Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Michael Wolff's "Fire and fury" revelations and slander of Trump administration

Was this a part of color revolution against Trump and might also be a smokescreen launched to destruct American public
 from finding the truth about the infamous Steele dossier.  It sure looks like it.

"He is needy and amoral enough to just, you know, insult people for attention"   -- Gawker

News MSM as an attack dogs of color revolution Recommended Links NeoMcCartyism campaign as a smoke screen to hide the crisis of neoliberalism Russiagate or Purple color revolution against trump Bannonism Bannon Demise Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool Was Natalia Veselnitskaya meeting with Trump Jr. a trap?
Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections MSM as fake news industry Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few US and British media are servants of security apparatus Strzokgate Steele dossier The Real War on Reality "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections Anti Trump Hysteria in major neoliberal MSM
Do the US intelligence agencies attempt to influence the US Presidential elections ? Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Media as a weapon of mass deception Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin Trump vs. Deep State Corporatist Corruption Michael Flynn removal FBI contractor Fusion GPS
Obama: a yet another Neocon Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA Media-Military-Industrial Complex  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" New American Militarism Luke Harding: a pathetic author of book that rehash Steele Dossier Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism Hillary Clinton email scandal Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite
History of American False Flag Operations The Deep State The Iron Law of Oligarchy Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite Pope Francis on danger of neoliberalism Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite Skeptic Quotations Politically Incorrect Humor Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy
 
  “Michael Wolff is a total loser who made up stories in order to sell this really boring and untruthful book. He used Sloppy Steve Bannon, who cried when he got fired and begged for his job. Now Sloppy Steve has been dumped like a dog by almost everyone. Too bad!”

“Well, now that collusion with Russia is proving to be a total hoax and the only collusion is with Hillary Clinton and the FBI/Russia, the Fake News Media (Mainstream) and this phony new book are hitting out at every new front imaginable. They should try winning an election. Sad!” Trump tweeted Friday morning. ~Trump tweets

He's getting royalties you fool. Y'all are getting excited about a bunch of slanderous words that mean absolutely nothing but to a bunch of fools. If this country is so foolish as to buy this used toilet paper then, it doesn't matter who is president at all.

sabbracadabra88 comment at Trump retweets 'Fire and Fury' parody cover, slams Wolff, Bannon Fox News


Introduction

  When, on returning home one evening, after a pipe party at my friend Jephson's, I informed my wife that I was going to write a novel, she expressed herself as pleased with the idea.  She said she had often wondered I had never thought of doing so before.  "Look," she added, "how silly all the novels are nowadays; I'm sure you could write one."

Novel Notes by Jerome K. Jerome

Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon was subpoenaed last week to testify before a grand jury in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election, The New York Times reported.

Bannon Is Subpoenaed in Mueller’s Russia Investigation - The New York Times, Jan 16, 2018

Wolff's book was a big present to NeverTrumpers. They, including Wolff himself,  hate Trump, and will continue to hate Trump. And very little of what they write is not colored by this visceral hatred.  But if we check the content against the reality on the ground. it is evident that Wolff's book is simplistic (and badly edited) collection of exaggerated rumors. And the for profit is off by miles in assessment of key dimensions of the situation in WH and internal struggles and capitulations that happened during the fist eight month of Trump presidency (the defeat of Bannon wing of Trump movement is just one tiny episode).

can be divided into five partially overlapping periods

  1. Inauguration speech to April. This was a period of gradual sliding  toward neocon/neolib camp (represented in Trump circle by Kushner or as it is call Jarvanka wing of the movement) and betrayal of his election promises, but still decorum was kept and some hopes that inaguration speach was not an Obam style "hope we can believe in" hopey dopey "bait and switch" maneuver remained.
  2. The first major capitulation to neocons, and "uncertainty period" from April to May. During this period, which was characterized by a series of well coordinated and damaging leaks,  anti-globalists, anti-imperial and anti war forces lost power in WH.  "Generals faction" which represents interests of Pentagon (which does completely correlated with the interests of CIA) were elevated to key positions.  It became clear that color revolution against  Trump is supported by powerful forces including powerful factions within CIA, FBI, State Department and the Department of Justice.  Media during thisperiod fully used propaganda value of "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections and Steele dossier.
  3. "Trump under siege period." This period started with the Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit. Post-May period when Trump was already emasculated and put against the wall by the appointment of the "Grand Inquisitor" Mueller, vicious neoliberal media witch hunt. this was the period of further retreat of "economic nationalists wing" and successes of the color revolution against Trump administration (see Strzok-gate).  Globalist/neoliberal wing (Jarvanka) restored and cemented its influence on foreign policy by cooping Tillerson (Haley, McMaster and Mattis were in their camp from the very start, despite some differences). Foreign policy of Trump administration during this period "normalized" to the level when Trump can be viewed as Obama II or Bush III, with somewhat more exaggerated saber-rattling component. As Patrick Cockburn reported:
    Trump’s isolationism may be less risky than the neo-interventionism of his senior advisers. Reports from Washington suggest that the decision to get more fully engaged in the Syrian civil war was contrary to what Trump himself wanted. By this account, he would have preferred to use his State of the Union address to announce that the US mission in Syria had ended in triumph with the defeat of Isis and that he was withdrawing US ground forces. Instead, the decision went the other way as McMaster and Mattis supported by Tillerson successfully argued for keeping US ground forces in Syria and Iraq.

    These senior officials were only advocating the consensus opinion of the US foreign policy establishment, as was swiftly illustrated by media commentators. Even as Turkish tanks were rolling into Syria, an editorial in The Washington Post was applauding Tillerson for having “bluntly recognized a truth that both President Trump and President Barack Obama attempted to dodge” – which is that the US needs a political and military presence in Syria.

    Still color revolution against Trump during this period enjoyed its first successes such as indictment of Flynn, elimination of Bannon, and reversal of Trump position on NATO and wars of expansion of neoliberal empire. Despite this capitulation, the behavior of the neoliberal media (attacks dogs of anti-Trump color revolution) during this period was so abhorrent that  it can't even be called media. Wolff book is just one example of this (well paid) campaign for the de-legitimization of Trump (smears is proved tool fro de-legitimization; accusations of corruption and connections to hostile groups such as "Russians" or "mafia", are another)   

  4. Strzok-gate revelations till Nunn's FISA memo period. It started with the revelations of text messages between Peter Strzok who was the top investigator of Hillary "emailgate" scandal and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who was his mistress at this time. The term "Strzok-gate" suggests that a part of FBI top brass (and a faction of Department of Justice, including Loretta Lynch, AG, Sally Yates, deputy AG, and Bruce Ohr, associate deputy AG), are guilty of bias, corruption, and attempt to interfere with the US Presidential elections. Strzok-gate allowed completely reexamine Hillary Clinton's private email server scandal (aka "bathroom server", see How FBI swiped under the carpet Hillary Clinton email scandal). Essentially FBI  pushed Sanders under the bus, depriving him of the chance to became the candidate from the Democratic Party.  It also  became clear that FBI Mayberry Machiavellians used a dirty trick with Steele dossier  created by FBI contractor Fusion GPS to launch Russiagate investigation, put members of Trump team under surveillance, and eventually managed to appoint the Special Prosecutor to paralyze Trump administration with the explicit goal to depose Trump.
  5. Release of Nunes FISA memo that partially lifted the siege by exposing dirty underlining of the FBI and Justice Department.  This memo, which does not contain any groundbreaking information, was significant as it marks partial success of the counterattack of pro-Trump  forces in Congress, putting DemoRats (Clinton wing of the Democratic party) on the defensive. It puts a big question mark on the possibility of the success of Mueller fishing expedition in deposing of Trump. That actually happened in February and does not belong to the first year of Trump administration, but added for completeness as it help to understand Wolff's book. 

Wolff mainly concentrated on "between the bed sheets" staff as he is organically unable (and unwilling) to see a bigger picture in this tragedy (or farce, if we view JFK assassination as the tragedy and the anti-Trump color revolution a a farce, as in famous saying "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce") .  So even as the book in January-February 2018 occupies No.1 place in the "I hate Trump" line of  books division, it position started to slide in February after what WaPo called "Michael Wolff self-destruction tour". It became more and more clear that despite all hoopla, it  is a second rate compilation of un-substantiated rumors by a mediocre and sleazy gossip columnist. The book was rushed to print. contains multiple typos and blatant errors; some parts were not even copyedited. Published excepts contain all valuable parts of the book; the rest is mostly fluff. It is possible to write much better anti-Trump book ;-)  Used copies will probably cost less then a dollar in one year or two.  My impression is that the lasting value of the book is close to zero and the fair price of the used book is one cent.

Election of Trump as a sign of deep crisis of neoliberal elite, while color revolution against Trump is a desperate, "va-bank" attempt to restore waning political power

Along with misunderstanding the US foreign policy (misrepresented by neoliberal MSM), I think there is also a tremendous gap between perception of the USA internal political landscape by the majority of the population (constitutional republic, elected representatives) and the reality (empire, "one dollar one vote", "deep state" with the core of all powerful and out of control intelligence agencies, etc). Much like in Matrix. Looks like it was FBI which was the kingmaker in the last Presidential election. Directly responsible for election of Trump -- pushing Sanders under the bus by exonerating Hillary.  In all empires the real political power is transferred to generals and Praetorian guard (intelligence agencies are just a modern form of the latter). In case of the USA the core of "deep state" includes Wall Street and the combination of Pentagon and the intelligence agencies.

Along with misunderstanding the US foreign policy (misrepresented by neoliberal MSM), there is also a tremendous gap between perception of the USA internal political landscape by the majority of the population (constitutional republic, elected representatives) and the reality (empire, "one dollar one vote", "deep state" with the core of all powerful and out of control intelligence agencies, etc).

The key problem is that Wolff's book focuses on personalities and petty trivia and avoids mentioning the fundamental crisis of neoliberalism as a social system and the neoliberal institutions ( from Congress to media, from Intelligence agencies and Pentagon to Hollywood). As well as the crisis of neoliberal policies (which in foreign policy area are essentially neocon foreign policies). And the crisis of neoliberalism (as a social system) in the USA is the key to understanding of Trump WH story as different players within WH represent different factions in the internal WH struggle for power, which in miniature reflects the struggle between different oligarchic groups within the USA "at large" (for example more globalist coalition of Wall Street financial oligarchy, CIA (which is connected to Wall-street sometime viewed as Wall-Street "enforcers") Silicon Valley tech giants and Hollywood (aka West and East coat elites) vs. more isolationalist traditional manufactures, real estate magnates, the "Rust belt" politicians, army which overextended and is sick and tied of multiple foreign wars, and a part of Pentagon, which probably includes military intelligence). General Flynn was a former head of military intelligence.

