Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Or, employ a little bit of skepticism. A book filled with gossip, released two months before the elections? Gee, whooda thunk?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Personally, I'd ignore everything that was anonymously sourced, and only pay attention to statements with names attached. At least you can follow up with that.

---

Quote:

---

If the president can use anon sources then why can't the press?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

If the president can use anon sources then why can't the press?

---

He does? I guess I pay so little attention that I don't even know when it happened.

Gossip: Somebody (Woodward) said that somebody (anonymous) said.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Saddam has WMD!!! Be afraid!! Be very afraid!!!

---

Quote:

---

Is it gossip if Trump does it in writing? Yesterday? The president of the United States — the country’s chief law-enforcement officer — is berating his own Attorney General for bringing criminal charges against two Republicans.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I don't follow Twitter and so I don't really pay attention to Trump tweets.

Quote:

---

Is it gossip if Trump does it in writing? Yesterday? The president of the United States — the country’s chief law-enforcement officer — is berating his own Attorney General for bringing criminal charges against two Republicans.

---

But I have noticed something interesting about the Trump WH ... if Trump says you're a great guy (or gal) you're probably about to be fired. So what does it mean if Trump constantly gripes about you? Because, for all the tweets ... Sessions is still in place, isn't he?
:shrug:

---

Quote:

---

The entire point was that Trump does NOT want the law enforced against Republicans.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

I'm holding my judgment in abeyance. There are two narratives out there, both of them sound equally preposterous.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The entire point is that IF Trump's supposed dislike of Sessions is one giant head-fake, why should I not wonder if Trump's criticism of the indictments is ALSO a giant head-fake?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I'm holding my judgment in abeyance. There are two narratives out there, both of them sound equally preposterous. The first is that Trump is a brain-dead stooge who would have never made it into the WH without Russian help ("help" to date seems pretty paltry and ineffectual.) That the Russians have some sort of "dirt" on Trump ... something about getting peed on by hookers ... which is worse that what Trump has already been accused of?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The second narrative is that Trump is a preternaturally devious mastermind, who has cooked up an entire scheme to bring down the deep state and its M$M partners, and that he's accomplished this partly by appearing to be imbecilic and irrational. I would think that the second version is completely out of the question except that I then recall the VERY long list of DOJ and FBI officers who've been fired, demoted, or resigned. So somebody somewhere must be doing SOMEthing to drain the swamp ...

---

Quote:

---

There is a third narrative out there: Trump is imperious, impatient and immature, a King Baby of presidents, a man who is incapable of rising to the demands of the most important job on earth.- SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

There is life beyond Trump.

So far, he's creating a better situation than when he arrived in office. The next term President (whether that's him or someone else) will have a much better platform from which to act.

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Where's Bernstein? Did they break up like Cheech and Chong did?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Wow, you really are totally culturally uneducated. It's mind blowing. You must be living under a rock. Your post goes a long way in explaining why all your opinions and beliefs come from a place of ignorance.

Add to that your admittance that you don't source information because you see everyone as lying. That you read something here and then formulate a opinion based on well, nothin from nothin equals nothin.


T

Quote:

---

Increased our coal exports by 60%

---

Quote:

---

U.S. oil production recently reached all-time high

---

Quote:

---

Issued executive order to keep open Guantanamo Bay

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Trumps nothing but a whack job. Those who continue to support his lunacy and corrupt ways only expose themselves to be loonies as well.

I have news for them. As he crashes and burns so do they. Although they've already lost all credibility as being factual or truthful and of sound mind, Trump going down will be the icing on the cake as far as sealing the deal on their intelligence, or lack thereof.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
What sig doesn't want to admit to is that many of Trumps promises were ill-conceived in the first place. Not good ideas at all.

---

Quote:

---

Some of them are ill-advised, some of them are necessary for the USA.

---

Quote:

---

Another thing sig won't admit to, is that Trumps ignorance of the issues is visible and he is doing more harm than good. He's just fucking things up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

So far, Trump is keeping his campaign promises. Some of them are ill-advised, some of them are necessary for the USA. Possibly everything terrible said about Trump is true, but I'm a "results" person. So waiting to see the net result.

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

---

Quote:

---

So far, Trump is keeping his campaign promises. Some of them are ill-advised, some of them are necessary for the USA. Possibly everything terrible said about Trump is true, but I'm a "results" person. So waiting to see the net result. - SIGNY

The "result" can all be credited to the GOP, not to Trump. - SECOND

---

Quote:

---

This is a president who cannot distinguish lies from truth (and cannot speak without lying).

