The Lodestar papers

NebraskaFootball · 2018-09-07T21:01:15.741Z

johnwk2:

Are you forgetting that coverage of Trump and his Administration by the New York Times is about 90 percent unfavorable?

There seems to be an uncontrollable hatred for Trump at the NYT . . . so uncontrollable that they may very well be resorting to manufacturing news.

Completely nonsensical. There is too much accurate reporting of actual events that are legitimately negative for Trump that there is no need to risk ruining the entire organizations reputation for all time. They have have record subscriptions right now. They wouldn’t throw away all of that money over some anonymous op-ed being printed on a random Wednesday in September of a midterm year.

Grimalken · 2018-09-07T21:07:41.756Z

That’s all the context we get to explain what you are on about, just a passing comment with the term Lodestar?

johnwk2 · 2018-09-07T21:24:35.150Z

NebraskaFootball:

johnwk2:

Are you forgetting that coverage of Trump and his Administration by the New York Times is about 90 percent unfavorable?

There seems to be an uncontrollable hatred for Trump at the NYT . . . so uncontrollable that they may very well be resorting to manufacturing news.

Completely nonsensical. There is too much accurate reporting of actual events that are legitimately negative for Trump that there is no need to risk ruining the entire organizations reputation for all time. They have have record subscriptions right now. They wouldn’t throw away all of that money over some anonymous op-ed being printed on a random Wednesday in September of a midterm year.

Your opinion is noted. But from where I stand, the Op-Ed’s theme does not appear to be designed to generate a negative event. It’s overall content seems to be intentionally written to create mistrust and paranoia for Trump and within his Administration . . . something which those suffering Trump Derangement Syndrome would not hesitate in doing to relieve the pain of their disorder. It’s like a relief valve on a boiler.

JWK

The unavoidable truth is, the Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’, Andrew Gillum and Ayanna Pressley’s socialist plan for “free” college tuition will be paid for by taxing millions of college graduates who worked for and paid their own way through college and are now trying to finance their own economic needs.

Vigilante · 2018-09-07T21:36:24.545Z

johnwk2:

NebraskaFootball:

GWH:

Have you read this thread? Wild speculation abounds. John’s is one of the more plausible.

Speculating over which senior member of the administration it was who wrote the op-ed is nowhere close to being the same as speculating that it is all just some giant conspiracy theory where NYT’s reporters themselves wrote it and it was approved to be printed by the Editorial board and the owner of the NYT.

As long as a person is not detached from reality and have this caricature perspective of what the Times is and what goes in to their confirmation process in vetting sources, then it is easy to see how such a proposal is beyond silly and the farthest thing in the world from plausible.

Are you forgetting that coverage of Trump and his Administration by the New York Times is about 90 percent unfavorable?

There seems to be an uncontrollable hatred for Trump at the NYT . . . so uncontrollable that they may very well be resorting to manufacturing news.

JWK

Without a Fifth Column Media, Yellow Journalism, Hollywood, and a corrupted FBI, Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary

But its not. Nice try

NebraskaFootball · 2018-09-07T21:48:26.603Z

I’ll ask again then, since you didn’t answer earlier. When the author is unmasked, and they will be unmasked, will you admit your conspiracy theory was nonsensical?

zantax · 2018-09-08T10:44:05.440Z

TommyLucchese:

Apocalypto:

The only possible speculation is how high in the cabinet chain this anonymous member is. If it’s an unknown member, then the NYT will have egg on their dave.

A “senior White House official” has a very specific meaning in the Kabuki theater of on the record/off the record/background/deep background comments.

You need to read the article, senior White House official isn’t in it.

johnwk2 · 2018-09-08T14:19:17.256Z

zantax:

TommyLucchese:

Apocalypto:

The only possible speculation is how high in the cabinet chain this anonymous member is. If it’s an unknown member, then the NYT will have egg on their dave.