The crisis of neoliberalism (as a social system) in the USA is  the key to understanding of Trump WH story as different players within WH represent different factions in the internal WH struggle for power, which in miniature reflects the struggle between different oligarchic groups within the USA "at large" (for example more globalist coalition of Wall Street financial oligarchy, CIA (which is connected to Wall-street sometime viewed as Wall-Street "enforcers") Silicon Valley tech giants and Hollywood (aka West and East coat elites) vs. more isolationalist traditional manufactures, real estate magnates, the "Rust belt" politicians, army which overextended and is sick and tied of multiple foreign wars, and a part of Pentagon, which probably includes military intelligence)

Election of Trump was the most clear and powerful signal that the USA neoliberal elite is discredited and de-legitimized.  Just imagine that Hillary Clinton -- the quintessential establishment neocon warmonger, the card-carrying neoliberal,  supported by power of all neoliberal MSM, intelligence agencies (and large part of MIC) as well as financial oligarchy lost to the candidate who  represented rag tag team of forces discontent with neoliberal globalization. You can't image more humiliating political fiasco (and  that's why the smoke screen of Russiagate was erected to hide it and depose Trump after the election).  In this sense, Trump is not a revolutionary as he does not have any coherent plans of transformation the country from neoliberalism to something else,  but he is not the devil. He is the symbol of coming  collapse of neoliberal in the form that currently exists ion the USA. He might also represent a modest attempt of a more forward thinking part of the US elite to slow down the empire downward cycle as well as correct few excesses and buy some time and  ensure the "soft landing". 

In the 1990s,  victory over the USSR fueled extraordinary hubris and a pattern of reckless behavior of the US neoliberal elite informed by an assumption that from now on the world  would ultimately conform to the wishes of the "indispensable nation." In almost three decades from this point, a sequence of costly foreign wars and blunders in domestic economic policies undermined the USA and its global neoliberal empire. Maintenance of the overextended empire became way too costly. Economy went into life threatening crisis in 2008, from which it never fully recovered.  All this  creates difficulties with the continuation of the previous course of local wars for the extension of the empire (Wolff was actually a war correspondent during the Iraq war, so theoretically he should understand those problems). Industrial base in the USA shrunk and moved from manufacturing to financial speculation, a typical for final stages of previous empires, including British, development. There is also a classic trend of impoverishment of lower 80% of population since 80th typical for the final stages of empires.  After 2007 the US government needs to operate with high level of government debt, which was the cost of bailing our Wall Street giants.  Money gradually became tight in the empire and negative balance with China makes things even worse and worse with time as dollar not spend it the USA on recovering of its manufacturing capabilities is a dollar spend on increasing China manufacturing capabilities, which in the final count mean more that the power of the US investment banks and financial oligarchy.  That's why Trump initially (until his capitulation to neocons) tried to put some pressure on NATO members, so that the USA can offload at least a part of the costs of the maintaining of the US military machine to foreign powers.  At the end he was overruled and the only part that remained from his initial plans is "buy more US weapons".  But this might be" too little, too late." It is OK for the empire to be feared. The problems start when it became despised. And if the USA did not reach this stage already, it might be precariously close.

During the election campaign Donald Trump also argued for better relations with Russia. Which can save a lot of money and to slow down or reverse deadly for the US empire formation of the Cino-Russian alliance (formation of which Obama accelerated by his reckless actions in Ukraine). Trump plans were very modest: he wanted to share with Russia the costs of  a fight against the Islamic State and sell Russia the US airplanes, machinery and such and get preferential treatment of the US oil majors and US banks, halting  the slide of Russia from dollar zone, caused by Obama sanctions.   

He also wanted to reverse some excesses of neoliberal globalization which destroyed parts of the USA manufacturing, make good paying jobs less available,  and impoverished common people.  His opponent during  the election, Hillary Clinton,  argued for a confrontational policy against Russia and for kicking the "globalization can"  down the road. The foreign policy establishment, the media, the CIA and FBI were solidly on Clinton's side. The people of the United States made the opposite choice. It was Trump and his policies toward the globalization, NATO and foreign wars that were approved by those elections.  At this point the "deep state" decided to reverse the result of elections. and now we know how they proceed with this plan and partial list of people involved.

So Trump WH was from approximately May, 2017  under real siege, limping from one internal crisis to another.  With the neoliberal MSM amplifying any minor misstep, or creating the impression of a misstep when there was none. In this respect treatment of both Trump and Melania was abhorrent; you would never imagine that "the swamp" of neoliberal press would have such a foil smell. so Wolff's book falls firmly into this line; nothing new or surprising here. It did add to  the stream of well coordinated and damaging leaks.

So  Trump WH was trying to recover from an attack only for find themselves under another more vicious attack.  Moreover the power of neoliberal elite was such that Trump election tome policies managed to last just three months,. As we mentioned before Trump capitulated to neocons in foreign policy in April, 2017. What is strange is  that neoliberal/neocon elite is still determined to eliminate after the capitulation violating the rule "Do not kick a man when he's down " Then his  administration was generally paralyzed in May via "Mueller appointment" gambit.  At this point neoliberal establishment decided that using Mueller as a Trojan Horse  can reverse the results of the elections, people will be damned. That backfired as soon as Strzok-gate  was exposed with the most recent stage of release of Nunes  memo, which while not exactly a bomb (most of what it contained was already known) is pretty damaging to the "neoliberal swamp".  

In other words this hubris backfired as in response  to Muller hunt  Trump supporters managed to prove the Steele dossier was a falsification created with the specific purpose of establishing surveillance on Trump team and Strzok-gate was an attempt of intelligence agencies to dictate the result of the US presidential elections. 

Steele dossier gambit suggests that we live in a neoliberal empire run by the intelligence services (the core of deep state), not a republic. And democracy of federal level is severely curtained by the mere fact of existence of so powerful agencies, which tend to escape the control of civil society.   It is true there are some counterattacks of democratic forces under the banner of accountability, but generally the horse already left the barn. Actually, for CIA it took less then twenty years when tail started wagging the dog, if we assume that they played the key role in JFK assassination. Let's also remember  that that Herbert Hoover was above any serving President; none was able to get rid of him until his death.

So the proper context for understanding the events covered in Wolff book (Trump WH under relentless attack by superior forces represented by the "neoliberal swamp")  would be

  1. Electorate does not matter much and is always presented with two “equally bad” choices, forcing typical for neoliberal empires ceremonial voting for “lesse evil”.
  2. POTUS is mostly a ceremonial figure which can be emasculated, impeached, or killed if the deep state decided that he is not acceptable (actually Obama one time mentioned that he is not eager to repeat the destiny of JFK; so he felt the danger).
  3. It took just three months for the deep state to emasculate Trump. The working hypothesis now is that FBI along with  rogue elements in the Department of Justice (Rosenstein, Bruce Our) and other intelligences agencies (Brennan)  tried to stage a soft coup against Trump after the elections along the lines:

    Steele Dossier ->  FISA court -> 17 agencies memo -> Russiagate hysteria in MSM -> The appointment of the special prosecutor.

  4. After surprise victory of Trump in Republican primaries, the deep state launched a color revolution against him. Which included anti-Russian hysteria in neoliberal MSM based on falsifications of Steele dossier, spying on him to collect dirt and  find out which appointees Trump consider for key positions (On Nov 17, 2018 Trump became aware of that and decided to move  his headquarters from Trump tower to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey at least partially avoid this) .
  5. The "deep state" launched several false flag operations against Trump. One of which probably was Veselnitskaya meeting with Trump Jr.  at Trump Power (organized by FBI contractor Fusion GPS) as an early false flag operation, see below. The FBI and CIA contractor Crowdstrike "analysis" of DNC  "intrusion" (which was a leak, not an intrusion) also has all signs of a sophisticated false flag operation.  This putsch against the will of American people was the joint operation of at least three intelligence agencies: FBI, CIA and MI6. Along with as rogue elements in the Department of Justice and the State Department. See Colonel Patrick Lang discussion at  the-trump-dossier-becomes-a-disaster-by-publius-tacitus

The recent revelations about Steele's dossier saga implicated intelligence agencies in a "soft coup" against the remnants of the republic and  democracy. To hide this development from the public after Strzokgate revelations the deep state required a good smoke screen to be launched. "Fire and fury" fits the bill. Was it part of the plan, or happened accidentally (it was actually rushed to print) does not matter.  The key role of the book is to distract the public from the revelations about Steele Dossier, abuse of FISA court  and intelligence agencies efforts to depose Trump. that's why since Jan 3, 2018 we observe efforts to replace discussion of Steele dossier and FISA count abuses with the discussion of salacious gossip about Trump administration provided by Wolff. and  numerous Wolff interviews. This sleazy gossip columnist quickly acquired taste to them and even tried to "enhance" his book with salacious accusation of extrametrical affair which 70 year old Trump supposedly having in WH (you can admire the man stamina in such case, as being POTUS is a pretty exhausting job even for much younger people; look how quickly Obama aged during his term). He also now feel as a proud member of the neoliberal swamp and interlaced his interviews with brave blabbing like  ‘My book will bring down Trump,’

The key angle under which we should assess Wolff's book

Not that Trump is a saint, but he, at least, was duly elected by electorate.  Even his meek and by-and-large derailed efforts to confront the neoliberalism and globalization were positive for the USA population developments. It's not overly idealistic to hope for a world in which defense forces (and defensive alliances like NATO) are used for the proper purpose of defense and not for expensive and destructive wars for expanding neoliberal empire dreamed up by the US neoconservatives.

That's what Trump 2016 was about and why he won.  So opposition to attempts of reversal of neoliberal globalization and outsourcing, and related attempt to derail Trump are reactionary and bad for the country.  In other  words Wolff is on wrong side of history and  as such is a negative, a reactionary force that  needs to be opposed.  This is the angle under which we should view Wolff's book and his machinations with the facts as well as his staggering betrayal of his sources. Especially damaging for Bannon, who was Wolff main source of information/rumors for the book (to the extent  that the book tells us more about Bannon than Trump).

Opposition to efforts to tame neoliberal globalization and outsourcing,  and attempts to derail Trump are reactionary and bad for the country.  In other  words Wolff is on wrong side of history and  as such is a negative, a reactionary force that  needs to be opposed.

