any speculation that he wrote the opinion piece "patently false." Coats has been critical in the past of how Mr. Trump handled the summit with Russian President.

"Speculation that The New York Times op-ed was written by me or my principal deputy is patently false," Coats said in a statement. "We did not. From the beginning of our tenure, we have insisted that the entire IC remain focused on our mission to provide the president and policymakers with the best intelligence possible."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-yor...onymous-piece/

© Copyright Original Source

So, yeah, liberal delusions that it was written by some highly-placed "insider" have gone up in smoke. It's worth pointing out, again, that the title of "senior administration official" could legitimately be claimed by literally hundreds of people in Washington, including many who have very little if any direct interaction with the president.