Bob Woodward’s new book reveals a ‘nervous breakdown’ of Trump’s presidency

[Cardinal]

I don't normally do this, but I'm not going to cut and past specific paragraphs from the article. The whole thing is so banana-pants that an isolated quote here and an isolated quote there wouldn't do it justice.

While we've known for well over a year now that the White House was defined by dysfunction, the pure extent of it still somehow managed to shock me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a6bac0df952a

Generic trump supporter response: "I don't believe anything in this article."
My response: "Good for you. Nobody cares."

 

[Praxas]

I don't normally do this, but I'm not going to cut and past specific paragraphs from the article. The whole thing is so banana-pants that an isolated quote here and an isolated quote there wouldn't do it justice.

While we've known for well over a year now that the White House was defined by dysfunction, the pure extent of it still somehow managed to shock me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a6bac0df952a

Generic trump supporter response: "I don't believe anything in this article."
My response: "Good for you. Nobody cares."

His book illustrates the dangers of what happens when the electorate elects an incompetent, lying man-child like Trump.

 

[Cardinal]

His book illustrates the dangers of what happens when the electorate elects an incompetent, lying man-child like Trump.

It's populism, which is a movement to elect somebody to be a wrecking ball to the State in order to punish the establishment (anti-immigration and xenophobism nearly always manage to be components of this for some reason). Most of these people would agree that the best way to fix a bad kitchen layout isn't to destroy the house's foundations, yet they think that it's okay to do that with an entire country. And here we are.

 

[Mycroft]

I don't normally do this, but I'm not going to cut and past specific paragraphs from the article. The whole thing is so banana-pants that an isolated quote here and an isolated quote there wouldn't do it justice.

While we've known for well over a year now that the White House was defined by dysfunction, the pure extent of it still somehow managed to shock me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a6bac0df952a

Generic trump supporter response: "I don't believe anything in this article."
My response: "Good for you. Nobody cares."

There should be a forum rule against using WaPo links. You know...the paywall and all.

Especially when the OP refuses to link even a little bit of the article.

 

[Cardinal]

There should be a forum rule against using WaPo links. You know...the paywall and all.

Especially when the OP refuses to link even a little bit of the article.

Oh noes. Mycroft won't be able to share his insights on the article with us. However will we go on with our day?

 

[Praxas]

There should be a forum rule against using WaPo links. You know...the paywall and all.

Especially when the OP refuses to link even a little bit of the article.

Most people know how to get around a firewall, but your faux outrage is noted and ignored. Feel free to move your happy ass on out then and don't let the door hit you where your false god split ya.

 

[roughdraft274]

There should be a forum rule against using WaPo links. You know...the paywall and all.

Especially when the OP refuses to link even a little bit of the article.

https://ittutorials.net/computer-re...-the-new-york-times-washington-post-pay-wall/

 

[americanwoman]

I don't normally do this, but I'm not going to cut and past specific paragraphs from the article. The whole thing is so banana-pants that an isolated quote here and an isolated quote there wouldn't do it justice.

While we've known for well over a year now that the White House was defined by dysfunction, the pure extent of it still somehow managed to shock me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a6bac0df952a

Generic trump supporter response: "I don't believe anything in this article."
My response: "Good for you. Nobody cares."

It's pretty frightening to read the President of the country needs to be controlled to such an extent. It's baffling anyone can in any way defend that.

 

[Lex Talionis]

There should be a forum rule against using WaPo links. You know...the paywall and all.

Especially when the OP refuses to link even a little bit of the article.

FYI, just right click the paywall link and open in an incognito/private window.

 

[jnug]

There should be a forum rule against using WaPo links. You know...the paywall and all.

Especially when the OP refuses to link even a little bit of the article.

Funny...I don't have a WAPO account, am way past any subscription deals they might have had running and just opened the article without delay..in fact less delay than is the norm with linked pieces.

 

[Cardinal]

Bob Woodward called Trump to explain to him that he tried to get a one-one-interview with him, and what's really fascinating is how the level of dysfunction in the process to speak to him directly mirrors the chaos described in the book.

It's a really great listen if you have 5 minutes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...oodward/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.aa1d640ca444

 

[Cardinal]

People, if Mycroft really wants to read the article then he'll find a way to do it. Please leave him be.