Especially damning for Wolff in view of recently released Nunes memo were false revelations/Bannon (mis)quotes  about Trump Tower meeting of Trump Jr. with private Russian lawyer/lobbyist Natalia Veselnitskaya organized by FBI contractor Fusion GPS. Here Wolff deliberately is pandering to Russiagate witch hunt, which in reality is about attempted putsch of intelligence agencies against Trump.  In this sense  I would be too surprised that he has some connections  to Fusion GPS of other FBI contractor.

While mediocre writer, Wolff is intelligent  enough and well informed enough  to understand that information he published about Trump Tower meeting is completely false. So it is reasonable to assume that his main motivation was similar to a typical motivation of a NKVD informer (aka stukach ;-).

All this means that Wolff and his book is a part of the problem, not the part of the solution, no matter how we view Trump.  In this sense Wolff is an "Evil doer" using an unforgettable phase of Bush II ;-) 

I would add extremely greedy and extremely sleazy "evil doer"...  A bit lazy too.  There are so much  information about "misdeeds" of FBI and selected officials from Justice Department that the hypotheses that Russiagate was a conspiracy organized for the purpose of bringing down the elected president of the United States via a color revolution mechanisms is extremely plausible.  In this sense, any book that plays into this conspiracy is tantamount to treason. Paul Craig Roberts aptly said "A case can be made that it would be just as well if the coup succeeds as it would bring an end to Washington's cover as the government of a great democracy with liberty and justice for all" (Warns The Russiagate Stakes Are Extreme )

There are so much  information about "misdeeds" of FBI and selected officials from Justice Department that the hypotheses that Russiagate was a conspiracy organized for the purpose of bringing down the elected president of the United States via a color revolution mechanisms is extremely plausible.  In this sense, any book that plays into this conspiracy is tantamount to treason. Paul Craig Roberts aptly said "A case can be made that it would be just as well if the coup succeeds as it would bring an end to Washington's cover as the government of a great democracy with liberty and justice for all" (Warns The Russiagate Stakes Are Extreme )

Unlike Russiagate innuendo, internal WH dynamics, especially modern role of the chief of staff as a private secretary/gatekeeper escaped Wolff (The Gatekeepers How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency  by Chris Whipple). the chief of staff generally works behind the scenes to solve personnel problems, mediate disputes, and deal with issues before they are brought to the chief executive. Often chiefs of staff act as a confidante and advisor to the chief executive, acting as a sounding board for ideas. If fact fate of the Presidency now might depends as much on the WH chief of staff as the President himself. Simply because  "Personnel is policy."  Ability to creates and maintain a workable team, that is congruent with  the President goals is a unique gift that can't be acquired and which POTUS himself does not necessary has.  In fact, as Chris Whipple suggested "the fate of every presidency arguably hinges on this little understood position". In several previous presidencies WH chef of staff was the real "power behind the throne". But Wolff is not interested in comlex WH mechanics, only in salacious rumors and Bannon ramblings.  The book largely comes across as a disorganized, low-energy rant, obsessively cataloguing the multiple transgressions of Trump against political norms, while offering little of the cogent analysis the political situation that  drive Trump WH to particular course of actions, as well as background the tag of war with intelligence agencies (due to Strzokgate we know some players on the opposite side of the rope). The question is: why neolib/neocon  efforts to depose Trump failed.  Was it Pentagon's support that saved Trump scalp? After all it was coalition of CIA and FBI, which with the help of Rosenstein installed Mueller as the Special Prosecutor (aka Grand Inquisitor, die to Rosenstein suspiciously overly bread definition of his  mission), and after which many assumed that Trump destiny was sealed.

As a writer Michael Wolff  reveals himself as a surprisingly mediocre story teller. He is definably unable to grasp the importance of events he observes. In other words he looks to me more and more like a typical neoliberal idiot.  His style of writing is clumsy and chapters are almost independent of each other. They can be read independently. There is no real storyline in  the book.  His level is nowhere close to the level top layer of modern "dirt diggers" represented by Matt Taibbi ( who called Goldman Sachs "Vampire Squid" in his world famous 2010 article in Rolling Stone).

Unlike Taibbi, the fame and money Wolff received for the books are completely undeserved. In essence, the book was a dirty, sleazy "make money fast" operation. Moreover the book was poorly copyedited (if copyedited at all) and contains many typos and outright errors, which undermine its credibility further (if you think that Wolff's reputation alone can't set the book credibility at zero; he is the  guy who supposedly stole and sold his mother-in-law jewelry to finance  his and  his former wife lavish lifestyle  ;-).  There are misspelling of names of some important figures in Trump administration such as Stephen Miller (of interview with Jake Tapper fame), which is completely unacceptable by any standards.

But the book his the nerve of NeverTrumpers and sold more then a million copies (mainly Kindle edition and audiobook in proportion two to one; Amazon gave audiobook for free with trial of Audible) making Wolf a millionaire: assuming  15% of the list price (typically $14.99) royalty he can get about a million for his book. The article Michael Wolff Could Reap $7.4M From 'Fire and Fury' Sales  suggests higher number, but I think the figures in it are overestimated (especially the price of the audiobook): 

Publishing economics can be complicated, and details of Wolff's contract aren't public. Neither the author nor his publisher, Henry Holt & Co., a division of Macmillan, responded to requests for comment.

But to get a rough estimate of what Wolff has made so far, let's assume he gets 15 percent of the book's list price -- a typical royalty rate -- and a $500,000 advance.

In its first two days, Wolff's book, with a list price of $30, sold more than 29,000 hardcover copies, according to NPD BookScan, which tracks 85 percent of the U.S. market. Retailers also sold 250,000 e-books, and 100,000 audio books, the publisher told the Associated Press on Jan. 10. They go for $14.99 and $27.99.

Add up all those sales, multiplied by the prices, and you get revenue of $7.42 million. Subtract the advance, and at 15 percent he gets $1.11 million.

Superficial and already outdated at the moment of publication by Strzokgate,
exposure of Steele dossier as fabrication to get surveillance of Trump, and Nunes' memo

  Ever watched a movie because the trailers were so good and realized the trailers were the only good parts? All the good bits have already been displayed publicly.

Amazon  review By MLO on February 2, 2018

"the book was outdated two days after it was published"

(S. Young, Jan 24, 2018)

The main problem with Wolff is that he does not understand the political atmosphere (and does not care to understand) about which he has written his book. He does not understand the term neoliberalism and the fact that election of Trump was the result of the crisis of neoliberalism in the USA and rejection of globalization by the USA population.  From this point of view he is a complete and utter incompetent.  Also Wolff tend to replace political tendencies and clash of ideologies and corresponding clans with Trump administration (which are a boring stuff) with the clash of personalities and petty political infighting, which make the story more entertaining and spicy, but ultimately wrong. For example "Bannon faction" (aka "economic nationalism" action although Bannon does not have any real economic program and was mostly alt-right propagandist) which was defeated and expelled by "Jarvanka faction" is far from being "good people". the same is even more true about neoliberal/neocon "Jarvanka faction", which is much closer to Hillary "kicking neoliberalism can down the road" program, then you might assume. In other words, his level or writing is good only for describing drunken fights in the pubs and sexual adventures of billionaires. Not much else.

At the moment of book publication most interesting and "juicy" parts of the book were already published and can be read for free. See "Published excepts from the  book" below. Amazon also provided a pretty long preview that gives you the sense of the book quality and content. You can get audio version on Amazon for free with a trail. And  most of the "bombshell" quotes you see in MSM are from the first two chapters.

And although advertised as a tell-all insider view, outside Bannon quotes, almost none of quotes or opinions are attributed. In other words this mix of yellow journalism and a book about Bannon (and his views on Trump WH after he was booted from WH ). Which was successful sold as book about Trump ;-)

 It just offers a cartoonish view that for $15 makes many NeverTrumper  happy for a day or two. Confirming their own illusion that Trump is a stupid buffoon (but watch this interview) , unfit for the office (but who is fit, in a long run, If this Pence or Hillary ? And does POTUS actually matter that much  if "deep state" runs the show ? ) , and people around him are either evil or stupid (two classic types that any administration should have, just think about Cheney and Bush II, or about "change we can believe if "bait and switch artist who used to live in WH before Trump  ;-) .

Using such epithets doesn't provide any insight in Trump administration or what is happening with this country. You can get the same stories from disgruntled employees about any large corporation for free.  Or from any neoliberal MSM, if you really want this dirt to be about Trump.

Another problem that not only the book was completely outrun by events in December 2017 and January 2018. It was outdated at the moment of publication. And this "problem" was actually noticed by several Amazon reviewers as early as the day of publication:

Always Interested, January 5, 2018

Being pushed in many directions and certainly not loved by the old guard in the political bubble

Ordered the book but, my feeling is it's already outdated. From the interviews of the author it's based on the start up in the WH when chaos was rampant and in fluctuation, Bannon being part of the problem. Remember this is and was a new, non political family, being pushed in many directions and certainly not loved by the old guard in the political bubble.

I've wasted my money on two best sellers about Trump which turned out to be comically outdated and totally erroneous by the time they were published and put out to the public.

Two stars based on the interviews I have watched with Mr. Wolff and the reason I purchased the book anyway, it's obvious he was underhanded in his so called interviews, which weren't actually interviews, just collected angst from general conversation.

If I am wrong I plan on making updates, until then it's fair to gather opinions on both sides.

In other words, not only NeverTrumpers were taken for a ride  paying $15 for information what is mostly known to all who follow national news (unless they bought the book as an attempt to defend free screech, as if dirty gossip is a free speech), but they also enjoyed it.

Wolff  within  the limits of his mediocre writer capabilities tried to follow this, already well established, anti-Trump canon, publishing partially already known partially invented and exaggerated by himself hearsay to please the NeverTrumpers who  want "red meat" on the President and are ready to pay money for it.  Money do not smell but the rush to get them can often be counterproductive ;-).

Unfortunately for Wolff, the period from inauguration to September 2017 was actually just a warm-up. BTW two key events of this period -- bombing of the Syria airfield (which signified capitulation of Trump to neocons),  and the appointment of the special prosecutor gambit (which put the color revolution  against Trump on fast truck) , were not covered well in the book. Events of December, 2017 and January, 2018 are revealing unprecedented corruption within the FBI, the CIA and the Obama White House. It goes from being almost unbelievable to downright scary. The real game was tag of war between Trump and Intelligences agencies (supported by Mayberry Machiavellians in Justice  Department) started with the discovery of messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and culminated in the release of Nunes  memo. This, including the onslaught of negativity from neoliberal MSM (attack dogs of this color revolution) is actually Agatha Christy level story -- a murder story.

