Trump lashes out at New York Times after report he Wasn't Briefed

Was he or wasn't he? Even Trump seems confused.

Trump lashes out at New York Times after report suggests he wasn't 'fully briefed' on action giving Bannon more power

President Donald Trump wasn't "fully briefed" on the details of an executive action giving his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, more power, according to an explosive report from The New York Times.

Trump signed a presidential memorandum in late January that removed the nation's top military and intelligence advisers as regular attendees of the National Security Council's Principals Committee, the interagency forum that deals with policy issues affecting national security, and gave Bannon a regular seat at the table.

source

Is this just Trump's move to cover his bottom?

I've read a number of articles suggesting that Trump basically signs what's put in front of him (after telling someone to "make it happen" and doesn't actually read through the document. We know that he doesn't like to read and that he prefers media, so it is quite likely someone can simply put something in a document (like raising their salary or whatever) and Trump will probably sign off on it.

Some of his supporters have certainly thought that he was being played for a victim. So have some of his detractors.

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who served in the Clinton administration, said on CNN on Sunday that she thought Bannon was "the person that's pulling the strings."

The Washington Post reported on Saturday that Trump had noticed Bannon's rising media profile, and MSNBC's "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough questioned whether Bannon was "calling the shots" on Monday, comments that seemed to incite Trump to tweet that that wasn't the case.

This article (which is Trump sympathetic... a surprising tone for the Times) is one of the sources for the claim that Trump didn't know and was fuming about it.

So now we have two contradictory statements. It'll be interesting to see what happens next.

And the RoguePOTUSStaff reports that Trump now thinks all the "bad polls" are behind him.

Popcorn, anyone?

a reply to: Byrd

Why did you never make threads like this before? You seemed ok with a media that was basically state propaganda and now you take them at their word even after all the exposed lies. Not to mention the fact they are obviously driven by partisan polotics.

I'm torn on the Trump Presidency v. The Media war that is currently on going.

Bannon may well be the "hidden hand" behind the decisions made in the WH. It seems like just yesterday he was a tabloid salesman and the laughingstock of the MSM. Funny how much power an election win can give a person.

If Bannon has undue influence over the President, and this can be proven, it is absolutely the right and the responsibility of the media (press) to inform the American people. I just wonder why they were so quiet about Jarrett for the last eight years.

Has the Trump win actually caused the American Media to find their misplaced integrity, or could it be something else?

Freedom of the Press is a fundamental right given to protect those that disseminate information to the masses. It is not a ticket to say/print what you want in order to destabilize your political adversaries. Make no mistake, the MSM has said time and again that Trump cannot, should not, and will not be President. With his winning the election opinions and partisanship didn't change, only tactics and goals.

a reply to: Byrd

Was he or wasn't he?

Probably not , he doesn't strike me as a man who does details , he's the captain of the ship not the boiler stoker.

a reply to: Byrd

Bannon once described himself as Wolsey among the Tudor's. My thought and comment at the time was that arrangement didn't work out so well for Wolsey in the end...

Above Top Secret, should change it's name to Daily Trump News. It's literally becoming impossible for me to come to this site any longer, when so many people are obsessed about everything connected to Trump. The amount of frustration some people carry in them is insane

a reply to: Byrd

Any President can demand, "Make it happen!" But none can cover dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's. That's why they all have advisors. As many as possible. Each with a different take and strengths.

The legal system, wheels of justice and red tape are meant to protect the nation. Not the President's position.

To be fair, this illustrates perfectly how Bannon's appointment is viewed.

Personally I thought this was funny, but would have been better if they made it a little more Saw like.

"I want to play a game..."

originally posted by: Nikola014
Above Top Secret, should change it's name to Daily Trump News. It's literally becoming impossible for me to come to this site any longer, when so many people are obsessed about everything connected to Trump. The amount of frustration some people carry in them is insane

Yes, quite depressing actually...

originally posted by: Nikola014
Above Top Secret, should change it's name to Daily Trump News. It's literally becoming impossible for me to come to this site any longer, when so many people are obsessed about everything connected to Trump. The amount of frustration some people carry in them is insane

Despite my participation I agree with you...far too much attention is being paid to it all.

Looks like this is the next four years!

originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: Byrd

Why did you never make threads like this before? You seemed ok with a media that was basically state propaganda and now you take them at their word even after all the exposed lies. Not to mention the fact they are obviously driven by partisan polotics.

so youre saying the report is a lie, bannon is not sitting on a chair higher than top military officials?
i dont know the ops track record for media posts, because it seems he's been posting since 2002...
Bannon is the new Karl rove.

I have a related and sincere question. Besides being an ardent and outspoken Trump support during the campaign, what credentials does Bannon have that warrants his current place in government? He was a Goldman-Sachs Investment banker and then went into media and political pontification. How is it he's the right-hand man of the President?

Maybe The Don is having problems with his memory !