 

[bearpoker]

I don't normally do this, but I'm not going to cut and past specific paragraphs from the article. The whole thing is so banana-pants that an isolated quote here and an isolated quote there wouldn't do it justice.

While we've known for well over a year now that the White House was defined by dysfunction, the pure extent of it still somehow managed to shock me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a6bac0df952a

Generic trump supporter response: "I don't believe anything in this article."
My response: "Good for you. Nobody cares."

The other generic response is, "he's still better than Hilary". There! We've got the entire right wing response out of the way.

 

[Cardinal]

The other generic response is, "he's still better than Hilary". There! We've got the entire right wing response out of the way.

I didn't care enough to create an entire list of the usual pointless responses.

 

[roughdraft274]

I don't normally do this, but I'm not going to cut and past specific paragraphs from the article. The whole thing is so banana-pants that an isolated quote here and an isolated quote there wouldn't do it justice.

While we've known for well over a year now that the White House was defined by dysfunction, the pure extent of it still somehow managed to shock me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a6bac0df952a

Generic trump supporter response: "I don't believe anything in this article."
My response: "Good for you. Nobody cares."

Also, I think this book is completely alarming unless probably well over 50% of it is completely made up. That's crazy.

A normal book like this goes in to all kinds of details and there might be 1 big alarming thing that is reported on that if true would be very worrisome. Maybe some books have 3 or 4 very alarming things. Books like this, if you take the most alarming 5% of the book, and figure it's probably wild exaggeration or false reporting, then the rest of it is really more just typical political infighting, or insiders fighting for positioning, typical heated arguments or any number of things that any reasonable person would assume goes on behind the scenes in any whitehouse.

With this book, based on reporting, if you got rid of the most alarming 5% and assumed it's false or exaggerated, there would still be plenty of incredibly alarming **** that no one would expect in even a poorly run whitehouse. We can see when the book is released, but I'm willing to bet you could pull the most alarming 25% and it would still scare the **** out of you if the rest were true. And lets be honest, too many people are reporting things like this. And Woodward wouldn't release a book where a sizable portion may be false. Of course we shouldn't assume that the book is gospel, as you can't assume with anything, but we know it wasn't all just made up out of whole cloth. This should terrify any american that actually cares about the country. The people that spend all day every day around the president literally think he's a child. They think he can't be trusted to tell the truth under oath. They point out things he got wrong and he has full blown 30 minute long temper tantrums. He doesn't understand the importance of missile detection. This **** is flabbergasting.

 

[Cardinal]

Also, I think this book is completely alarming unless probably well over 50% of it is completely made up. That's crazy.

A normal book like this goes in to all kinds of details and there might be 1 big alarming thing that is reported on that if true would be very worrisome. Maybe some books have 3 or 4 very alarming things. Books like this, if you take the most alarming 5% of the book, and figure it's probably wild exaggeration or false reporting, then the rest of it is really more just typical political infighting, or insiders fighting for positioning, typical heated arguments or any number of things that any reasonable person would assume goes on behind the scenes in any whitehouse.

With this book, based on reporting, if you got rid of the most alarming 5% and assumed it's false or exaggerated, there would still be plenty of incredibly alarming **** that no one would expect in even a poorly run whitehouse. We can see when the book is released, but I'm willing to bet you could pull the most alarming 25% and it would still scare the **** out of you if the rest were true. And lets be honest, too many people are reporting things like this. And Woodward wouldn't release a book where a sizable portion may be false. Of course we shouldn't assume that the book is gospel, as you can't assume with anything, but we know it wasn't all just made up out of whole cloth. This should terrify any american that actually cares about the country. The people that spend all day every day around the president literally think he's a child. They think he can't be trusted to tell the truth under oath. They point out things he got wrong and he has full blown 30 minute long temper tantrums. He doesn't understand the importance of missile detection. This **** is flabbergasting.

Keep in mind that this is Bob Woodward, not Michael Wolff.

 

[Mycroft]

I don't normally do this, but I'm not going to cut and past specific paragraphs from the article. The whole thing is so banana-pants that an isolated quote here and an isolated quote there wouldn't do it justice.