There  is a real murder in it  -- Murder of Seth Rich. Rich's mother told NBC's Washington affiliate WRC-TV, "There had been a struggle. His hands were bruised, his knees are bruised, his face is bruised, and yet he had two shots to his back, and yet they never took anything... ". Newt Gingrich said that Rich "apparently was assassinated". In other words this is a really fascinating story of the first color revolution in the USA.  The book touches only one related to this intelligence agencies putsch against Sanders and Trump event -- an organized by FBI contractor meeting in Trump power which well may be an attempt to entrap Trump Jr. (see Meeting in Trump power). And it is covered all wrong, following standard for neoliberal MSM  "Russiagate" agenda. 

So not only "the book was outdated two days after it was published" (S. Young, Jan 24, 2018), you also get cheap, "National Enquirer" quality coverage with typos and unfinished  sentences as a bonus (actually many articles "National Enquirer" has more substance and credibility than this book).

The success of a book that lacks any semblance to real investigative journalism is sad testaments of the power of neoliberal propaganda machine. That's why it become a bestseller. Non-ending stream of "revelations", Wolff's interviews (including his desperate and dirty attempt to extend his 15 min of glory by suggesting that Trump has his Monica in WH ;-), lasted till the end of January (with the last gasp of propaganda campaign when excepts from the book were read on Grammies). If Wolff is really lucky it will be converted into TV miniseries, with some Brit participation (beware Brits working on Wolff's book; they authored Steele dossier with "golden showers" gossip) But it looks he already got the money (hollywoodreporter.com, Jan 17, 2018): 

Michael Wolff's controversial Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is coming to television.

Endeavor Content -- the financing and sales arm formed in October between sister companies William Morris Endeavor and IMG -- has purchased film and television rights to the No. 1 best-selling book. The massive deal is said to be in the seven-figure range. Endeavor Content plans to adapt the book as a TV series. A network is not yet attached, as Endeavor will now begin shopping the project.

Wolff will executive produce the series, with veteran Channel 4 and BBC executive Michael Jackson -- now CEO of indie producer Two Cities Television -- also on board to produce.

As of February 3, 2018  Strzokgate  (intelligence agencies partially successful attempt to change the results of Presidential elections) became the central story of the first year of the Trump presidency along with revelations about falsifications of so called  Steele dossier (another fantastic story which is waiting for a talented writer of caliber of Matt Taibbi to tackle) and Nunes memo. 

That makes the book mostly a collection of salacious gossip about the first year of Trump administration. Which probably was the original intent of the author.

Violation of trust as a business method: Matt Taibbi compared Wolff with a "Three-card Monte" dealer

  That describes MacShaughnassy exactly.  He does seem to know a tremendous lot.  He is possessed of more information than any man I ever came across.  Occasionally, it is correct information; but, speaking broadly, it is remarkable for its marvelous unreliability.  Where he gets it from is a secret that nobody has ever yet been able to fathom.

Novel Notes by Jerome K. Jerome

Stukach: n. (from Russian)

An informer. One who turns in one's friends, family, and neighbours to the secret police, usually for a reward or advantage...

Urban Dictionary stukach

"He is needy and amoral enough to just, you know, insult people for attention" ~Gawker

Michael Wolff's book is littered with errors. He has a track record that suggests that embellishment is par for the course for him. He misrepresented his way into the White House. How much of his Trump tell-all is embellished or misrepresented is unclear and may never be known.

The Washington Post

Wolff started shopping for his book in February 2017 when Russiagate was already in full swing and it became clear that  any dirt on Trump will be highly profitable.  In this sense Wolff is just another Russiagate enthusiast, notwithstanding his gossipy drunken companions in the bars where he collected all this dirt :-). Unable to see that the main plot is not the chaos in WH, but a FBI/CIA (or more correctly CIA/FBI, as in a fundamental way FBI is a department of CIA)  plot to depose Trump, or, more formally, a color revolution (the term far above his semi-sophisticated head ;-)  What is interesting is that someone wanted to talk with this treacherous ugly old man. Looks like way too many people are extremely lonely those days. Which reminds  me the quote of Jerome K. Jerome about  Aunt Emma (Full text of Diary of a Pilgrimage (and Six Essays):

" The house holds seven thousand people,"  answered my friend B., " and money is turned  away at each performance. The first production is on Monday next. Will you come ? "

I pondered for a moment, looked at my diary,  and saw that Aunt Emma was coming to spend  Saturday to Wednesday next with us, calculated that if I went I should miss her, and might not see her again for years, and decided that I would go.

The key idea of the book is getting information by violation of trust. And Wolff has long and sordid story of such an activity.  The key to his personality and methods is the following video on CNN host interview of Wolff ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60o72NLxnT0 ). You probably should listen to it before preceding. Key points is that Wolf admit himself behaving like a stukach  flattering his way in: "I certainly said whatever necessary to get the story".  Unlike "kid gloves" interview here interviewer asks several relevant questions and first of all: "Did you misrepresent yourself trying to get access to Trump?

Because in emails provided by WH we have found phases like  "I like the person", "I want to humanize the president", "Nobody is doing it" , "You know that I like him", "I might be able to change perceptions" which are completely opposite to the actual intent of the author. Such a "wolf in sheep clothing".   Another interesting questions were "Where all those pledges accurate when you made them? "  and "Why you present yourself as a beacon to combat bias against the President?" You definitely need to listed to this interview. It is only eight minutes. But neither doubts about Wolff credibility nor his tendency to burn his sources are new (Journalists scrutinize Michael Wolff's credibility - POLITICO)

“I wonder how many [White House] staff told Wolff things off the record that he then used on the record,” Bloomberg View columnist Joe Nocera tweeted Thursday. “He’s never much cared about burning sources. Can’t imagine that many of those quotes were meant for publication.”

...Rattner’s claim that Wolff used his 7-year-old son, on a play date with one of Rattner’s children, to extract information. He’s “a total sleazebag,” Rattner tweeted.

Wolff... has faced accusations in the past of playing loose with facts in his columns and books, and of not honoring ground rules with sources.

...In a 2004 profile, The New Republic’s Michelle Cottle wrote that “the scenes in his columns aren't recreated so much as created — springing from Wolff's imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events.”

Also in February 2017 it did not require much brainpower to understand that any salacious gossip about Trump will be well received and can bring the author substantial money. That there are serious money behind the Russiagate.

To get the necessary dirt in Trump (not that Trump was a saint, but here it does not matter -- he was the object of a treacherous attach first and  sinner second) Wolff essentially behaved not as a journalist but as undercover agent. Pretending to be a journalist interested is opposing the wave of witch hunt unleashed on Trump by major MSM.  And understandingly he found sympathetic ears, and least one "long tongue" with pathologically large ego -- Bannon. Everything  here looks like in second rate spy novels.

And as I noted above he his betrayal of his sources was not something new and unexpected of him. This is a 64 old sleaze with a long  trail of betrayals, not a new boy on the block. So his "sources" bear a large part of the blame. But him managed to hit a sensitive point of Trump staffers -- the defense against the MSM witch hunt.

After he collected all this gossip, he  never consulted his sources about accuracy of quotes before the publication of the book. Which again makes him more like an undercover agent on a mission, then a journalist. But this also is a typically operation mode of any sleazy gossip columnist. 

People who talked to him now deeply regret  the fact. The book was published on Jan 5, 2018 just two weeks before one year anniversary of  Trump inauguration.  It is clear from book that for the most salacious parts of the book Wolff  relied almost exclusively on Bannon ramblings as a disgruntled employee after his  eviction from WH.  And, in effect, Bannon paid the personal price for his transgressions, while Wolff was richly rewarded.

Look like his "manure fly on the wall" operation involved three steps: first he interviews Trump (big mistake on Trump's part, but that was early in campaign; that's the only interview Wolff did (there were no interviews in WH). After that  he managed to get the trust of Bannon by publishing in November 2016 a  flattering interview with him in Hollywood Reporter (at the  point Wolff was already booted from Vanity Fair): 

The focus on Bannon, if not necessarily the description, is right. He's the man with the idea. If Trumpism is to represent something intellectually and historically coherent, it's Bannon's job to make it so. In this, he could not be a less reassuring or more confusing figure for liberals — fiercely intelligent and yet reflexively drawn to the inverse of every liberal assumption and shibboleth. A working class kid, he enlists in the navy after high school, gets a degree from Virginia Tech, then Georgetown, then Harvard Business School. Then it's Goldman Sachs, then he's a dealmaker and entrepreneur in Hollywood — where, in an unlikely and very lucky deal match-up, he gets a lucrative piece of Seinfeld royalties, ensuring his own small fortune — then into the otherworld of the vast right-wing conspiracy and conservative media. (He partners with David Bossie, a congressional investigator of President Clinton, who later spearheaded the Citizens United lawsuit that effectively removed the cap on campaign spending, and who now, as the deputy campaign manager, is in the office next to Bannon's.) And then to the Breitbart News Network, which with digital acumen and a mind-meld with the anger and the passion of the new alt-right (a liberal designation Bannon derides) he pushes to the inner circle of conservative media from Breitbart's base on the Westside of liberal Los Angeles.

What he seems to have carried from a boyhood in a blue-collar, union and Democratic family in Norfolk, Va., and through his tour of the American establishment, is an unreconstructed sense of class awareness, or bitterness — or betrayal. The Democratic Party betrayed its workingman roots, just as Hillary Clinton betrayed the longtime Clinton connection — Bill Clinton's connection — to the workingman. "The Clinton strength," he says, "was to play to people without a college education. High school people. That's how you win elections." And, likewise, the Republican party would come to betray its workingman constituency forged under Reagan. In sum, the workingman was betrayed by the establishment, or what he dismisses as the "donor class."

... ... ...

It is less than obvious how Bannon, now the official strategic brains of the Trump operation, syncs with his boss, famously not too strategic.

The next step was initiated by Trump himself, who phoned Wolff in February after Wolff's CNN interview in which he defended the administration.  At this point Wolff realized that he can gain and subvert access to EH by pretending to be a defender of the administration and  writing positive book about the first 100 days of Trump presidency.

He tried to court Kellyanne Conway. It looks like he was less successful then with Bannon. After Kelly replaced Priebus as chief of staff at the end of July, Wolff was no longer allowed to linger in the West Wing lobby. Still Conway is mentioned dozens of times in Wolff’s book, including in scenes in which he quotes her directly and describes her thoughts. Role of Hope Higgs is less clear, but it looks that Wolff parasites on her inexperience. For the first six months of Trump’s presidency no one stopped Wolff from scheduling around 17 visits to the West Wing (mostly to Bannon). According to Bloomberg

Some of Trump’s senior-most staff believed that Hicks, one of Trump’s longest-serving aides who has acted as a gatekeeper for his interview requests, had authorized their cooperation with Wolff. They recalled that she encouraged them to engage with the author as long as they made positive comments. Hicks hadn’t greenlit the book, people familiar with her handling of the matter said -- but nor did she immediately put up a stop sign.