A “senior White House official” has a very specific meaning in the Kabuki theater of on the record/off the record/background/deep background comments.

You need to read the article, senior White House official isn’t in it.

Spot on!

From the article:

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.

I would know. I am one of them.

There is a big distinction between “senior White House official” and, “senior officials in his own administration” which does appear in the article.

JWK

Let us not forget Obama’s Administration which engaged in a Long train of tyranny, including giving aid and comfort to ten enemies of the United States by FREEING them from GITMO.

calirepub · 2018-09-08T14:27:20.903Z

johnwk2:

There is a big distinction between “senior White House official” and, “senior officials in his own administration” which does appear in the article.

I totally agree. “Senior White House official” is completely different than “a senior official in the Trump administration.” In the first instance, the words “senior” and “official” are separated by two words, which completely changing the meaning of those words, and the second instance “senior” and “official” are directly next to each other. Additionally, in the first instance, we’re talking about the White House, whereas the second phrase talks about the Trump administration. Completely different things.

Who’s to say this senior official of the Trump administration has even been inside the White House? Occam’s razor says they haven’t. Trump probably hasn’t even heard of this person before.

johnwk2 · 2018-09-08T14:42:35.567Z

calirepub:

johnwk2:

There is a big distinction between “senior White House official” and, “senior officials in his own administration” which does appear in the article.

I totally agree. “Senior White House official” is completely different than “a senior official in the Trump administration.” In the first instance, the words “senior” and “official” are separated by two words, which completely changing the meaning of those words, and the second instance “senior” and “official” are directly next to each other. Additionally, in the first instance, we’re talking about the White House, whereas the second phrase talks about the Trump administration. Completely different things.

Who’s to say this senior official of the Trump administration has even been inside the White House? Occam’s razor says they haven’t. Trump probably hasn’t even heard of this person before.

Having had the time to analyze the Op-Ed a little more last night, I am more convinced one of its specific objects, if not the sole object, is to create distrust and paranoia inside the Trump Administration. Having said that, I’m still not sure if the piece was written by New York Times employees, or an actual person or persons in the Trump Administration. I am more inclined to believe the former, considering New York Times employees have displayed symptoms of Trump Derangement Syndrome

JWK

Let us not forget the Obama Administration which engaged in a Long train of tyranny, including giving aid and comfort to ten enemies of the United States by FREEING them from GITMO.

calirepub · 2018-09-08T14:44:47.929Z

johnwk2:

I’m still not sure if the piece was written by New York Times employees, or an actual person or persons in the Trump Administration. I am more inclined to believe the former

When the actual author is unmasked, proving you wrong here, will you admit it?

conan · 2018-09-08T16:05:32.859Z

Yeah I’m thinking it was NYSlime employees.

If they can convince the public that they have insider…then they can say anything and their readers will believe it.

Which most of em do now.

Vigilante · 2018-09-08T18:32:55.746Z

conan:

Yeah I’m thinking it was NYSlime employees.

If they can convince the public that they have insider…then they can say anything and their readers will believe it.

Which most of em do now.

You run with that.

Call_me_Ishmael · 2018-09-08T18:50:46.772Z

johnwk2:

calirepub:

johnwk2:

There is a big distinction between “senior White House official” and, “senior officials in his own administration” which does appear in the article.

I totally agree. “Senior White House official” is completely different than “a senior official in the Trump administration.” In the first instance, the words “senior” and “official” are separated by two words, which completely changing the meaning of those words, and the second instance “senior” and “official” are directly next to each other. Additionally, in the first instance, we’re talking about the White House, whereas the second phrase talks about the Trump administration. Completely different things.

Who’s to say this senior official of the Trump administration has even been inside the White House? Occam’s razor says they haven’t. Trump probably hasn’t even heard of this person before.

