Is the anonymous NY Times editorial a way to distract from kavanaugh, and this was part of their

[still_one]

plan?

[enough]

1. Of course. NT

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Oh, hell, no!

In a way it just adds to the general awfulness of this administration.

[still_one]

15. Of course it is awful, but this anonymous source is problemetic inself because it is coming close

to saying they are running a second government within our government.

What I don't understand is if this "resistence movement" exists, why don't they exercise the 25th ammendment?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

19. The 25th Amendment is actually very difficult to activate.

The vice president and a majority of the cabinet would have to declare the president unable to “discharge the powers and duties of his office.” If the president disputes that determination, which he surely would, two-thirds of both the House and the Senate must then vote to sideline him and put the vice president in charge. Do you really think a majority of the cabinet would declare Trump unable to serve; and even if they did, that two-thirds of both the House and the Senate would agree? Whoever comprises this "resistance movement" clearly can't do it by themselves.

[still_one]

22. Agreed, but something doesn't feel right about this. NY Times better have this story correct, and

verified it through multiple sources, because if there is a flaw or an inconsistency in this, we will all be screwed.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

23. The NYT would never have published that piece if they didn't know who wrote it.

[still_one]

24. That isn't what I am referring to. I am referring to the reliability of the person who wrote it. I

cannot help but think about how they pushed the WMD story, or what was done to Dan Rather, or the tactics of Project Veritas

Yeah, perhaps I am being a conspirisy nut, but I wouldn't put it past them

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

29. Here's the NYT's preface to the op-ed:

The Times today is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers. We invite you to submit a question about the essay or our vetting process here.

And here's some information about how they got the piece and how they handled it. http://www.krtv.com/story/39033618/the-story-behind-the-new-york-times-anonymous-op-ed-blasting-trump

[still_one]

30. Thanks

[still_one]

26. The one corroborating thing is the release of Woodward's book, which helps validate it

[Fred Sanders]

3. Highlighting that the nominee is the chosen of a mad man is more of a focusing.

[babylonsister]

6. Yes! The confirmation should be off. He's nuts. nt

!

[Fred Sanders]

7. An obvious internal coup is happening....but we should carry on with the nomination because

maybe we can sneak it it in before the bullets fly, perhaps literally, is not a good cover story.

Hope a Democrats demand a halt tomorrow over this along with the many other justified reasons.

Wonder if Shitler's personal security has been doubled tonight, the paranoia must be off the charts.

[JI7]

4. no, it gives more reason to get more info on kavanaugh and not confirm him

[C_U_L8R]

5. More reasons why this nomination needs to be yanked.

[still_one]

8. and who do you think will do that? Doubtful any republican will do that

[C_U_L8R]

13. We've got lots of good reasons...

But apparently there's no such thing as a good Republican. Or at least they seem very rare.

[still_one]

18. First of all the implication in the editorial, and keep in my I haven't read it only going from what

I see here, that there is a resistance movement in the government actually running things, is that even legal?

I don't know if things are as obvious as they seem

[C_U_L8R]

21. The op-ed writer claims to be part of a group

Self-labeled themselves to be 'adults in the room' saving the country from a dangerously unfit President. In essence they are running an unelected shadow government.

If they weren't so selfish and thinking about their own jobs, they would uphold their oath and immediately invoke the 25th and deliver all their evidence to Congress and the media.

[still_one]

25. That is effectively what the editorial is saying as I understand it.

[bdamomma]

11. +1000

nt

[bdamomma]

10. interesting

comment. Kavanaugh should not be interviewed at all for this position, he is only there to protect this POS so called pResident.

[Voltaire2]

12. No it is a giant crack in the wall.

[pnwmom]

14. That occurred to me. It's not beyond the realm of possibility given what we know about DT.

[still_one]

16. The way to do this is exercise the 25th ammendement. Running a "resistence movement" against the

government is problematic, and I am not sure about it legality, which is probably why the source remain anonymous

[pnwmom]

17. Deep Throat broke the law. That's why he didn't come forward for so long. n/t

[still_one]

20. Except deep throat reported illegal activities that were being committed. This source as I

understand it is saying a "resistance group" has taken over the functions of the government. That is big deal, and implies a government take over

Also, the NY Times had better be sure through multiple sources on its validity, because if not, the country is going to suffer immensley because of it. The blow back will be unstoppable

What perhaps gives this credibility is Woodward's book

[pnwmom]

27. The NYTimes doesn't need multiple sources -- they just need absolute proof

that they got the piece from the particular Senior Administration official they think they got it from.

[Fred Sanders]

31. Which is easy enough as the person would be standing in front of them at some point.

[Dawson Leery]

28. I have been thinking the same way.