Bannon proved to be a real weakling who was deceived and mercilessly exploited by the "charmer".  And the WH staff realized that they got into a trap only in September  after Bannon was removed.  He also tried to capitalize on unusually high level of chaos in the new administration to force his way into some additional offices (although 90% of his dozen or so WH visits were to Bannon).  This was not too successful as staff was instructed by Hope Higgs to provide only positive quotes and subverting this in each case was probably way too complex for such an intellectually lazy person as Wolff.  I strongly doubt that his White House "catch" amounted even to 10% of salacious quotes he got from  Bannon; most probably they were limited to brief "hello-goodbye" interactions after Bannon interviews.

But after Bannon was booted from WH, Wolff got a unique, golden chance to spice his book which he probably utilized the full 100% feeding on the resentment of the person with such an enormous ego.  We all know the tales, how mercilessly disgruntled former employees rat their former employers. That's life. That's probably was the time when Wolff got the  most salacious quotes attributed to Bannon in the book including quotes related to Trump Jr. meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower (probably a trap organized by FBI contractor Fusion GPS)

Using typical NKVD informer methods Wolff works to get trust and then destroy his target by provoking them in order to extract salacious quotes that would guarantee that his book sells well.  Such a commercial conveyer belt of ratting of too trusting victims. And first of all Bannon. The victims probably were assuming that they are "off record", not understanding that there is no such thing with Wolff. This particular "feature" of Wolff personality and his tendency to invent quotes and situations to spice his writing was widely known before, so Trump people actually failed to do an elementary due diligence before speaking with him.  Which actually say something positive about Trump administration: whatever it is does not look like CIA-controlled enterprise with restriction of who can visit whom, strict checking of all "messages" by staff and using communication officers as "watchers" to help staff to stay on the message. 

People automatically assumed that  this "friend" of Bannon is one of Trump supporters. Big mistake. Most people mentioned in the book were unpleasantly surprised with the quotes attributed to them, then the book was published. Bannon initially wanted to write a disclaimer, but after Trump attacked him he changed his mind. Still he was forced to issue a half-hearted apology to Trump meeting quotes and charging Trump Jr. with "collision with Russia" (the book includes a quote from Bannon describing Donald Trump, Jr. and former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort behaviour as "treasonous."). For his "loose  lip sink ships" adventures with Wolff Bannon was ostracized  and lost his position at Bretbart. He also was summoned by Mueller to testify before a grand jury (probably because if he suspected treason he should as a law abiding citizen to inform authorities). 

The most disgusting is his  coverage of Trump tower meeting, which deserves a more detailed analysis.

Wolff book is a testament of the sad state of journalism today. ("Were all those pledges accurate when they were made? Were they honest?").  Wolff belongs pathological specie of "yellow press" journalists who specialize in spreading malicious rumors, usually about celebrities ( rumor=hearsay; As Comey defined it in exchange with Trey Gowdy hearsay is an information  that  you do not know on you own, but learned from somebody else; legally they distinguish between hearsay, double hearsay and so on ;-)  As always the case with "yellow press" it was the money that was probably the main motive for writing the book. So you need a critical mss of salacious rumors for a book to sell well. And to get them you betray the trust of people who communicate with you "off record".  As Russiagate is now in full swing it is interesting to remind that there is a special term  for people who betray the trust of friends for financial benefits, or personal advantages.  Stukach is slang derogatory name for an informer  who betrays his friends for personal advantage (Urban Dictionary stukach):

stukach
n. (from Russian) An informer. One who turns in one's friends, family, and neighbours to the secret police, usually for a reward or advantage...

Wolff  describes  himself using more politically correct term “constant interloper” which is "a person who intrudes into a region, field, or trade without a proper license. ", "One that interferes with the affairs of others, often for selfish reasons; a meddler."

These people are a tiny minority, but they seek career advancement and other benefits, so they create great damage to the society.  Wolff was trying to pretend to be a "concerned citizen" while working to undermine  Trump presidency, working as a stukach.  Nowhere this is more clear then in case of his coverage of Veselnitskaya visit to Trump tower (which might well be an attempt of entrapment of Trump Jr. by FBI-connected Fusion GPS).  Coverage of this episode also vividly shows how sloppy, lazy and evil Wolff is a writer and a journalist.

Nowhere Wolff behaviour is more clear then in case of his coverage of Veselnitskaya visit to Trump tower (which might well be an attempt of entrapment of Trump Jr. by FBI-connected Fusion GPS).  Coverage of this episode also vividly shows how sloppy, lazy and evil Wolff is a writer and a journalist.

Wolff also tried to hit the President below the belt ( Michael Wolff claims Trump may be having affair in White House..., Jan 20, 2018).

It is prudent to view this book in the context of the color regulation launched to depose Trump. In this sense Wolff book might serve as an opening move of the gambit "Unfit to serve in the office". Previous gambit connected with sacrificing Comey to appoint the Special Prosecutor failed after Strzok-gate was uncovered and Stele dossier discredited.  Is Wolff another CIA produced pawn sacrificed in order to launch the next gambit to depose Trump (as well as provide a smoke screen cover for " Steele dossier fiasco").  The key here is to understand who promoted Wolff's in MSM -- it is the same set of neoliberal MSM which promoted Steele dossier junk.  BTW Wolff's wandering inside WH without a press badge (he used visitor badge mostly obtained to visit Bannon) was such a gross violation of WH security protocol that suggests that some powerful "sponsor" was involved. He masterfully exploited disgruntled Bannon, and played with him "three-card monte" when "off-record" invectives toward Trump and Trump family suddenly became "on-record" to great surprise of Bannon. It looks like Wolff's did not have any other  reliable source inside WH and the book can be published under the title "Bannon fury and revenge: burning the bridges".  So we can say that  Wolff's book side effect was elimination Bannon from the US political scene.

Wolff's "carpet bombing" of Trump administration and personally Trump and his family raises many questions about the credibility of the author, personality of Bannon, the credibility of the book and quotes in it. As well as the credibility of the Trump administration ("no smoke without fire" effect).  The problem with Wolff is that he has provable history of fabricating quotes and events in his publications (he called himself "famous bloviator".) There are multiple reason to believe that the book is "a mix of incorrect anecdotes, sensationalism and score-settling." (wjla.com).

First of all this is connected with the personality of the author, who, in a way, proved to be perfect hired gun in the hand of forces hell-bent to destroy Trump -- a greedy amoral person. As Gawker said: "He is needy and amoral enough to just, you know, insult people for attention". Not that Trump is a saint, but it is not up to such a greedy, amoral person as Wolff to judge him.

Character assassination of Trump was a cheap trick but in this case it worked splendidly for Wolff, as the book sold in more that a million of copies (most of the electronic kindle edition).  But boomerang returns and it followed by character assassination on Wolff. And they found a lot of dirty clothing and skeletons in the closet of "famous bloviator".  So let's follow this story -- in some ways Wolff is also an interesting character. His treatment of his sources suggests that he is completely amoral, "make money fast" type of writer, which  can sell his own mother  for a good payment (actually there is lawsuit against him from his former  mother in law, who claims that  he cheated her on Manhattan apartment swap, stole and  sold her  jewelry,  and demands eight  million in compensation. And remember that an objective evaluation of a person is an evaluation of the person we do not like ;-)

Megan McCain is the only interviewer they tried to question Wolff credibility, and he did not fare all to well in this episode (although he  did not cared much; from his reaction is was clear that he is counting the money) FIREWORKS Meghan McCain UTTERLY DESTROYS ‘Fire and Fury’ Author on LIVE TV Sean Hannity:

McCain went on to errors plaguing the book; referencing reporters, newspapers, magazines, and others that have accused Wolff of outright fabricating events depicted in “Fire and Fury.”

“Did you ever interview Jared and Ivanka? How can I trust some of these quotes?”

“There are a lot of factual errors in here. So, what I want to know from you is, what do you say to people?” pressed McCain.

“I think this hits a special place for me because my family has been the subject of a book like this: “Game Change,” […] And lots of disgruntled staffers give interviews like this. I’m curious, when you talk about staff, you didn’t talk to his cabinet. Did you ever interview Jared and Ivanka? How can I trust some of these quotes?” she fired-back.

As Matt Taibbi (who is yet another #neverTrumper and is sympathetic to the author of the book) compared Wolff with  "three card monte" dealer, which  is pretty apt comparison  (Taibbi TLDR Guide to Michael Wolff’s 'Fire and Fury' - Rolling Stone)

The tortured "Author's Note" preceding the prologue almost reads like a novel in itself. In fact, trying to follow Wolff's idea of what "off the record" means or does not mean is like trying to follow the hands of a three-card monte dealer. It just can't be done.

As a White House source put it, Wolff's narrative personality is almost like a comedy act in itself: "He's like the old Jon Lovitz character from Saturday Night Live," the source said. "You know – 'Yeah, I went to Harvard, that's the ticket. And, yeah, I was on the couch in the West Wing for months, that's the ticket.'"

Pushback against ‘Fire and Fury’ author Michael Wolff started immediately after the publication calling Wolff’s credibility into question. Fox News’ Laura Ingraham tweeted a picture of chapter 17 from Wolff’s book titled Abroad and at Home with a caption, "From Wolff book—this is TOTALLY FALSE. I was there!"

“ From Wolff book—this is TOTALLY FALSE. I was there! “Distanced themselves from Trump”?! Total fabrication. pic.twitter.com/75QbME75IL

— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) January 5, 2018

Katie Walsh, a former White House adviser, disputed a comment attributed to her by Wolff, that dealing with Trump was “like trying to figure out what a child wants.” (The Washington Post questions 'Fire and Fury' author, Michael Wolff's credibility). As White House press secretary said  “We know the book has a lot of things, so far that we’ve seen, that are completely untrue”. While she did not provide any specific example, she noted that Wolff's picture of White House operations is false and  “the opposite of what I saw.”

Wolff's "three card monte" with "off record" conversations -- stunning betrayal of his sources

  stukach  n. (from Russian) An informer. One who turns in one's friends, family, and neighbours to the secret police, usually for a reward or advantage. It is considered one of the foulest insults in the Russian language.

Urban Dictionary stukach

Some people who have been burned by Wolff’s questionable tactics are now referring to him as “a total sleazebag”

...Rattner claims that Wolff used his 7-year-old son, on a play date with one of Rattner’s children, to extract information. He’s “a total sleazebag,” Rattner tweeted.

