• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Op Ed: Whodunit ?

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
And you know all of this, in your great wisdom, how exactly?

Most likely case... Invent a mole you cannot find, because there isn't. You rile up Trump, make him look crazy chasing the ghost, and put him in a weird spot with all his current staff. Mission accomplished.

Let's face it, no one working in the administration would have an advantage to admit this even if they completely sympathized. Coming out with it would be irresponsible, self-defeating, and leaving a trail of breadcrumbs for someone to find and destroy your career with. In this case, it's just propaganda to fool people who can't rub two sticks together.

Anyway, their isn't proof either way... so occam's razor and call it a night...
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
It takes a lot of wishful thinking to believe that there can be no internal resistance to Trump, given known history and facts.
 

Duke_Leto

Active Member
Who's going to call them on it? Well, the Administration itself pops quickly to mind, and as I recall they do have some resources....

But there's nothing in the op-ed that says anything which could be easily discredited. And, secondly, who would believe the Trump administration anyway?
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
It takes a lot of wishful thinking to believe that there can be no internal resistance to Trump, given known history and facts.

The resistance has been documented in various places. The op-ed is to me just someone admitting publicly what already is known.

Having worked in a couple of gigantic corporations during my career, it's not surprising at all that there is resistance. It goes with bigness as I found out in corporate America.

What is a bit surprising is that someone chose to go public with it.
 
Most likely case... Invent a mole you cannot find, because there isn't. You rile up Trump, make him look crazy chasing the ghost, and put him in a weird spot with all his current staff. Mission accomplished.

Let's face it, no one working in the administration would have an advantage to admit this even if they completely sympathized. Coming out with it would be irresponsible, self-defeating, and leaving a trail of breadcrumbs for someone to find and destroy your career with. In this case, it's just propaganda to fool people who can't rub two sticks together.

Anyway, their isn't proof either way... so occam's razor and call it a night...

Sometimes when you want to change your country you need to sacrifice everything. Just do it.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
Pence isn't exactly what I would consider bright.Downplaying the dangers of tobacco smoking, going before the state senate to denounce and disprove evolution as "just a theory," and trying to keep same-sex marriage out of Indiana even after the Supreme Court overturned Indiana's law and after the SC legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states.
Perhaps he has had the ambition for presidency and feels it's an opportunity now. With politicians instincts, if it's him, he probably thinks if he would be seen as "part of the resistance", he would be quite popular or popular enough with those who dislike Trump. Perhaps thinking he could even win the next election. If so, some of this would actually make sense and why he wasn't caught earlier.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Trump once tweeted indignation about a supposed bugging of the White House "by Obama", only to dismiss it as unimportant weeks later during an interview. That was a typical situation of his raising what would be important concerns, just to fail to given them the obvious significance later. His tales are to be taken as entertainment, not testimonials.


Still, at this moment it appears that he is sincerely interested in finding out who "Lodestar" might be. That he is taking the trouble to ask for that instead of dismissing it as "fake news" says something.

In some ways this Op-Ed seems like a natural extension of the recent situation with Omarosa, which lampshaded the kind of loyalties that Trump nurtures and earns. It is so toxic to even itself that defections and backstabbings are a necessary result.

And indeed, there is little to commend the author of the piece. He is by his own admission an irresponsible fanatic that happens to fall just short of letting Trump run unleashed. The one result that he seems to expect from releasing his piece is to make Trump's fall that much quicker and (from his point of view) less painful.

That strongly hints that whoever wrote the piece expects Trump to face rough water ahead, presumably at least in part due to the investigations against him. I assume that the hope is that the Conservative base will transfer its loyalties to the "Resistance" of opportunists who think nothing of supporting Trump in the open and undermining him cirurgically for optimal political results. That may well happen once it becomes undeniable that Trump is in league with Russia in a way that endangers the pride and safety of the USA.

It will not be that much of an improvement, and it may well not be an improvement at all, but it may well happen.

Of course, it would be incomparably better to have Trump supporters grow intellectual honesty and moral courage instead, but I can't think of any quick or painless way for that to happen. It certainly isn't likely to happen out of scandal alone.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
In some ways this Op-Ed seems like a natural extension of the recent situation with Omarosa, which lampshaded the kind of loyalties that Trump nurtures and earns. It is so toxic to even itself that defections and backstabbings are a necessary result.

We're seeing on the national stage sowing and reaping being played out for all to see. Forgetting political considerations and just looking at the psychological level, we can see in gory detail how people react to a certain kind of personality.

And in this case, what we're seeing is unprecedented in my 73 years on this Earth. I've never seen nor heard of an executive at any level attacking subordinates with such venom IN PUBLIC.

If I were in the position of one of the subordinates, I might decide to give him the finger and quit publicly. I might decide to gather evidence of his misdeeds to release to the media. I might decide to metaphorically stab him in the back by my official government actions or by leaking to the press. I might decide to stick it out and do my best to block his actions. But there's no way in God's green earth I would not react to having dung heaped on me repeatedly by a boss who should know better.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Perhaps he has had the ambition for presidency and feels it's an opportunity now. With politicians instincts, if it's him, he probably thinks if he would be seen as "part of the resistance", he would be quite popular or popular enough with those who dislike Trump. Perhaps thinking he could even win the next election. If so, some of this would actually make sense and why he wasn't caught earlier.
My prediction since Pence was chosen as VP is that Pence would use his position to work towards a presidential bid. He was a paragon of the Religious Right in Indiana, and now he has national attention.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Considering the dramatic wording of the op-ed, I wouldn't be surprised if it was all a hoax.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Let's face it, no one working in the administration would have an advantage to admit this even if they completely sympathized.
You can't really believe this.

Whoever wrote this has 10s of millions in the bank. Wait until Trump stops having the power he does, then come forward. Book deals, speaking fees, hush money, the sky is the limit for cashing in on this.

Wouldn't surprise me if the NYT already has a big piece of that action either.
Tom
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
I found the NYT's How the Anonymous Op-Ed Came to Be interesting, particularly ...

The writer was introduced to us by an intermediary whom we know and trust.

If we take this at face value, it suggests that the writer required an intermediary. This would hardly be the case were this anonymous author someone like Pence, Conway, etc. So, either this is a clever diversion or Dao is pointing us to a person with relatively low name recognition.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I found the NYT's How the Anonymous Op-Ed Came to Be interesting, particularly ...

The writer was introduced to us by an intermediary whom we know and trust.

If we take this at face value, it suggests that the writer required an intermediary. This would hardly be the case were this anonymous author someone like Pence, Conway, etc. So, either this is a clever diversion or Dao is pointing us to a person with relatively low name recognition.
Sorry, but I am not following.

If anything, a higher profile author would have a stronger need for an intermediary to remain undetected, wouldn't he?

And it is not like the NYT would necessarily be above lying on that particular point in order to better cloud the identity of the author, don't you think?
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
I found the NYT's How the Anonymous Op-Ed Came to Be interesting, particularly ...

The writer was introduced to us by an intermediary whom we know and trust.

If we take this at face value, it suggests that the writer required an intermediary. This would hardly be the case were this anonymous author someone like Pence, Conway, etc. So, either this is a clever diversion or Dao is pointing us to a person with relatively low name recognition.
Interesting, but I am not fully convinced. As you say people like Pence, Conway etc would not need an introduction to the news division of the NYT, but what about the editorial division? I don’t think this is like talking to a reporter. If one of these high profile names has known to be in contact with the editorial staff that itself would raise questions even before the op ed was published.

But I do think it could be someone lower down, a senior advisor to the Vice President for example.
 
Top