Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 09-07-2018, 10:18 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia View Post
But the base is not listening to anyone without the Trump surname, so even that point makes little sense.
The OLD base; in other words, people who were ideological Republicans prior to the Tea Party and all the populist and religious nonsense took over, not people who voted Republican merely because it was closest to their far-right nonsense.
  #102  
Old 09-07-2018, 10:31 AM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I don't think the letter was written to comfort the people that there are "adults on watch", it was written to strike paranoia into Trump's head. Making it seem like the VP is out there rallying the rest of the cabinet to start considering the 25th Amendment seems like a pretty sure-fire way to accomplish that. I would imagine the goal, then, being to make him implode.
Assuming the letter is at it seems, I think the intended audience is Congress. The goal would be draw more attention to the severity of the situation and hopefully goad them into taking some action, whether that means simply not supporting his ever move, or something more severe.
  #103  
Old 09-07-2018, 10:42 AM
Merneith is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 6,901
I think the editorial was a trial balloon, to see how people would react if the 25th was invoked.

It seems to me, the editorial was mostly received with cries of "Well, get on with it, already!" I'm not sure that was the reaction they were hoping for. The author seems to feel that his actions are just and righteous. I'm not sure that he might have been looking for permission to continue keeping quiet, rather than permission to call in the men in the little white coats.

I suspect that Donald telling the crowd that it will be their fault if he gets impeached wasn't prompted by the overall lack of outrage over this letter. Donald's cultists are unhappy about the letter, but they didn't take to the streets over it.
  #104  
Old 09-07-2018, 11:22 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,379
Do you remember this story from back in May? White House Leaker Covers Tracks by Impersonating Co-workers

Quote:
“To cover my tracks, I usually pay attention to other staffers’ idioms and use that in my background quotes. That throws the scent off me,” the current White House official added.
That's a possible explanation for 'lodestar'. In fact, I think that's the most likely explanation. It's just such a weird word choice.
  #105  
Old 09-07-2018, 11:29 AM
Merneith is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 6,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merneith View Post

I suspect that Donald telling the crowd that it will be their fault if he gets impeached wasn't prompted by the overall lack of outrage over this letter.
... was prompted.
  #106  
Old 09-07-2018, 11:47 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merneith View Post
I think the editorial was a trial balloon, to see how people would react if the 25th was invoked.

It seems to me, the editorial was mostly received with cries of "Well, get on with it, already!"
It was? I thought it was mostly received by "That's not what the 25th amendment is for".

I can guarantee you we are not going to see a "25th amendment solution" to the Trump problem. Impeachment is more likely, if the Democrats take the House, but then we still are left with the fact that the Senate is unlikely to convict and remove from office. Unless, of course, Mueller comes up with some pretty crazy shit. Which I think is possible, but not probable.
  #107  
Old 09-07-2018, 11:59 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,890
I stand by my assertion that it's a group, probably 3-4 staffers (Pence might be one of them <shrug>), and the purpose is to drive thump to doing something so crazy that either 1) no one will be able to ignore it, or 2) thump effectively removes himself from office (a stroke, suicide, fleeing the country, or being reduced to a babbling, drooling, inarticulate puddle of goo*). Pence can be sworn in, Kavanaugh confirmed, black people, Hispanics, poor people and immigrants out of luck, Pubbies happy, no one loses his/her job. Life is good.




*I know: how will we be able to tell, right?
__________________
“Master, I’ve discovered the answer! Knock and the door will be opened to you.” The master replied, “Who said the door was closed?”
  #108  
Old 09-07-2018, 12:10 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
I would not be surprised if Anonymous was plural. The more I think about it, the more I would be surprised if it was just one person. It makes a lot more sense that the NYT would feel compelled to publish this if it was not just a singular voice crying out in the wilderness.
  #109  
Old 09-07-2018, 12:26 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,985
Why not say it's more than one person?
  #110  
Old 09-07-2018, 12:27 PM
Bijou Drains is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,527
has there been anything like this where the author was not eventually revealed?

I remember a novel called primary colors by anonymous and after a while the author admitted he wrote it after first denying it was him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Colors_(novel)

and JK Rowling wrote a book under a pen name but she later admitted it was her

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cuckoo%27s_Calling

Last edited by Bijou Drains; 09-07-2018 at 12:27 PM.
  #111  
Old 09-07-2018, 12:28 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
Why not say it's more than one person?
I'm skeptical it's more than one, but if a group of 3 or 4 got together and wrote it together, but only one communicated with the NYT, then those 3 or 4 might semi-plausibly be able to declare they aren't the authors without thinking of themselves as lying (still a lie of omission/weaseling, but I don't think we're talking about highly honorable people here).