---

Quote:

---

But the deep state is just a conspiracy theory!

---

Quote:

---

The Times prefaces the piece with this disclaimer:

The Times today is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers. We invite you to submit a question about the essay or our vetting process here.

A senior White House official has published an anonymous op-ed in the New York Times titled:

I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration (I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.

It’s not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump’s leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hellbent on his downfall.

The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

---

Quote:

---

I would know. I am one of them.

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.

That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions

---

Quote:

---

while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.

The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.

Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people.

---

Quote:

---

At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.

In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,”

---

Quote:

---

President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade

---

Quote:

---

and anti-democratic.

---

Quote:

---

Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.

---

Quote:

---

But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.

From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief’s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.

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.

The erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren’t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.

---

Quote:

---

It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults conservative GOPers and deep-staters in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.

The result is a two-track presidency.

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.

---

Quote:

---

Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track

---

Quote:

---

, 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.

---

Quote:

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state.

---

Quote:

---

It’s the work of the steady state.

---

Quote:

---

Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right-wing direction until — one way or another — it’s over.

The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.

---

Quote:

---

Senator John McCain

---

Quote:

---

put it best in his farewell letter. All Americans should heed his words and break free of the tribalism trap, with the high aim of uniting through our shared values and love of this great nation.

We may no longer have Senator McCain. But we will always have his example — a lodestar for restoring honor to public life and our national dialogue.

---

Quote:

---

Mr. Trump may fear such honorable men, but we should revere them.

---

Quote:

---

There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country ideology first.

But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
I haven't decided whether that op-ed is genuine or not, who the audience is suppose to be, what it's purpose is short term or long term. It has a phony ring to it often but that could just be poor writing skills. Is it Pence as some have suggested, trying to save his future, seeing the way the world is swaying? Don McGahn? I bet we'll know soon enough.

---

Quote:

---

Trump Saboteur Op-Ed Backfires: LA Times Calls "A Coward"; Greenwald: "Unelected Cabal"

An op-ed written in the New York Times by an anonymous "senior official in the Trump administration" has drawn harsh rebuke from both sides of the aisle and beyond - after everyone from President Trump to Glenn Greenwald to the Los Angeles Times chimed in with various criticisms.

The author, who claims to be actively working against Trump in collusion conspiracy with other senior officials in what they call a "resistance inside the Trump administration," has now been labeled everything from a coward, to treasonous, to nonexistent.

Trump supporters, also as expected, slammed the op-ed as either pure fiction or treason - a suggestion Trump made earlier Wednesday. What we don't imagine the anonymous author or the Times saw coming was the onslaught of criticism coming from the center and left - those who stand to benefit the most from Trump's fall from grace, or at least probably wouldn't mind it.

In an op-ed which appeared hours after the NYT piece, Jessica Roy of the Los Angeles Times writes:

"No, anonymous Trump official, you're not 'part of the resistance.' You're a coward" for not going far enough to stop Trump and in fact enabling him.

If they really believe there's a need to subvert the president to protect the country, they should be getting this person out of the White House. But they're too cowardly and afraid of the possible implications. They hand-wave the notion thusly:

“Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis."

How is it that utilizing the 25th Amendment of the Constitution would cause a crisis, but admitting to subverting a democratically elected leader wouldn't?

If you're reading this, senior White House official, know this: You are not resisting Donald Trump. You are enabling him for your own benefit. That doesn't make you an unsung hero. It makes you a coward. -LA Times

Meanwhile, Glenn Greenwald - the Pulitzer Prize Winning co-founder of The Intercept, also called the author of the op-ed a "coward" whose ideological issues "voters didn't ratify." Greenwald continues;

"The irony in the op-ed from the NYT's anonymous WH coward is glaring and massive: s/he accuses Trump of being "anti-democratic" while boasting of membership in an unelected cabal that covertly imposes their own ideology with zero democratic accountability, mandate or transparency."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

1) The NYT received an editorial but didn't do it's due diligence, and didn't confirm the presumed source, or

2) The editorial WAS written by WH "senior staff", who outed himself as part of a conspiracy which is imposing its unelected ideology on America or,

3) The editorial was written by WH "senior staff" as part of a WH disinformation campaign.