Fahri writes that Wolff has been accused of re-creating scenes out of whole cloth.“He has been accused of not just re-creating scenes in his books and columns, but of creating them wholesale,” Fuhri said.

Author of Anti-Trump Bannon Book of Gossip Described as a “Total Sleazebag” www.independentsentinel.com

Only slightly more then a dozen of interviews (90% of which were with Bannon, which means all but one out of 17) were confirmed so far. Everything else is probably a product of Wolff own overactive imagination. Some liars believe in what they are saying. This is BTW quite typical for sociopaths. And this is the way Wolf typically works: he engage anybody who foolishly wants to speaks to him, flattering the person so that the person lower his guard, then provoking the person to reveal some dirty laundry which can be used to Wolff's advantage.  Typical NKVD informer  staff.  Matt Taibbi called such behaviour "Wolff's Three Card Monte".  While he probably is not informer of some agency and his attack of Trump is probably just a sign that he views himself as a part of neoliberal elite, still  in case of Bannon his behaviour is borderline to entrapment ("action by law enforcement personnel to lead an otherwise innocent person to commit a crime, in order to arrest and prosecute that person for the crime").

Wolff claims that he has several tapes. Illegally recording the conversation without the explicit consent especially if the conversation was agreed to be "off record" might constitute a crime in some jurisdiction (I beleave it is in NY).  If done inside WH it might also be a federal crime.

In this case Wolff by flattery and pretending that he is a friend who shares the victim political views managed to extract and then report for his own advantage incriminating Bannon details of his conversation with his, which Bannon most probably thought were "off record" and which already cost him his position at Bretbart News.  And Bannon recently got an invitation to testify to grand jury due to incriminating him quotes published in Wolff's book. And then he equates such an entrapment to "interview". The actual number of people with which he has format interview is probably less then a dozen. Some people like Dr. Gorca recognized the trap and refused to cooperate.

Like sociopath typically do,  Wolff does not care about well-being of people, he used as his sources. In this sense Wolff is completely amoral bottom feeder ("stukach"), treating of his sources as pawns in the goal of "earning a lot of money and scandalous fame" (news.com.au)

As POLITICO mentioned

“I wonder how many [White House] staff told Wolff things off the record that he then used on the record,” Bloomberg View columnist Joe Nocera tweeted Thursday. “He’s never much cared about burning sources. Can’t imagine that many of those quotes were meant for publication.”

Steven Rattner, a journalist-turned-financier and former Obama auto czar, tweeted Thursday that “[Steve] Bannon may well have said all that stuff but let's remember that Wolff is an unprincipled writer of fiction.”

Wolff and Rattner have a history of animosity, with Wolff writing critically about Rattner in his 2003 book, “Autumn of the Moguls,” and also in Vanity Fair. And then there’s Rattner’s claim that Wolff used his 7-year-old son, on a play date with one of Rattner’s children, to extract information. He’s “a total sleazebag,” Rattner tweeted.

Wolff ... has faced accusations in the past of playing loose with facts in his columns and books, and of not honoring ground rules with sources.

In a 2004 profile, The New Republic’s Michelle Cottle wrote that “the scenes in his columns aren't recreated so much as created — springing from Wolff's imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events.” Instead of conventional reporting, she wrote, Wolff “absorbs the atmosphere and gossip swirling around him at cocktail parties, on the street, and especially during those long lunches at Michael's."

Some even speculated that Wolff's behaviour is driven by "bottled up sexual rage"  Gavin McInnes  suggested that " “My gut kind of vibe is that this has to do with repressed homosexuality,” Gavin McInnes Tries To Discredit Michael Wolff By Claiming He May Be Secretly Gay Right Wing Watch 

...he appears to be a closeted gay and my experience with them is that they tend to be sociopaths.

“They have a lot of bottled up sexual rage and they want revenge on the world. I don’t trust these stories.”

(Actually Wolff is a heterosexual and has a girlfriend that is younger than him by almost 30 years, so he might present a quite different "sexual minority" ;-).  In any case, it was established that several people who spoke with Wolff without being told that this in "on record" and who were never presented with the quotes for verification, suffered from publishing of his book.  At least for two of them that was a classic "career limiting move"

Similar to Steele dossier the book was a salacious bombshell based of false and maliciously interpreted rumors.  It was equivalent to writing the book about Wolff with the title "Is Michael Wolff a closet pedophile?" (he definitely looks like a sociopath, almost like Dr. Evil, which was noted by many observers ;-). With  the insinuations like

 "According to a close friend of Wolff's former wife, whom he deserted to sleep with an intern who was 30 year younger, there is something deeply troubling in a way ugly, Dr.Evil-like trout-pouted Wolff looked at pre-pubescent girls. His salacious face gave up his inclinations"  ;-). 

As Jeffrey Lord noted in Gossip Garbage

For those who came in late you may have missed one Kitty Kelley. She had earned her reputation writing gossip books about Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, Elizabeth Taylor and Frank Sinatra. In 1991, two years after the Reagans had departed the White House, she penned Nancy Reagan: The Unauthorized Biography. In which she claimed (among other things) that Mrs. Reagan had had an affair with Frank Sinatra and that the President had date-raped a 19-year old girl. Neither was true, to say the least. It was gossip garbage.

This is (admittedly incompetent due to many factual errors) attempt to discredit the POTUS,  a book in which it is "by design"  impossible to distinguish fact from fiction -- and pointless to even try. But the issue of credibility of the author was never addressed in neoliberal MSM interviews of Mr. Wolff.  Interviews that were specifically designed to promote the book to wider audience (Trump also helped to promote  the book with his reaction and "cease and  desist" letter).

Wolff likes to invent thing if it suit his goals. For example, in the  past Wolff was accused by Andrew Sullivan of putting words in his mouth in 2001. Sebastian Gorka, former deputy assistant to President Donald Trump, said a controversial new book about the first months of the Trump White House is full of "inaccuracies and lies."   Newsbusters reports that many of Wolff’s allegations have been proven false.

MaggieGal (marpel) ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ a day ago
This Wolff creep was asked by someone at MSNBC this a.m. if he could produce some proof that what he wrote was truthful and he said that the proof is what he wrote in the book and that’s all the proof one needs. This Dr. Evil lookalike is not only a liar, but he’s mentally ill.

Wolf in some case is capable producing entertaining (but not deep) analysis of pretty complex events like media mergers. Still even in those  rare cases he usually concentrating on personalities and gossip. His understanding of politics is pretty basic at best, and the book shows that quite clearly that he is "dumb as a brick" to borrow his own characterization of Ivanka (attributed to Bannon). 

The content clearly shows that despite his claims, the author doesn't seem to know Trump as a person (and probably does not care). Instead of trying to understand this complex character he re-created typical neoliberal caricature on Trump pushed by such neoliberal MSM as CNN and MSNBC. And to prove it he invented or misrepresented that facts and conversations, as he so often did in the past with other people, if this can earn him a couple of bucks.  He hurt several former and current WH staffers in the process, destroying Bannon as a political operative.

But actually his goal is quite different from providing honest reporting: it is all  about money. He made correct calculation that the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber and at the end of 2017 is ready to swallow tabloid gossip as it is ice-cream. And that ability of Wolff as an author to time the release of his gossip books so that his machinations with fact were undetected was noted long before, just after publishing of his first book (which was released in 1999 a year before the collapse of dot-com bubble): 

In a 2004 cover story for The New Republic, Michelle Cottle wrote that Wolff was "uninterested in the working press," preferring to focus on "the power players—the moguls" and was "fixated on culture, style, buzz, and money, money, money." She also noted that "the scenes in his columns aren’t recreated so much as created—springing from Wolff’s imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events." Calling his writing "a whirlwind of flourishes and tangents and asides that often stray so far from the central point that you begin to wonder whether there is a central point."[23]

He  also is a real trusted member of neoliberal/neocon establishment press:

His second National Magazine Award was for a series of columns he wrote from the media center in the Persian Gulf as the Iraq War started in 2003

That desire to please and profit from the establishment by pushing Hillary "unfit for the office" meme was noted by White House press secretary Sarah Sanders (who correctly defined the book as "trashy tabloid fiction"). She stated that the questions about Mr. Trump’s suitability for office were both not only partisan, but also "disgraceful and laughable"  as "if he was unfit he probably wouldn’t be sitting there having defeated the most qualified group of candidates the Republican Party has ever seen."

From his first book Burn Rate Wolff emerged as a person  with enormous ego, and extremely, pathologically money hungry gossip columnist.  : ... If  Michael Wolf really consider Trump so unfit and dangerous, why he was sitting on this material for more then a year. so his motives are different and probably far from noble.

Wolff represent  a brand of journalism in the USA which might be called "slanderous attack journalism" which is what some British yellow press publications excel in.  And he has penchant of making notes of the conversation that his counterpart consider private, or off-record.  The key suspicion about Wolff is that his main motivation is money and only money. As well as pandering to his oversize ego.

While some of what is said in the book is true it is mixes with so many lies that the cocktail is really toxic. His is descriptions of people who often helped him to write his garbage is cruel and insensitive. he essentially destroyed Bannon (to whom he actually owns all this money and the minute of fame). You might be even entertained to read the clever caricatures of everyone Wolff lied to, swindled, and stepped on in his quest for a quick buck (The juiciest lines from Michael Wolff’s Trump book - NY Daily News)

Wolff had a lot to say about the head of Trump’s National Economic Council and quoted from an email “purporting to represent the views of Gary Cohn” that circulated in the White House in April.

“It’s worse than you can imagine. An idiot surrounded by clowns. Trump won't read anything — not one-page memos, not the brief policy papers; nothing. He gets up halfway through meetings with world leaders because he is bored. And his staff is no better. Kushner is an entitled baby who knows nothing. Bannon is an arrogant p---k who thinks he’s smarter than he is. Trump is less a person than a collection of terrible traits ... I am in a constant state of terror and shock,” the email said, according to “Fire and Fury.”

Even media mogul Rupert Murdoch, a Trump supporter, hung up the phone after a conversation with the President about H-1B visas for select immigrants and said, “What a f---ing idiot,” Wolff wrote.