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 09-07-2018 at 12:30 PM.
  #112  
Old 09-07-2018, 12:37 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'm skeptical it's more than one, but if a group of 3 or 4 got together and wrote it together, but only one communicated with the NYT, then those 3 or 4 might semi-plausibly be able to declare they aren't the authors without thinking of themselves as lying [...]
That's possible (though I don't see what the group effort achieves). But JM's theory was that the NYT published it because it was written by more than one person, in which case they obviously knew about it.

Last edited by Fotheringay-Phipps; 09-07-2018 at 12:38 PM.
  #113  
Old 09-07-2018, 12:50 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 31,112
To what extent is the NYT vouching for the accuracy of the article?
__________________
Quartz
  #114  
Old 09-07-2018, 01:03 PM
Bijou Drains is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,527
they did not print it as news, it is printed as opinion by someone not on their staff. They are vouching for the person being an actual Trump admin person but not sure if they vouch for anything beyond that.
  #115  
Old 09-07-2018, 01:56 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
Assuming the letter is at it seems, I think the intended audience is Congress. The goal would be draw more attention to the severity of the situation and hopefully goad them into taking some action, whether that means simply not supporting his ever move, or something more severe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merneith View Post
I think the editorial was a trial balloon, to see how people would react if the 25th was invoked.
Possible. If, as I suspect, the goal was paranoia then I would expect the author to write again. If not, then maybe not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
has there been anything like this where the author was not eventually revealed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voynich_manuscript
  #116  
Old 09-07-2018, 01:59 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
To what extent is the NYT vouching for the accuracy of the article?
There's basically nothing in the Op-ed of a factual nature other than "there's people in the White House trying to hamstring Trump's stupider ideas". Woodward's book seems to document that pretty extensively.
  #117  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:04 PM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,042
Slate has a decent argument that the writer is Jon Huntsman, current ambassador to Russia.

* it matches things important to him - basic conservative policies, quality of character
* the specific mention of Russia in the op ed
* the prose matches Huntsman's style
* similar wording to other things he has written, like "country first" and "adults in the room"

There was enough other stuff as well to sway me toward Huntsman.
  #118  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:16 PM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,042
Here's a podcast interview with the Op-Ed editor for the Times, talking a little about what led to publishing it and the impact. There's nothing too earth-shattering.

He said the initial contact was through an intermediary, but they transitioned to dealing with the individual directly, and said they did sufficient investigation to be absolutely sure the person was who they said they were.

The editor also commented that they receive a ton of op-eds from government employees, and typically they are clunky and poorly argued. But this one impressed him with its clarity and emotion.

One thing I'm a little dubious about is when the editor expressed surprise at how big a story this became. Really?
  #119  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:25 PM
Fotheringay-Phipps is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
Slate has a decent argument that the writer is Jon Huntsman, current ambassador to Russia.
As good a speculation as any other I've seen.

ISTM that as media speculation centers on this or that suspect, this will put pressure on that person to definitely confirm or deny it.
  #120  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:27 PM
Ashtura is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,429
I heard that it was likely written by an older conservative white male. Really narrows it down.
  #121  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:31 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
He said the initial contact was through an intermediary, but they transitioned to dealing with the individual directly, and said they did sufficient investigation to be absolutely sure the person was who they said they were.
That sort of rules out any names we'd recognize (unless he's purposefully obfuscating by saying this).

Quote:
The editor also commented that they receive a ton of op-eds from government employees, and typically they are clunky and poorly argued. But this one impressed him with its clarity and emotion.
Either he read a different letter than I or that's got to be a sad lot of writers.

I mean, the letter was fine and clear, but emotional? Neigh, I say.
  #122  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:33 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I mean, the letter was fine and clear, but emotional? Neigh, I say.
So you're saying the writer should have been less whinny?
  #123  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:37 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 31,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
They are vouching for the person being an actual Trump admin person but not sure if they vouch for anything beyond that.
Thanks.
__________________
Quartz
  #124  
Old 09-07-2018, 02:57 PM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
That sort of rules out any names we'd recognize (unless he's purposefully obfuscating by saying this).
I'm not sure if your comment is regarding going through an intermediary or doing investigation, but either way I don't agree. A truly high level person would almost certainly go through an intermediary to start. And doing rigorous investigation is a necessity no matter what level the person is at. If someone calls me and says "I'm Mike Pence," I'm not going to skip the investigation because I know that name already.

