advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: September 21, 2018 01:29PM
Big distraction from the Kavanaugh affair. Think Nunes can holler loud enough to drown out the women of America?

Who leaked it?



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: NewtonMP2100
Date: September 21, 2018 01:38PM
.....my understanding is that Trump has already been taped.........P.....tape....



____________________________________________________

I reject your reality and substitute my own!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2018 01:38PM by NewtonMP2100.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: bfd
Date: September 21, 2018 01:40PM
Silence is Golden
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Dennis S
Date: September 21, 2018 01:46PM
None of this makes Trump any less guilty.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Steve G.
Date: September 21, 2018 01:54PM

can't have Comey and the FBI snooping around you know
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: September 21, 2018 02:26PM
WaPo reporting that this information is contained in memos written by former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

Leaked by the WH to form the basis for firing Rosenstein?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Pam
Date: September 21, 2018 02:35PM
Quote
Lemon Drop
WaPo reporting that this information is contained in memos written by former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

Leaked by the WH to form the basis for firing Rosenstein?

Yep. After the midterms he wants Sessions, Rosenstein, and Mueller gone. Forget that people in his own White House talked about the same thing.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: sekker
Date: September 21, 2018 05:49PM
This is clearly a WH leak. I happened to see the NYT reporter being interviewed, he was being lauded for the ‘scoop’ on CNN.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Dennis S
Date: September 21, 2018 05:58PM
I heart one of the NYT reporters, Michael Schmidt, interviewed on NPR. He gulped during one of his answers. This is crap.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2018 06:12PM by Dennis S.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: September 21, 2018 08:26PM
I think the NY TImes got owned on this one.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Dennis S
Date: September 21, 2018 08:48PM
The American People got owned.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Ted King
Date: September 21, 2018 10:08PM
This is going to be pretty bad to really bad. Right now I'm leaning toward the really bad.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 22, 2018 10:29AM
Quote
Lemon Drop
I think the NY TImes got owned on this one.
agree smiley



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: J Marston
Date: September 22, 2018 11:21AM
Quote
Lemon Drop
Leaked by the WH to form the basis for firing Rosenstein?

My guess is that it was leaked by pro-Trump members of the House, who have access to most of this. And yes, the purpose is to give a credible reason to fire Rosenstein.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: bfd
Date: September 22, 2018 01:25PM
A mass firing by this asshat president will make Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre seem pale by comparison…

Guaranteed to fill the streets. We might actually get to watch someone's Police State see some real live action…
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Steve G.
Date: September 22, 2018 03:57PM
To be fair, if you just got out of a long private meeting with Trump, you'd be thinking hard about the 25th amendment, too.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: September 22, 2018 04:13PM
Quote
$tevie
Quote
Lemon Drop
I think the NY TImes got owned on this one.
agree smiley

Wait. Are you saying this isn't legitimate news? Regardless of the machinations behind it's leaking, this is absolutely newsworthy. Good reporters don't use or not use sources based on the source's reasons for spilling the beans. I think that the Times story, while far from the last word on the matter, did a good job of putting the McCabe memos in a well-researched context.

If you're going to drag the paper through the mud, please describe in some detail what you think the Times did wrong here.



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Ted King
Date: September 22, 2018 05:40PM
Quote
rjmacs
Quote
$tevie
Quote
Lemon Drop
I think the NY TImes got owned on this one.
agree smiley

Wait. Are you saying this isn't legitimate news? Regardless of the machinations behind it's leaking, this is absolutely newsworthy. Good reporters don't use or not use sources based on the source's reasons for spilling the beans. I think that the Times story, while far from the last word on the matter, did a good job of putting the McCabe memos in a well-researched context.

If you're going to drag the paper through the mud, please describe in some detail what you think the Times did wrong here.

Things from the article that I think are likely to be facts that are especially pertinent:

- It is very likely a fact that Rosenstein stated to them that “The New York Times’s story is inaccurate and factually incorrect.”

- "A Justice Department spokeswoman also provided a statement from a person who was present when Mr. Rosenstein proposed wearing a wire. The person, who would not be named, acknowledged the remark but said Mr. Rosenstein made it sarcastically." Also very likely that there is such a statement that says essentially that.

- "But according to the others who described his comments, Mr. Rosenstein not only confirmed that he was serious about the idea but also followed up by suggesting that other F.B.I. officials who were interviewing to be the bureau’s director could also secretly record Mr. Trump." It's also very likely true that the Times reporters were told this by some "others who described his comments" as essentially that.