Having had the time to analyze the Op-Ed a little more last night, I am more convinced one of its specific objects, if not the sole object, is to create distrust and paranoia inside the Trump Administration. Having said that, I’m still not sure if the piece was written by New York Times employees, or an actual person or persons in the Trump Administration. I am more inclined to believe the former, considering New York Times employees have displayed symptoms of Trump Derangement Syndrome

JWK

Let us not forget the Obama Administration which engaged in a Long train of tyranny, including giving aid and comfort to ten enemies of the United States by FREEING them from GITMO.

A committee headed by Brennan .

Konssurvative1 · 2018-09-09T12:00:44.789Z

I don’t think he’s doing it to gain office. I think if he did pen the editorial…he did so because of Trump and Trump only. I don’t buy into he’s trying to overthrow Trump. I think he’s trying to warn Trump. If pence wrote this.

DougBH · 2018-09-09T14:03:17.864Z

johnwk2:

MichaelScarn:

Yeah, a world renowned paper is going to fake an op-ed. Don’t believe everything you’ve seen over the last 3 years. Believe the conspiracy. Trump is the smartest person, so smart. Biggest brain. He has the best brain. Trump isn’t impulsive. This trump, op-ed thing with the op-ed and Trump. He had to accuse people of treason because it was a distraction. What you’re seeing and hearing isn’t what’s happening. Truth isn’t truth.

Oh, give it a break. The anonymous op ed was more than likely written by NYT employees who have Trump Derangement Syndrome

JWK

I don’t see the NYTs destroying their own credibility by faking a story like this. The problems we should have are:
What is meant by a senior administrative official?
What is the credibility of that official?
Is there really a group or is he fantasizing…or lying…about that
How much reliance can be placed on someone who isn’t available for even the slightest questions for clarification? The actual statement contains almost no facts or examples.
Is he a nut? Is he extremely biased against Trump?
Is he very much on the outs and doesn’t expect to be around soon and is getting back?
If we knew who it was, would we all laugh and say “oh him, who cares”?

So whereas I don’t think the NYTs would actually make this up, it is really not very interesting unless the person comes forward. And, if he thinks the country is at risk and doesn’t, he’s kind of a coward, isn’t he?

calirepub · 2018-09-09T15:41:05.865Z

DougBH:

So whereas I don’t think the NYTs would actually make this up, it is really not very interesting unless the person comes forward. And, if he thinks the country is at risk and doesn’t, he’s kind of a coward, isn’t he?

Well said, Doug. Well said.

Vigilante · 2018-09-09T17:24:33.589Z

calirepub:

DougBH:

So whereas I don’t think the NYTs would actually make this up, it is really not very interesting unless the person comes forward. And, if he thinks the country is at risk and doesn’t, he’s kind of a coward, isn’t he?

Well said, Doug. Well said.

I’m guessing you guys are saying Dennis Dennison wrote it?

calirepub · 2018-09-09T17:25:48.097Z

Vigilante:

I’m guessing you guys are saying Dennis Dennison wrote it?

I’m sticking with my original guess. I’m going win 100 Internet Points if it turns out to be Pence.

DougBH · 2018-09-09T17:28:38.512Z

Vigilante:

calirepub:

DougBH:

So whereas I don’t think the NYTs would actually make this up, it is really not very interesting unless the person comes forward. And, if he thinks the country is at risk and doesn’t, he’s kind of a coward, isn’t he?

Well said, Doug. Well said.

I’m guessing you guys are saying Dennis Dennison wrote it?

We guys don’t know who that is.

Vigilante · 2018-09-09T17:29:32.043Z

DougBH:

Vigilante:

calirepub:

DougBH:

So whereas I don’t think the NYTs would actually make this up, it is really not very interesting unless the person comes forward. And, if he thinks the country is at risk and doesn’t, he’s kind of a coward, isn’t he?

Well said, Doug. Well said.

I’m guessing you guys are saying Dennis Dennison wrote it?

We guys don’t know who that is.

Sorry I meant David Dennison