Posted on 01/08/2018 9:39:41 AM PST by Starman417
Have there been any West Wing leaks to speak of since Bannon and Priebus were ousted? I haven’t heard of any—have you? Before those two left, leaks were epidemic.
Oh come on. A day doesn't go by it seems without a story or two quoting anonymous sources.
...why would Donald Trump allow such a chucklehead access to the White House? The answer may lie in the relentless leaking that was occurring in the Trump campaign right from the start. Trump values loyalty and he may have decided upon a way to determine where that loyalty was and where it lacked. Michael Wolff was allowed access to the Trump campaign around the middle of 2016. Chris Wallace reported that the White House Communications Team urged all senior advisers to talk with Wolff. Trump and his truly trusted staff could easily have fed stories to different people and then use those stories as tracers. Trump may have wanted to test the loyalty of all, so he went fishing. The biggest fish caught in the betrayal net was Steve Bannon. He had a number of unsavory things to say about Trump, his family and staff. Trump wasted no time returning the fire. Bannon stayed silent for a few days, but then, realizing that he pretty much destroyed his career, offered up a mea culpa...
One obvious advantage to having this easily debunkable book out there is that it will be equated with all the other easily debunkable smears about Donald Trump and his family members.
If I were aware of ongoing West Wing leaks I wouldn’t have posted what I did. Can you cite the two or three most significant, recent West Wing leaks?
Here's one from just today: White House considering Puzder for administration job . Source is " three people close to the White House".
Here's another one from today: White House preparing for trade crackdown . Source is "three administration officials". Maybe the same three?
Here's yet another from today: Behind the Scenes at Camp David. This one credits "A source familiar with the discussions".
The administration still leaks like a sieve.
Countdown to the “Trump is playing 4D chess” in 4 ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...
“Have you ever met Vladimir Putin?” Savage asks. “Yes,” Trump answers, emphatically. “You have?” Savage follows up. “Yes, a long time ago. We got along great, by the way.” Savage then asked, “If you win the presidency, do you feel you can do business with Vladimir?”
Then later in 2015 with George Stephanopoulos he had this exchange
“I’ve never met him,” Trump said then. “I have no relationship with Putin. I don’t think I’ve ever met him. I never met him. … I mean if he’s in the same room or something. But I don’t think so.” “You’ve never spoken to him on the phone?” Stephanopoulos followed up. “I have never spoken to him on the phone, no,” Trump replied. “Well, I don’t know what it means by having a relationship. I mean, he was saying very good things about me, but I don’t have a relationship with him. I didn’t meet him. I haven’t spent time with him. I didn’t have dinner with him. I didn’t go hiking with him. I don’t know — and I wouldn’t know him from Adam, except I see his picture and I would know what he looks like.”
This is a strange administration that can't seem to remember meetings with Russians. So which is it? Did he lie to Savage or Georgy?
I’m convinced a lot of the leaks have Trump’s blessing.
Old computer. Missed a word. Wolff said this morning that it was Bannon and Conway that facilitated him being at the WH.
Yeah and people think the whole Wolff book was a plot to smoke out leakers too.
Tells me his little plan boomeranged.
Thank you for those links. I read all three stories. Here is my take. When Bannon was still in the WH, the leaks were toxic. They invariably cast Trump in a bad light and reflected negatively on the administration.
Of the three leaks you posted, two struck me as positive and one as neutral. I.e.: they were of a fundamentally different nature than the ones flooding the press during Bannon’s tenure.
Here is something to ponder. During Bannon’s time in the WH, leaks were depicted as a crisis. Story after story was written about Trump’s inability to plug the leaks. The situation was contrasted to Obama’s, which had no similar issue.
I just haven’t seen the same issues since Bannon cleared out. Not every leak is a problem. Sometimes an administrative sends up a trial balloon, and other times it gives signals as to its general future direction. These are inocuous, and do no damage at all.
My sense is that the leak crisis is over. We aren’t seeing nasty, infighting gossip-type leaks any more. The hatchet jobs focussing on certain West Wing parties have ended. The overall atmosphere is 180 degrees different—and better.
For Gawd’s sake he doesn’t even have his HAIR on!
Has Conway confirmed Wolff’s claim? Otherwise you’re taking the word of a Leftist Trump-hating pathological liar.
If Conway does confirm, then that would make three Cruz supporters involved with Wolff. Interesting, at a minimum.
Conway would come up with alternative facts. So who do you believe?
I notice you haven’t commented on my Savage/Georgy S discrepancy on meeting Putin. Trump lied in one of the interviews.
But it was the “genius” who put those Cruz lovers in the WH. How could someone so smart make such horrible personnel decisions?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.