None of these are pretty alternatives. But I'm sure that those who "trust" the M$M will somehow manage to overlook the implications of all of these "gaffes", including this last one, and bury them deeply in their memory-hole.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
I haven't decided whether that op-ed is genuine or not, who the audience is suppose to be, what it's purpose is short term or long term. It has a phony ring to it often but that could just be poor writing skills. Is it Pence as some have suggested, trying to save his future, seeing the way the world is swaying? Don McGahn? I bet we'll know soon enough.

---

It's been said the Times knows who the source is. If that's true then what is being reported is as well and this comes from a senior advisor to the president.

Can you hear the clock ticking? I can...

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
I haven't decided whether that op-ed is genuine or not, who the audience is suppose to be, what it's purpose is short term or long term. It has a phony ring to it often but that could just be poor writing skills. Is it Pence as some have suggested, trying to save his future, seeing the way the world is swaying? Don McGahn? I bet we'll know soon enough.

---

It's been said the Times knows who the source is. If that's true then what is being reported is as well and this comes from a senior advisor to the president.

Can you hear the clock ticking? I can...

T

---

Quote:

---

Signym, you are lying, again in Trump's service. The editorial writer's identity is known to the NYTimes, just not to Trump. - SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
I haven't decided whether that op-ed is genuine or not, who the audience is suppose to be, what it's purpose is short term or long term. It has a phony ring to it often but that could just be poor writing skills. Is it Pence as some have suggested, trying to save his future, seeing the way the world is swaying? Don McGahn? I bet we'll know soon enough.

---

It's been said the Times knows who the source is. If that's true then what is being reported is as well and this comes from a senior advisor to the president.

Can you hear the clock ticking? I can...

T

---

I don't think any editorial will harm Trump in the slightest. "Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me." Trump could harm himself with voters if he does something violently stupid to discover who the anonymous editorial writer is. Since his staff is not stupid, they won't do it. So Trump is safe from whatever idiotic scheme he dreams up for his staff to execute in learning anonymous's name.

---

Trump is cracking. He is realizing that the crimes he committed by colluding with the Russians for decades, helping them to money launder could destroy his businesses. Remember, Trump lives in dept. Those loans and debts could be called in.

Add to that the trouble his family is in. No, he's cracking. Lets also hope that the republicans see the writing on the wall and start to do the right thing when it comes to this country.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
You could certainly decide that Trump is more than half crazy. He is never calm : Trump responded by questioning whether the anonymous senior White House official even existed, tweeting: "Does the so-called 'Senior Administration Official' really exist, or is it just the Failing New York Times with another phony source? If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!"

Maybe Trump's lawyers will tell him that the mystery editorial writer cannot be executed for TREASON on a President's orders. If Trump does have the execution order typed and ready for his signature, maybe somebody will steal it off Trump's desk. Soon enough he will forget all about it in the dizzying swirl of chaos spinning around in the Oval Office.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Saddam has WMD!!! Be afraid!! Be very afraid!!!

Or, employ a little bit of skepticism. A book filled with gossip, released two months before the elections? Gee, whooda thunk?

Personally, I'd ignore everything that was anonymously sourced, and only pay attention to statements with names attached. At least you can follow up with that.

---

T


An anonymous NYT op-ed, which the paper said was written by a senior administration official, asserted that appointees, serving at the highest levels of the Trump administration, have worked to 'thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.'

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

1) The NYT received an editorial but didn't do it's due diligence, and didn't confirm the presumed source, or

2) The editorial WAS written by WH "senior staff", who outed himself as part of a conspiracy which is imposing its unelected ideology on America or,

3) The editorial was written by WH "senior staff" as part of a WH disinformation campaign.

None of these are pretty alternatives. But I'm sure that those who "trust" the M$M will somehow manage to overlook the implications of all of these "gaffes", including this last one, and bury them deeply in their memory-hole.

---

Signym, you are lying, again in Trump's service. The editorial writer's identity is known to the NYTimes, just not to Trump. Your panicky writing about conspiracies changes nothing, but you and Trump really have no worries. The Democrats will never get 67 Senators, which means Trump is safe. The Democrats might not break 51% in the House, which means Trump won't even be talked mean about in Congress. But Trump has extremely delicate skin. Mean talk makes him break out in a rash.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/ho
use/

---

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

I guess I pay so little attention that I don't even know when it happened.

Gossip: Somebody (Woodward) said that somebody (anonymous) said.