On that topic, the editor at CNN believes the person is almost certainly a name that people would recognize. Publishing an anonymous op-ed is a huge deal for the NYT, and they wouldn't do it for just anyone. I'm not sure I agree, because it's a big story by itself and the threat to the writer is real whether it's a known person or not. But the editor at CNN probably knows a little more about journalism than I do, so his argument carries more weight than mine.
  #125  
Old 09-07-2018, 03:12 PM
Merneith is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 6,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
It was? I thought it was mostly received by "That's not what the 25th amendment is for".
The 25th contains a provision for a removing a president if the Vice President and a cadre of fellow Executives believe that he is unfit for office. Here's the relevant part:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 25th Amendment

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.

<snip>
After that congress votes on it, or if they go into hiding, the President gets his job back.

In other words, getting an unfit president out of office is exactly what that part of the 25th is for.


Quote:
I can guarantee you we are not going to see a "25th amendment solution" to the Trump problem. Impeachment is more likely, if the Democrats take the House, but then we still are left with the fact that the Senate is unlikely to convict and remove from office. Unless, of course, Mueller comes up with some pretty crazy shit. Which I think is possible, but not probable.
I didn't say it was likely. I just said the majority of people seem to be fine with it, especially if the alternative is a bunch of unelected randos randomly setting policies and going behind the president's back to shield us all from what those randos have privately decided are his destructive impulses.

Last edited by Merneith; 09-07-2018 at 03:13 PM.
  #126  
Old 09-07-2018, 03:21 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
That sort of rules out any names we'd recognize (unless he's purposefully obfuscating by saying this).
That was kind of my thought too (without having listened to the podcast yet). Unless, the intermediary known to the NYT said something like "John Kelly wants to get you an op-ed, but it can't be traceable to him, so he can't use the email address you have for him. He'll be using the address lodestar99@gmail.com...."

My vote is for an aide or close adviser to a Cabinet official, someone who can fairly be described as a "senior official" but who most of us have never heard of. Most of us had no idea who Mark Felt was either.

Last edited by Defensive Indifference; 09-07-2018 at 03:21 PM.
  #127  
Old 09-07-2018, 03:29 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
Slate has a decent argument that the writer is Jon Huntsman, current ambassador to Russia.

* it matches things important to him - basic conservative policies, quality of character
* the specific mention of Russia in the op ed
* the prose matches Huntsman's style
* similar wording to other things he has written, like "country first" and "adults in the room"

There was enough other stuff as well to sway me toward Huntsman.
That's actually pretty persuasive. Hmmm. Maybe I need to rethink my vote.
  #128  
Old 09-07-2018, 03:37 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merneith View Post
The 25th contains a provision for a removing a president if the Vice President and a cadre of fellow Executives believe that he is unfit for office. Here's the relevant part:



After that congress votes on it, or if they go into hiding, the President gets his job back.

In other words, getting an unfit president out of office is exactly what that part of the 25th is for.
First of all, I was noting how that part was, in your words, "mostly received". It was received the way you describe by Elizabeth Warren, but most of the commentators I have heard have said "that's not what the 25th amendment is for" or something along those lines.

The amendment, which you quoted, doesn't say "unfit", it says "unable" (emphasis added in your post). Those are two very different things.

Last edited by John Mace; 09-07-2018 at 03:39 PM.
  #129  
Old 09-07-2018, 04:38 PM
Aescwynn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensive Indifference View Post
That's actually pretty persuasive. Hmmm. Maybe I need to rethink my vote.
Wouldn't it have to be someone privy to most everything going on? That would seem to rule out Kellyanne Conway and Jon Huntsman.

Putting aside "lodestar," I was struck by the phrase "free minds, free markets and free people." Eloquent, and not a catchphrase you hear every day. I was also struck by "cold comfort," which has a literary feel to it, and also doesn't sound like something a young person would say.