I do indeed think that Bannon is Rove v.2 and to be blindly giving this tool swaying power over US security policy is thoroughly bad, notably because he wants to destroy the state ... does that not bother anybody ? Really ?

originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: Byrd

Why did you never make threads like this before?

You seemed ok with a media that was basically state propaganda and now you take them at their word even after all the exposed lies. Not to mention the fact they are obviously driven by partisan polotics.

Do not mistake my silence for acquiescence or indifference. I'm actually limiting my posting about Trump (you do NOT want to follow my Twitter feed or one of my Facebook groups.)

And if you go back through ATS threads, you will find several recent topics where a number of us liberals asked ATS "what do you consider fake news and which sources are reliable?" The consensus from ATS was "if I like it, then it's okay news. If it disagrees with me, it's fake news." There was no one standard outlet that people said they trusted (at one time this was NOT true and Fox News was seen as the leading 'truth teller' during the first half of Obama's presidency.) Even Breitbart was not to be trusted if it was posting something not favorable to Trump.

I check multiple sources before selecting one to post about, and do some fact-checking. This one had been reported on my news aggregators for a number of hours (plus Twitter feeds and so forth.) I used these sources because they'e somewhat less likely to trigger a "FAKE MSM!" response and because the second article was at least sympathetic in tone.

If you think the posts about Trump are bad, just query for the term 'obama' or 'Clinton'. No one complained about that, even when the news sources were blogs and not a news site. I'm not posting allegations he's a child molester or running a prostitution ring out of Trump Tower or any one of a thousand different things (all of which got posted for Obama and Clinton... and worse.)

Although I do not care for him or his actions, talk about him in neutral tones. I don't call him "an absolute roaster" or "bawbag" or anything else (unlike the Scots, who pull no punches)

But it IS political news, and people should be informed.

originally posted by: jtma508
I have a related and sincere question. Besides being an ardent and outspoken Trump support during the campaign, what credentials does Bannon have that warrants his current place in government? He was a Goldman-Sachs Investment banker and then went into media and political pontification. How is it he's the right-hand man of the President?

I have the same concerns. He may be 'draining the swamp' but he seems to be filling it with wealthy business owners that he wants to admire him - business owners who are busy trying to dismantle regulations that kept them from preying on the public.

Like the Net Neutrality law (which will make ATS videos impossible to see for a number of folks unless you pay top dollar for fast internet access.)

originally posted by: 200Plus
Bannon may well be the "hidden hand" behind the decisions made in the WH. It seems like just yesterday he was a tabloid salesman and the laughingstock of the MSM. Funny how much power an election win can give a person.

This was Bannon's first real mistake.

Up to this, it wasn't clear where Trump's ideas were coming from.

Bannon was operating in secret, behind the scenes, working in the dark.

But, there's no reason for Trump to want to "remove" members from the National Security Council. Since, such an important function definitely benefits from more experienced voices and opinions, rather than less. So, even if he wanted Bannon on the team, to add some perspective, he should want to keep the other members also.

Seeing how Trump likes to surround himself with all the best talent he can find, it's hard to think of this "removal" as being Trump's idea.

Considering how quickly Bannon has risen, however, it's clear that Bannon is mostly unqualified for this position, and would feel threatened by the presence of more experienced members of the team, hence, he would move to have them taken off the team. Their removal is to give Bannon more power, and has nothing to do with Trump, and definitely doesn't benefit Trump at all.

Since Trump is making the final decisions, he doesn't need to have anybody removed. He can listen to all voices. Then decide.

But, since Bannon is trying to control Trump, it's in his interest to block any advice coming from other sources that might conflict with his own, especially, since Trump is known to adopt the opinion and view of the last person he spoke with, which could pose a problem for Bannon's plans.

So, this EO has "outed" Bannon, as the key architect behind Trump's ideology.

a reply to: AMPTAH
C'mon, Bannon is to Drumphf, as was Rove & Rumsfeld ro Bush 2

originally posted by: solargeddon

originally posted by: Nikola014
Above Top Secret, should change it's name to Daily Trump News. It's literally becoming impossible for me to come to this site any longer, when so many people are obsessed about everything connected to Trump. The amount of frustration some people carry in them is insane

Despite my participation I agree with you...far too much attention is being paid to it all.

Looks like this is the next four years!

Then I think you (and others) need to go to your favorite sources and hunt things to post to this section of ATS. Follow my lead: post just the title as written in the article (ATS standard practice), copy the first two or three paragraphs, and make a small comment about it.

ATS relies on an active and engaged membership. Post the content that you WANT to see for others to discuss.

Meanwhile, I will limit myself to 2 (or fewer) posts of the type I like to see here. Probably less.

originally posted by: Byrd
Do not mistake my silence for acquiescence or indifference. I'm actually limiting my posting about Trump (you do NOT want to follow my Twitter feed or one of my Facebook groups.)

You probably shouldn't be following those either...

originally posted by: odzeandennz
Bannon is the new Karl rove.

The best political cartoon on the topic I have seen yet