---

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Signym, you are lying, again in Trump's service. The editorial writer's identity is known to the NYTimes, just not to Trump. - SECOND

---

Then the author of the editorial just outed himself as part of a deep state conspiracy to impose on America an unelected ideology. Conspiracy to thwart a Presidency?? Isn't that something like treason?

Like I said, SECOND, none of the alternatives are pretty, and of all of them, this is the ugliest. I proposed the other two alternatives so as to give the both the author AND the NYT the benefit of the doubt.

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It is not "treason" (aiding an enemy in a declared war) which is why I posted "something like treason". But I agree with Trumps sentiment. People voted for Trump because he said he would do certain things, and the deep state is busy subverting the will of the people by imposing a different agenda over a platform that people voted for.

Yanno, THUGR is always going on and on about our "democratic institutions" and yet seems to tolerate this rather large violation of the democratic process.

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

---

Quote:

---

It is not "treason" (aiding an enemy in a declared war) which is why I posted "something like treason". But I agree with Trumps sentiment. People voted for Trump because he said he would do certain things, and the deep state is busy subverting the will of the people by imposing a different agenda over a platform that people voted for.

Yanno, THUGR is always going on and on about our "democratic institutions" and yet seems to tolerate this rather large violation of the democratic process. - SIGNY


Signym, you might need to clarify what "the will of the people" means and exactly what this "platform that people voted for" means. That's because Trump was the minority candidate. And then there were 200,000,000 Americans that did not vote for anybody. What was the will of those people?- SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
And then there were 200,000,000 Americans that did not vote for anybody. What was the will of those people?

---

Quote:

---

We Are Being Played

If any evidence existed to be found that Donald Trump had illegally colluded with the Russian government to rig the 2016 presidential election, that evidence would have been picked up by the sprawling surveillance networks of the US and its allies and leaked to the Washington Post before Obama left office.

Russiagate is like a mirage. From a distance it looks like a solid, tangible thing, but when you actually move in to examine it critically you find nothing but gaping plot holes, insinuation, innuendo, conflicting narratives, bizarre mental contortions to avoid acknowledging contradictory information, a few arrests for corruption and process crimes, and a lot of hot air. The whole thing has been held together by nothing but the confident-sounding assertions of pundits and politicians and sheer, mindless repetition. And, as we approach the two year mark since this president’s election, we have not seen one iota of movement toward removing him from office. The whole thing’s a lie, and the smart movers and shakers behind it are aware that it is a lie.

And yet they keep beating on it. Day after day after day after day it’s been Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. Instead of attacking this president for his many, many real problems in a way that will do actual damage, they attack this fake blow-up doll standing next to him in a way that never goes anywhere and never will, like a pro wrestler theatrically stomping on the canvass next to his downed foe.

What’s up with that?

As you doubtless already know by now, the New York Times has made the wildly controversial decision to publish an anonymous op-ed reportedly authored by “a senior official in the Trump administration.” The op-ed’s author claims to be part of a secret coalition of patriots who dislike Trump and are “working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.” These “worst inclinations” according to the author include trying to make peace with Moscow and Pyongyang, being rude to longtime US allies, saying mean things about the media, being “anti-trade”, and being “erratic”. The possibility of invoking the 25th Amendment is briefly mentioned but dismissed. The final paragraphs are spent gushing about John McCain for no apparent reason.

I strongly encourage you to read the piece in its entirety, because for all the talk and drama it’s generating, it doesn’t actually make any sense. While you are reading it, I encourage you to keep the following question in mind: what could anyone possibly gain by authoring this and giving it to the New York Times?

---

Quote:

---

Seriously, what could be gained? The op-ed says essentially nothing, other than to tell readers to relax and trust in anonymous administration insiders who are working against the bad guys on behalf of the people (which is interestingly the exact same message of the right-wing 8chan conspiracy phenomenon QAnon, just with the white hats and black hats reversed). Why would any senior official risk everything to publish something so utterly pointless? Why risk getting fired (or risk losing all political currency in the party if NYTAnon is Mike Pence, as has been theorized) just to communicate something to the public that doesn’t change or accomplish anything? Why publicly announce your undercover conspiracy to undermine the president in a major news outlet at all?