While we've known for well over a year now that the White House was defined by dysfunction, the pure extent of it still somehow managed to shock me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a6bac0df952a

Generic trump supporter response: "I don't believe anything in this article."
My response: "Good for you. Nobody cares."

I wonder...having read a large portion of that article...has any contention in that article been corroborated by a named source?

I don't care if Woodward is the result of the second coming of Jesus Christ. Without named sources, his book is nothing more than a book of rumors.

 

[Cardinal]

I wonder...having read a large portion of that article...has any contention in that article been corroborated by a named source?

I don't care if Woodward is the result of the second coming of Jesus Christ. Without named sources, his book is nothing more than a book of rumors.

Well, thanks for your extraordinary insight as always. Bye.

 

[bearpoker]

Also, I think this book is completely alarming unless probably well over 50% of it is completely made up. That's crazy.

A normal book like this goes in to all kinds of details and there might be 1 big alarming thing that is reported on that if true would be very worrisome. Maybe some books have 3 or 4 very alarming things. Books like this, if you take the most alarming 5% of the book, and figure it's probably wild exaggeration or false reporting, then the rest of it is really more just typical political infighting, or insiders fighting for positioning, typical heated arguments or any number of things that any reasonable person would assume goes on behind the scenes in any whitehouse.

With this book, based on reporting, if you got rid of the most alarming 5% and assumed it's false or exaggerated, there would still be plenty of incredibly alarming **** that no one would expect in even a poorly run whitehouse. We can see when the book is released, but I'm willing to bet you could pull the most alarming 25% and it would still scare the **** out of you if the rest were true. And lets be honest, too many people are reporting things like this. And Woodward wouldn't release a book where a sizable portion may be false. Of course we shouldn't assume that the book is gospel, as you can't assume with anything, but we know it wasn't all just made up out of whole cloth. This should terrify any american that actually cares about the country. The people that spend all day every day around the president literally think he's a child. They think he can't be trusted to tell the truth under oath. They point out things he got wrong and he has full blown 30 minute long temper tantrums. He doesn't understand the importance of missile detection. This **** is flabbergasting.

What is flabbergasting to me is that I'm not at all surprised.

 

[Cardinal]

It's pretty frightening to read the President of the country needs to be controlled to such an extent. It's baffling anyone can in any way defend that.

They remove the papers from his desk and he forgets what he wanted to do. That's how they prevent disaster 85% of the time.

As I was reading the article I couldn't help but wonder if publishing it would eliminate that as a viable strategy. Or is trump just so far gone that it simply doesn't matter?

 

[roughdraft274]

Keep in mind that this is Bob Woodward, not Michael Wolff.

Agreed. That's why I specifically said Woodward carries much more weight than others.

 

[roughdraft274]

They remove the papers from his desk and he forgets what he wanted to do. That's how they prevent disaster 85% of the time.

As I was reading the article I couldn't help but wonder if publishing it would eliminate that as a viable strategy. Or is trump just so far gone that it simply doesn't matter?

If they don't mention it on fox and friends would he even know? I mean, we know he's not going to read the book. Maybe he'll see it on the other news shows since half of his day is apparently watching cable news. But I doubt it matters.

 

[Mycroft]

Well, thanks for your extraordinary insight as always. Bye.

No problem.

Hey...I know how much you like your rumors and how much you like the rumor mill (otherwise known as the mainstream media). I'm not commenting to take away your enjoyment...rather, to simply point out the obvious reality.

 

[Fiddytree]

Pre-ordered a week or so ago. I feel like I am going to be unable to read it for quite some time, however. Sigh. My recreational reading list keeps expanding, while work reading keeps calling me back.

 

[Chomsky]

That "remove the papers" strategy is sick!

But you know what's worse? The President giving a directive to the Sec'y of Defense, who then blows him off & ignores it!

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot!

I'm beyond words, here.

After Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad launched a chemical attack on civilians in April 2017, Trump called Mattis and said he wanted to assassinate the dictator. “Let’s ****ing kill him! Let’s go in. Let’s kill the ****ing lot of them,” Trump said, according to Woodward.

Mattis told the president that he would get right on it. But after hanging up the phone, he told a senior aide: “We’re not going to do any of that. We’re going to be much more measured.” The national security team developed options for the more conventional airstrike that Trump ultimately ordered.