Coats and Pence both have Indiana backgrounds. They both went to McKinney School of Law at Indiana University, though not at the same time. I could see them being on the same wave-length about Trump, and having conversations that led to the NYT op-ed piece, probably penned by Coats.
  #130  
Old 09-07-2018, 07:03 PM
Bijou Drains is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,527
check this website - their motto is: free minds and free markets: (it's at the top of the page)

https://reason.com/

They are a libertarian website/magazine
  #131  
Old 09-07-2018, 07:36 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
check this website - their motto is: free minds and free markets: (it's at the top of the page)

https://reason.com/

They are a libertarian website/magazine
And your context for this suggestion is...?
__________________
“Master, I’ve discovered the answer! Knock and the door will be opened to you.” The master replied, “Who said the door was closed?”
  #132  
Old 09-07-2018, 08:16 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
And your context for this suggestion is...?
The post immediately above it. That was my first thought on reading that the phrase was not something you hear everyday. Depends on which sources you read.
  #133  
Old 09-07-2018, 08:25 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
The post immediately above it. That was my first thought on reading that the phrase was not something you hear everyday. Depends on which sources you read.
Ah... okay. I seem to be very groggy today. Death by a thousand (news)paper cuts.
__________________
“Master, I’ve discovered the answer! Knock and the door will be opened to you.” The master replied, “Who said the door was closed?”
  #134  
Old 09-07-2018, 08:43 PM
Max the Immortal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Posts: 4,047
Vladimir Putin, via proxy.
  #135  
Old 09-07-2018, 10:21 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,275
I seriously doubt the anonymous op-ed piece was written by a household name, but it could have been written by a deputy or an assistant deputy who knows what key players are up to. What matters is motive: was this an opinion piece written by someone who is legitimately afraid for the future of the country under Trump, or was it written to troll the media?
  #136  
Old 09-07-2018, 11:20 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I seriously doubt the anonymous op-ed piece was written by a household name, but it could have been written by a deputy or an assistant deputy who knows what key players are up to. What matters is motive: was this an opinion piece written by someone who is legitimately afraid for the future of the country under Trump, or was it written to troll the media?
Or was it written to drive thump over the edge so Pence will have to take over?
__________________
“Master, I’ve discovered the answer! Knock and the door will be opened to you.” The master replied, “Who said the door was closed?”
  #137  
Old 09-08-2018, 02:33 AM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,983
I found the Slate piece by Saletan pretty convincing as well. However does Huntsman really count as a senior official inside the administration? That sounds to me like someone who is working in DC.

Has anyone done a statistical analysis matching the phrases in the op-ed with speeches and articles by the various suspects ? Of course the writer may have tried to disguise their writing style but there are probably subtle patterns which are difficult to get rid of.

Last edited by Lantern; 09-08-2018 at 02:37 AM.
  #138  
Old 09-08-2018, 06:55 AM
The_Peyote_Coyote is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 3,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidCharlemagne View Post
Why not Pence? He is practically a perfect fit. His fawning isnt real, though I hope that's obvious. What else precludes Pence?
I don't think it was Pence. I have read on one of those political gossip websites that he and Nikki Haley want to be the political nominees in 2020. I agree that Pence wants the Presidency, but to get the GOP nomination he'll have to be accepted by Trump's base. If he were revealed to be the author of the piece, that isn't going to happen.
  #139  
Old 09-08-2018, 10:23 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,858
I'm not an HR professional, but if someone under you writes an op-ed saying that you're an incompetent asshole and you can't narrow it down to 100 people, then you probably are an incompetent asshole.

I think Dumb Donald is going to force every one of his subordinates to write a letter to the NYT asking them to void the secrecy agreement and publish the author's name. Hopefully the Times would ignore a forced request even if coming from the author.
  #140  
Old 09-08-2018, 11:28 AM
DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
Slate has a decent argument that the writer is Jon Huntsman, current ambassador to Russia.

* it matches things important to him - basic conservative policies, quality of character
* the specific mention of Russia in the op ed
* the prose matches Huntsman's style
* similar wording to other things he has written, like "country first" and "adults in the room"

There was enough other stuff as well to sway me toward Huntsman.
Isn't Huntsman in Moscow? I don't know how he could be the resistance in the WH.
  #141  
Old 09-08-2018, 03:32 PM
Hari Seldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Trantor
Posts: 13,239
I am assuming that the name of Deep Stoat will eventually become public and that the NY Times will assume the same. While every newspaper, if they are honest, will make errors and print corrections, they claim that this one has been carefully researched and everything they said is true. Otherwise, their credibility would be shot to hell and it might even cost them their business. And for what? Fifteen minutes of fame?