---

Quote:

---

What are the results of this viral op-ed everyone’s talking about? So far it’s a bunch of Democratic partisans making a lot of excited whooping noises, and Trump loyalists feeling completely vindicated in the belief that all of their conspiracy theories have been proven correct. Many rank-and-file Trump haters are feeling a little more relaxed and complacent knowing that there are a bunch of McCain-loving “adults in the room” taking care of everything, and many rank-and-file Trump supporters are more convinced than ever that Donald Trump is a brave populist hero leading a covert 4-D chess insurgency against the Deep State. In other words, everyone’s been herded into their respective partisan stables and trusting the narratives that they are being fed there.

And, well, I just think that’s odd.

Did you know that Donald Trump is in the WWE Hall of Fame? He was inducted in 2013, and he’s been enthusiastically involved in pro wrestling for many years, both as a fan and as a performer. He’s made more of a study on how to draw a crowd in to the theatrics of a choreographed fight scene than anyone this side of the McMahon family (a member of whom happens to be part of the Trump administration currently).

You don’t have to get into any deep conspiratorial rabbit hole to consider the possibility that all this drama and conflict is staged from top to bottom. Commentators on all sides routinely crack jokes about how the mainstream media pretends to attack Trump but secretly loves him because he brings them amazing ratings. Anyone with their eyes even part way open already knows that America’s two mainstream parties feign intense hatred for one another while working together to pace their respective bases into accepting more and more neoliberal exploitation at home and more and more neoconservative bloodshed abroad. They spit and snarl and shake their fists at each other, then cuddle up and share candy when it’s time for a public gathering. Why should this administration be any different?

I believe that a senior Trump administration official probably did write that anonymous op-ed. I do not believe that they were moved to write it out of compassion for the poor Americans who are feeling emotionally stressed about the president. I believe it was written and published for the same reason many other things are written and published in mainstream media: because we are all being played.

The more I study US politics, the less useful I find it to think of it in political terms. The two-headed one party system exists to give Americans the illusion of choice while advancing the agendas of the plutocratic class which owns and operates both parties, yes, but even more importantly it’s a mechanism of narrative control. If you can separate the masses into two groups based on extremely broad ideological characteristics, you can then funnel streamlined “us vs them” narratives into each of the two stables, with the white hats and black hats reversed in each case. Now you’ve got Republicans cheering for the president and Democrats cheering for the CIA, for the FBI, and now for a platoon of covert John McCains alleged to be operating on the inside of Trump’s own administration. Everyone’s cheering for one aspect of the US power establishment or another.

Whom does this dynamic serve? Not you.

If you belonged to a ruling class, obviously your goal would be to ensure your subjects’ continued support for you. In a corporatist oligarchy, the rulers are secret and the subjects don’t know they’re ruled, and power is held in place with manipulation and with money. As such a ruler your goal would be to find a way to manipulate the masses into supporting your agendas, and, since people are different, you’d need to use different narratives to manipulate them. You’d have to divide them, tell them different stories, turn them against each other, play them off one another, suck them in to the tales you are spinning with the theater of enmity and heroism.

As a result of the New York Times op-ed, if this administration engages in yet another of its many, many establishment capitulations (let’s say by attacking the Syrian government again), Trump’s supporters won’t see it as his fault; it will be blamed on the deep state insiders in his administration who have been working to thwart his agendas of peace and harmony. Meanwhile those who see Trump as a heel won’t experience any cognitive dissonance if any of the establishment agendas they support are carried out, because they can give the credit to the secret hero squad in the White House.

Would a billionaire WWE Hall of Famer and United States President understand the theater of staged conflict for the advancement of plutocratic interests, and willingly participate in it? I’m going to say probably.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

I too have been wondering about the reason for this attack against Trump.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

It is not "treason" (aiding an enemy in a declared war) which is why I posted "something like treason". But I agree with Trumps sentiment. People voted for Trump because he said he would do certain things, and the deep state is busy subverting the will of the people by imposing a different agenda over a platform that people voted for.

Yanno, THUGR is always going on and on about our "democratic institutions" and yet seems to tolerate this rather large violation of the democratic process. - SIGNY


Signym, you might need to clarify what "the will of the people" means and exactly what this "platform that people voted for" means. That's because Trump was the minority candidate. And then there were 200,000,000 Americans that did not vote for anybody. What was the will of those people?- SECOND

---

It's very simple, SECOND, it's the will of the people as expressed through the currently-adopted process*. It would be impossible to hand-hold non-voters into expressing their opinion, given that it's a state-to-state issue.

*Yanno, the "democratic institutions" that THUGR goes on and on about ... the delegation of authority to each state.

---