Looks like he  is completely devoid of dignity and does not respect the office of the President. Who, while not a saint,  was elected by beating  several establishment candidates including Hillary Clinton.  In other words, the book is a nice example of "deception  as an art form" and teaches us are much more grades of distortion of the truth them just intentional lying. Sometime even wrong accent do the dirty job.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders dismissed the book as “tabloid gossip” that was laced with “false and fraudulent claims.” (For example it is very difficult to believe that Trump did not expect to win the presidency, or in Bush II style did not know who John Boehner was, or that .).  Michael Wolff sounds like an upset baby with zero facts or logic, only skewed references to vague exchanges (bbc.co.uk)

Despite what is touted as unlimited access  most of the information appears was rehashed from existing articles (including previously published by  Wolff himself), rumors circulating in Washington, DC  and NYC social circles to which Wolff can access, insiders anonymous whisperings and drunken chat.  From Guardian (which is the stalwart  of #neverTrumper camp): 

Bannon has criticised Trump’s decision to fire Comey. In Wolff’s book, obtained by the Guardian ahead of publication from a bookseller in New England, he suggests White House hopes for a quick end to the Mueller investigation are gravely misplaced.

“You realise where this is going,” he is quoted as saying. “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr. and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”

Last month it was reported that federal prosecutors had subpoenaed records from Deutsche Bank, the German financial institution that has lent hundreds of millions of dollars to the Kushner property empire. Bannon continues: “It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.”

Scorning apparent White House insouciance, Bannon reaches for a hurricane metaphor: “They’re sitting on a beach trying to stop a Category Five.” He insists that he knows no Russians, will not be a witness, will not hire a lawyer and will not appear on national television answering questions.

Some people observed that his book  is more like the National Enquirer staff, somewhat plausible but mostly false.

Joshua B. Goodon January 7, 2018

What's all the fuss?

If you've been reading the news, then there aren't too many surprises in Michael Wolff's transcript of the clash of the Trump and Bannon egos. Bannon was a political arsonist who everyone knew would burn his bridges when he left the White House. And in exchange for the access to the White House Wolff had gotten during Bannon's tenure, Wolff has written a book exclusively from Bannon's perspective.

... ... ...

And BTW citing  Roger Ailes left and right also was pretty disingenuous -- he is now dead and can't defend himself and disprove the quotes the he never said. BTW Alies one made and observation that is perfectly applicable to the Wolff's book (Wikipedia):

If you have two guys on a stage and one guy says, "I have a solution to the Middle East problem," and the other guy falls in the orchestra pit, who do you think is going to be on the evening news?[10]

Again, Wolff does not  mention the crisis of neoliberalism in his book even once, but this was the key factor that propelled Trump to victory. Instead he tried to sniff Trump dirty clothing.

Wolff's carpet bombing of Trump: Wolff as a part of neoliberal MSM wolf pack

  "He is needy and amoral enough to just, you know, insult people for attention" -- Gawker

"Long a media provocateur Wolff has optimized his barbed bitching for the Internet" -- New York Magazine

bloviate -- To discourse at length in a pompous or boastful manner.  ~Wiktionary

Wolff's recklessness fuels the Trump administration's critique of journalists and the media. It suggests that journalists really are out to get the president -- after all, in Fire and Fury, Wolff suggests that journalists will print anything, so long as it casts Trump in a bad light.

The Bubble Michael Wolff's book a 'gift' to Trump, liberals say. Jan 25, 2018

 

This book should be viewed in the context of  Steele dossier fiasco and MSM media witch hunt (which are both a part of color revolution against Trump). As many Amazon reviewers state this book is not a work of investigative journalist, but a cheap and rushed attempt to earn money of sniffing dirty laundry. But it suit neoliberal narrative, so it was hyped to the stratosphere. For all January 2018 (starting from Jan 3, when Guardian published first excepts) it also supplemented the 24x7 attacks on Trump in neoliberal MSM. The hoopla around this mediocre and dirty book was just insane.  The number of Amazon  reviews  exceeded 4K in one month since publication  (on Jan 20, 2018, the number of reviews of Amazon reached 3.1K and on Jan 31 4.1K).  Rate books attract so many reviewers. Even 3K is a pretty rare occurrence (very successful Trump The Art of the Deal has 3.2K reviews; Blood Feud The Clintons vs. the Obamas Edward Klein, Lars Mikaelson   has just 1.9K)

The book also might well be a part of California billionaire Tom Steyer’s $20 million campaign to oust Trump (California Billionaire's Private Trump Impeachment Crusade).

For such books there is period during which used copy reach their real price (one cent). I think for Wolff's book this period might be very short: around a year. But  the intensity of hype in neoliberal MSM like CNN and MSNBC was simply amazing and completely insane. While in a short run the book inflicted serious damage to Trump, in a long run it might became a gift to Donald Trump (The Bubble Michael Wolff's book a 'gift' to Trump, liberals say. Jan 25, 2018):

The New Republic's Alex Shephard said Wolff's work has always had a loose connection with the truth and that he has already "has been caught making very suspicious claims" in Fire and Fury.

Wolff's work relies on gossip to tell us what we already know about the administration and in the process Wolff's apparent willingness to "say anything, whether or not it's strictly true ... only bolsters the Trump administration's case that the fake news media is out to get him," Shephard said.

Wolff's recklessness fuels the Trump administration's critique of journalists and the media. It suggests that journalists really are out to get the president -- after all, in Fire and Fury, Wolff suggests that journalists will print anything, so long as it casts Trump in a bad light.

The rewards are clear: His cavalier reporting has led to TV bookings, a #1 Amazon bestseller, and insane traffic for any of the outlets that agreed to publish his work.

All January 2018 Wolff interviews and the  book discussions in neoliberal MSM were like "an hour of hate" from Orwell 1984 novel. Notwithstanding Wolff's well-known poor relationship with the truth, the most distributing part of Wolff's book is Wolff interpretation of Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya  visit to the  Trump tower. There are two possibilities here:

Trump mistake in judging Wolff is inexcusable

The author excels in "soap opera" style of books starting with his 1999 Burn Rate How I Survived the Gold Rush Years on the Internet. His forte is to make the hero to look a bumbling semi-uneducated amateur (as if Trump killed his dog). This vicious level of dislike he has to Trump (who allowed him into WH, not a small fit for a sleazy second rate gossip columnist) is really strange, unless we assume that Wolff has had a predefined agenda. Trump probably knew him (or should have known) from New York social circle, so this was a real blunder. Trump definitely read his first column about him, which was not too complementary and clearly demonstrated the author biases.  As other people from Trump team who were familiar with NY social life.

In this sense Trump mistake is inexcusable: he should discover his interviews with Bannon much earlier then at the moment of the book publication.  But the fact that Wolff was allowed into West Wing is explainable -- he managed to  play Bannon enormous ego, get his confidence and he was using him as a Trojan horse since this moment. It just confirms that Trump administration, with all its warts, is more distant from "CIA controlled" administration then Barack Obama administration. 

Reading this book was like watching a one guy just keeps pouring the dirt of the  person sitting  tied to the chair do for some WH staffers this was a pretty educational moment (which actually undermines the press as whole, not so much "Sleazy Wolff" who is at this point a played card). not only that are statements are intentionally wrong, designed for most damage/sensationalism, Wolff really burned all his sources. But this is his business method, see below.

 The key message is  that  Trump is out-of-touch with reality and as such is unfit to be the President of the USA. Essentially this is a rehashed Hillary message.  The sensationalist and outlandish tone of the book makes me wonder if anything that is written is even remotely true. Again, if you're looking for an analysis of Trump's policies and internal struggle within t he US elite, don't waste your dollars. This is mostly salacious gossip. In this sense the book belong to "make money fast" category. The book properly compressed and rewritten with  less grammar error, less repetition, as well as more solid logical structure would make a decent article in Vanity Fair (actually you can buy compressed Cliff notes style write-up of the  book on Amazon now. 

There are several points that can be made about the events immediately prior the book release:

  1. This is definitely attempt to take down Trump.  A part of color revolution against Trump. So Michael "sleazy" Wolff might have some powerful sponsors (and  actually that is one such hedge fund billionaire in California, who would suit perfectly for this purpose).
  2. Trump reaction was amateurish and counterproductive. Which actually confirms some suspicion raised in the book. His "genius" tweet was especially damaging.  The only guy who  actually raised to the moment was Stephen Miller. I like his characterization on Bannon line attack on CNN in his interview with Jake Tapper.
  3. Bannon was probably the main (or only) Wolff source (out of 17 Wolf "excursion" in WH 90%, or all by one, were for meetings with Bannon). Bannon proved to relying of rumors in assessing Trump Tower meeting and was unable to grasp the meaning of the meeting as a possible attempt to entrap Trump Jr.  He also have pretty unrealistic ideas about foreign policy -- too much warmongering toward China and actually also toward Russia (his assessment of Trump tower meeting is really idiotic to say the least).
  4. Bannon proved to be a miserable human being, hell-bent of revenge.  Actually the book is more about Bannon than Trump. And his portrait is far from flattering. Bannon committed stunning art betrayal of the President. Stunning even if we take into account that Trump renegs on most of his election promises. See  Steve Bannon Tells Michael Wolff Trump Is ‘Not Going to Make It’, Jan 4, 2018
  5. Wolf proved again that his is just a second rate sleazy gossip columnist who will commit any unmoral acts for money. He is now rightfully afraid of possible legal consequences.
  6. Wolf completely destroyed Bannon as a political figure and promoter of "economic nationalism" in the USA.  Wolff probably have tapes with conversation with Bannon. Alt-right will never trust Bannon again.  Actually nobody will trust him. Bannon is effectively dead as a political figure Karl Rove - YouTube
  7. Wolf assertion that he want to inform people about danger that Trump represents is phony. All he wants is money and a large scandal to feed his ego. That' why he waited for a year to launch the book at one year anniversary of Trump presidency. There might be other motives too as the book distracted attention from Steele dossier fiasco and Strzok-gate (Ex-Bush adviser Why was Wolff allowed in White House):
    Amar Grewal 6 hours ago

    you guys , now after the fake witch hunt of Russian dossier you are cheat enough to come out with this fake book and fake author story to malign Trump, , ..... leave us Americans alone , do not waste resources of American tax payers in satisfying your arrogance and ego, ... instead you must call Obama/Clintons on the MSM and ask the relevant questions how much damage they done to this great nation
    ... ... ...

  8. Trump team was dysfunctional at the beginning and allowed this mole to do the damage. There was not clear lines of responsibility and with flattery and a highly placed "protector"  you can get pretty far. That person, by all accounts, was former White House adviser Steve Bannon. There might be a couple of other too. While Trump may have simply known that the biographer of his idol, Rupert Murdoch, was on site, it was Bannon who ensured Wolff had access. " Why Steve Bannon let Michael Wolff in the White House - Business Insider.  As The AP's White House reporter, Zeke Miller, said, every time he saw Wolff there it was with an "appointment" badge rather than a "press" badge.