Therefor I am assuming that everything they said is accurate. The writer is a high administration official who can be fired and who is in a position to actually thwart Trump. This lets out Pence, some random undersecretary, de Vos, Carson and some others. Yesterday, the Votemaster printed a list of 20 people who have denied writing it: https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp20...07.html#item-1. One name is conspicuously missing from that list is John Kelly. That's where my vote is going.

It has been suggested that all the possible people will be ordered to undergo lie detector tests. A more interesting possibility is that every white house employee will be required to sign a notarized statement that they didn't. That way, when their name is eventually revealed they can be charged with perjury. Perhaps an FBI agent can be called in to take their statements. thereby risking 14 days in prison.
  #142  
Old 09-08-2018, 03:37 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalC View Post
Isn't Huntsman in Moscow? I don't know how he could be the resistance in the WH.
Isn't Moscow where the real WH power is? You may have inadvertently stumbled on the answer!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hari Seldon
It has been suggested that all the possible people will be ordered to undergo lie detector tests. A more interesting possibility is that every white house employee will be required to sign a notarized statement that they didn't. That way, when their name is eventually revealed they can be charged with perjury. Perhaps an FBI agent can be called in to take their statements. thereby risking 14 days in prison.
Getting something notarized makes you liable for perjury?

I was wondering if Congress could call a bunch of "senior WH officials" to testify under oath as to whether or not they were the one. Of course, some could plead the 5th.

Last edited by John Mace; 09-08-2018 at 03:40 PM.
  #143  
Old 09-08-2018, 07:42 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hari Seldon View Post
I am assuming that the name of Deep Stoat will eventually become public ....
I wouldn't hold my breath. It took 30 years for Mark Felt to out himself.
__________________
“Master, I’ve discovered the answer! Knock and the door will be opened to you.” The master replied, “Who said the door was closed?”
  #144  
Old 09-08-2018, 08:49 PM
Captain Amazing is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 25,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
I
Getting something notarized makes you liable for perjury?
Having a statement notarized doesn't touch on the truth or falsehood of the statement. It just certifies that the person who's signed it is authentic.
  #145  
Old 09-08-2018, 08:56 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,892
I'd never heard of Felt myself. But I kind of always thought that Deep Throat was L. Patrick Gray, who was Felt's boss. So, ballpark there. There is a pretty persuasive case to be made on this one for Dan Coats who, at 75, has no ambitions about future government employment, is an "old line" Republican and clearly hasn't liked some of what he's seen.

Last edited by E-DUB; 09-08-2018 at 08:57 PM. Reason: spelling
  #146  
Old 09-09-2018, 07:06 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,187
Trump doesn't seem quite sure the insider really is "anonymous".
__________________
Some or all of the above statements may be intended as sarcastic.
.
andros had more faith in an American jury than I had; and he was right. I'm happy to lose a bet and hope this trend continues.
  #147  
Old 09-09-2018, 11:13 AM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Isn't the issue with authorship really that almost literally anybody in the White House ("the best people") could have done it, even (and maybe especially) those who have denied it the most stoutly? This isn't a mere pout, it's a cry for help. If it weren't credible, consistent with everything else we've come to know about the Very Stable Genius, it would be easy to dismiss, and easy to identify the author. But it is.

"Who wrote it?" is just a diversion. The problem is the truth of what was written.
  #148  
Old 09-09-2018, 11:50 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
..."Who wrote it?" is just a diversion. The problem is the truth of what was written.
Yup. This park keeps getting overlooked.
__________________
“Master, I’ve discovered the answer! Knock and the door will be opened to you.” The master replied, “Who said the door was closed?”
  #149  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:03 PM
DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 11,200
But what is there to say about that other than "Yup, the president is crazy but the GOP is milking him for tax cuts and judges so what can we do".
  #150  
Old 09-09-2018, 01:17 PM
Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,150
Yo, man
(Yo)
Open up, man
(Yeah, what do you want, man?)
The President just caught me
(You let him catch you?)
I don't know how I let this happen
(With who?)
The New York Times, ya know?
Man, I don't know what to do
(Say it wasn't you)
Alright

Mr. Trump came in and he caught me red-handed
Creeping with the media
Picture this he was gonna go golfing
I was curled up on the bathroom floor
How could I forget that I was
Working for a orange turkey
All this time he was standing there
He never took her eyes off me

But he caught me in the paper (It wasn't me)
Saw me on Don Lemon (It wasn't me)
I even posted to my Twitter (It wasn't me)
He even caught me on camera (It wasn't me)
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017