That the reporters were told those things is almost surely a fact. But the content of all the stated claims can not be true because the first two contradict the third. So someone is saying something that isn't true.

The relevant question in the context of this discussion is - did the reporters unearth enough evidence to lead to a reasonable conclusion about who is not telling the truth? I'm getting old so I may have missed it, but I don't recall reading any evidence that strongly implied who was not telling the truth.

So as reporters it seems as though journalistic expectations would be that they would present the information in a manner that reflected that ignorance of a central fact. I can see that their use of word choice was careful to "sound" neutral but I am still left with a clear impression of who they think is telling the truth - their "were briefed either on the events themselves or on memos written by F.B.I. officials" sources.

From the first paragraph, "...deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, suggested last year..." "Suggested" is a neutral sounding word but it often carries the connotation of intent to encourage an action. "Suggestions" is used in the second paragraph.

In the fourth paragraph they do use the term "remarks": "Mr. Rosenstein made the remarks about secretly recording Mr. Trump and about the 25th Amendment in meetings and conversations with other Justice Department and F.B.I. officials." That sounds more neutral to me than "suggested", so that's better.

But then the seem to weigh heavily in the direction of their sources for the next few paragraphs:

Quote

None of Mr. Rosenstein’s proposals apparently came to fruition. It is not clear how determined he was about seeing them through, though he did tell Mr. McCabe that he might be able to persuade Attorney General Jeff Sessions and John F. Kelly, then the secretary of homeland security and now the White House chief of staff, to mount an effort to invoke the 25th Amendment.

The extreme suggestions show Mr. Rosenstein’s state of mind in the disorienting days that followed Mr. Comey’s dismissal.

The "suggestions" have rhetorically become "proposals". It's not clear to me where the evidence that "he did tell Mr. McCabe that he might be able to persuade Attorney General Jeff Sessions..." came from. Is this from documents they have verified? Or are they assuming the truth of the accounts told them by their sources? That seems pretty significant to me. Oh, and then they finish with the phrase "extreme suggestions". Eh.

It does strike me that the reporters had determined somehow that their sources were giving them the straight scoop more than Rosenstein or the Justice Department person who said he was being sarcastic. But it isn't clear to me why they are justified in taking that position. It could be that they know more than they have said in this article, but then they should have either provided that information or been more neutral in their reporting for this article.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2018 06:24PM by Ted King.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: Ted King
Date: September 22, 2018 06:56PM
Here's a good interview where one of the reporters, Michael Schmidt, talks about some of the issues I raised above:

[slate.com]

[a snippet of the interview]

Quote

Were you doubtful of the Justice Department giving you this person to offer a differing account because the memos and other things disputed that account? Or was it because you guys felt like the credibility of the Justice Department—which obviously had a vested interest in this—meant that you trusted it less? Or is it both?

No, it’s much more the former. The depth and breadth of our reporting led us to a different conclusion than what the Justice Department had given us.

Some people have criticized the story by saying things like, “If you’re relying on something like a memo, it may not pick up something like sarcasm.” And there is one quote in the Washington Post story which has Rosenstein saying to McCabe, “What do you want to do, Andy, wire the president?” Was that something that you wrestled with when you were working on the story, and how did you deal with that possibility?

This story has taken us months, if not a year, to get to the bottom of, and that’s because the people that had access to this information knew what had gone on and knew it wasn’t a joke, and wouldn’t talk to us about it. If this was a joke, we don’t think it would have been so difficult for us to have worked to get to this information. If this was a joke, this would not have been memorialized, documented, and discussed in the FBI in the way that it was. If this was a joke, Rod Rosenstein probably wouldn’t have made it more than once. Also, if this was a joke, the other thing is, this 25th Amendment stuff is in a memo as well. So, this is like—is this a broader conspiracy of jokes that was going on?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Sources say Rosenstein floated idea of taping 45, invoking 25th Amendment
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 22, 2018 10:16PM
To me, this story is questionable because of 1. the timing, which works very well as both a reason to impeach Rosenstein AND as a reason to push Kavanaugh from the top of the headlines and 2. the fact that I’m not hearing what I would consider enough background to publish. For instance, I don’t think that Ben Bradlee nor Katharine Graham would have let this piece run based on what the reporters are describing. That’s my opinion and the Slate article hasn’t changed my mind.

And rjmacs, I’m nonplussed that a person who has been complaining nonstop that everything is a distraction from the children in detention would choose this story as the one that is real enough / important enough for which to give up your mantra.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 280
Record Number of Users: 52 on November 20, 2014
Record Number of Guests: 2330 on October 25, 2018