Of course right now Wolff is laughing to the bank, but there are some issues with the book on which he can lose his shirt. One such issues which is much bigger that his tiny, slimy personality is Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya visit to the Trump tower story. And he failed to understand this writing the book.

Russiagate related insinuations

You write in your recent piece "The Russians are Coming, the Russians are Coming", "The complete and unmitigated irrationality of the current epidemic of Russia-phobia does nothing to reduce its incredible virulence as it continues to infect the entire political and media class."

..So we have had the coming together of these factors: the hatred of WikiLeaks by the intelligence community, the military's need for Russia as an enemy to justify the billions and billions in military spending, and the need of the so-called liberal left for a scapegoat for Hillary's defeat. So you have this kind of perfect storm that has led people to concoct this imaginary scenario where Russia installed the president of the United States in collusion with Julian Assange.

Former Ambassador Reflects on Current Events
Consortiumnews. Jan 31, 2018

This report of Bannon insinuations (probably exaggerated and uttered probably in a bout of narcissistic rage after his dismissal) about Natalia Veselnitskaya was actually the most powerful attack on Trump contained in the book. Such behaviour was typical for Bannon and was actually predicted by POLITICO Magazine (If Trump Fired Bannon, Would He Seek Revenge):

And when Bannon was breaking up with his second wife, she accused him of grabbing her by the throat and threatening to take away their children, while his lawyer reportedly threatened that she would end up with "no money" if the resultant domestic abuse case went to trial.

...Taken together, their suggestions amount to an epic, Kill Bill-style revenge saga that starts with Bannon leaking personal dirt on his enemies to the tabloids

...Jacobus said she expects Bannon would use his knowledge of the White House's internal dynamics to drum up stories that exacerbate existing rivalries.

Meanwhile, Bannon could launder more salacious hits through the tabloids.

...Cernovich said. "All the gossip and drama and stuff that might be a little more personal is going to get leaked."

So this sleasy gossip columnist Wolff tells is that Russians told through some intermediary that they have some dirt on Hillary and they want a meeting with Trumps son. This is quite a double idiocy. Because it denigrate the Russian diplomacy to some wild tribe in Amazon. Even if they wanted to meet with Trump's son, they would never acknowledge the intermediary of the purpose of the meeting.

Bannon insinuations reported by Wolff already prompted an action of "Grand Inquisitor" Mueller, who quickly capitalized on Bannon mistake and summoned him to the grand jury. Ironically, in Russiagate in general and in case of Trump power meeting in particular the truth is on Trump's side. Nunes FISA memo confirms this. Wolff proved to be completely incompetent as investigative journalist. But what you would expect from sleazy gossip columnist.

Like was the case with Steele dossier (British fabrication sourced, paid, and promoted by FBI contractor Fusion GPS) Wolff book "hot staff" if as far from real events as one can get. He claimed in his book that Veselnitskaya meeting with Trump Jr. in Trump tower was a treason. This is probably the most libelous statement you can find in the book. The reality it most probably it was an attempt of entrapment of Trump Jr. by FBI contractor Fusion GPS, using Veselnitskaya as a patsy. See Was Natalia Veselnitskaya meeting with Trump Jr. a trap? This was a very short meeting organized by false pretences by a British person who worked for FBI contractor Fusion GPS. All agree that the meeting lasted no more than 20 minutes.

Wolff's attempt to publish this false statement even if it was an authentic Bannon comment suggest that he is a tool (the other possible diagnosis might include a sociopath with completely inadequate view of his own personality; or a person with a damaged by alcoholism and cocaine mentality). This is completely outrageous behaviour on the part of the Wolff both as a human and as a journalist. It is beyond my competence to judge whether Trump is fit for the office, but it quite clear that Wolff is unfit to be a writer.

In any case, this is the part of the book where Trump lawyers can probably prove actual malice because Bannon statements were suspicious as statements of any person who never was present during Veselnitskaya meeting with Trump Jr.,; add to this that he was a disgruntled employee and he probably never understood the role of FBI contractor Fusion GPs in organizing the meeting. Although the danger of Wolff's lawyers requesting information from WH as a part of "discovery" probably outweighs the benefits. It would much smarter to get Wolff on some of his own semi-criminal dealings ( in the past he was accused of stealing and selling jewelry from his mother in law to finance his and his former wife lavish lifestyle) ) by supporting the injured party. As French used to say "revenge is the dish that is better to served cold"

The short term effect was clearly devastating both for Trump administration and Republicans, producing a new bout of anti-Russian and anti-Trump hysteria. But like is the case with Steele dossier, as time pass by we learn more and more facts that undermine Wolff's credibility. Still the short term effect was close the information bomb explosion. With the only difference from Steele dossier that the position of Special Prosecutor was already occupied. But this was the episode which probably provoked Trump reaction and the seize and desists letters, which definitely increased sales of the book. Here is how David reviewed the book on January 5, 2018

I purchased this strange, cheesy book for three reasons: 1) Trump tried to suppress it (1st Amendment, anyone?); 2) to protest the TrumpCo-driven devaluation of United States into a de facto Russian satellite country (are we great enough yet?); 3) to spit in the eye of all congressional Republicans who are silent in the face of treason, collusion, money-laundering, profiteering, stealing from the poor and middle-class, and a host of other high crimes and misdemeanors.

There are actually a of lot of reviews in the style "But when the administration sent the lawyers after it...best publicity imaginable. The writing is not stellar. I'm giving it five stars mainly to annoy 45 and his hardcore supporters. " This Russiagate story was like 5 gallon carton of ice cream to Hillary supporters ;-). But the quality of this "ice crème" is suspect.

It looks like Wolff failed to understand that evidence-free attacks has strengthened Trump's base and convinced his supporters that their leader is being unfairly attacked.

Russiagate originated in a conspiracy between the military/security complex (intelligence agencies are the key part of MIC), the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party (which pushed Sanders under the bus), and the neoliberal MSM. The goal of the military/security complex is to protect its budget and power by preventing President Trump from normalizing relations with Russia. Clinton wing of Democratic Party wants to hide Hillary political fiasco by blaming it on Russians. Neoliberal MSM and their handlers just want an establishment neocon warmonger like Hillary as a President and Trump does not qualify.

Bannon proved to be a real Trojan horse within Trump administration, who pursued his own agenda (and who ended with self-immolation). And while disappointment with Trump, who reneged on most of his election time promises is understandable, whether this is a tactical move or strategic retreat and conversion into "normal" republican was not clear at a time.

Attempt to create another Steele dossier to depose Trump:
Wolff's interpretation of Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya visit to the Trump tower attributed to Bannon is wrong

As the presstitutes are aligned with the military/security complex, Hillary and the DNC, and the liberal/progressive/left, the Russiagate orchestration is a powerful conspiracy against the president of the United States and the "deplorables" who elected him. Nevertheless, the Russiagate Conspiracy has fallen apart and has now been turned against its originators.

Russiagate Turns On Its Originators, by Paul Craig Roberts - The Unz Review

These people are the lowest form of life; vicious, ignorant, scheming, petty, savage, manipulative -- if given the opportunity and the right incentive, he would stab any one of them, and not lose a minute's sleep... Again, what was his motivation -- something is missing from this puzzle. Drugs or drink or mental illness? ... those rats in that sinking sack, they're fighting... He may be the dictionary definition of a firestarter to some, to me he's a rancid piece of filth.

Guardian comment

"Fire and Fury's shoddy journalism manages to indict both Wolff's tactics and the whole media ecosystem around him."

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2018/01/fire_and_fury_by_michael_wolff_reviewed.html

As soon as Wolff alleges that there was Trump collision with Russia (regarding the meeting with Russian lawyer in Trump tower) it became clear what agenda he have had.

Wolff is definitely pandering to anti-Russian hysteria in neoliberal MSMs by pushing Veselnitskaya visit to Trump tower (which lasted no more then 20 min and participants clearly were under surveillance by FBI and possibly British intelligence services via Veselnitskaya special status as a visitor to the USA as a lobbyist for Magnitsky case as well as Steele dossier machinations). all Veselnitskaya communication were intercepted (CONFIRMED Mueller admits no collusion at Trump Tower meeting)

As is now becoming the way as the Russiagate scandal unravels, confirmation of the collapse of one of its central pillars – the claim of proof of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign which some have claimed to see in the meeting in Trump Tower in June 2016 between the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and Donald Trump Junior – has slipped out in the most covert way possible.

Nonetheless the confirmation is there and originates in what all the indications suggest is a deliberate leak either from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team or from the White House's legal team. The confirmation is provided in an NBC News article which reads as follows

Two sources familiar with the questions Mueller's team have been asking about the meeting say the investigators are most interested in why the president crafted a misleading statement about the meeting much later, in July 2017, after a New York Times report about it. The sources say Mueller's office is trying to confirm every detail it can about the meeting.

Mueller's team is less interested in the meeting as a direct example of collusion, the sources said, although Trump Jr. accepted the meeting after being told he would receive incriminating information about Hillary Clinton as part of the Russian government effort to help his father.

No evidence has emerged publicly to contradict Veselnitskaya's account that she wanted to press a case about U.S. Magnitsky Act sanctions, and that she did not possess significant derogatory information about Clinton, despite the email from a music promoter to Trump Jr. promising incriminating details about the Democrat.

Moreover, no evidence has emerged publicly that connects the Russians in the meeting with the Russian intelligence effort to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

The issue of Donald Trump's supposedly misleading statement about the meeting is a red herring since it can have no possible connection to the collusion allegations which Mueller's inquiry is supposed to be investigating.

Even assuming that Trump's statement was misleading – which some might question – it would hardly be the first case of a US President making a misleading statement, and it is impossible to see how it can possibly give rise to a law enforcement issue for Mueller to investigate.

Of much more importance is the confirmation that Mueller's team now acknowledge that there is no evidence to connect Veselnitskaya to Russian intelligence and that her and Donald Trump Junior's accounts of their meeting must be accepted as true since there is no evidence to contradict them. In truth this was obvious from the start as I pointed out in an article I wrote on 12th July 2017, written immediately after details of the meeting came to light

The meeting with Veselnitskaya duly took place on 9th June 2016. It turned out that she had no information about Hillary Clinton to offer and was not a "Russian government attorney". Instead she wanted to discuss the Magnitsky Act, upon which a baffled Donald Trump Junior politely showed her the door.

That is the unanimous account of all the participants of the meeting including Donald Trump Junior and Veselnitskaya herself. All agree that the meeting lasted no more than 20 minutes.

There is no evidence that contradicts their account and the absence of any follow-up to the meeting essentially corroborates their account.

It seems that Donald Trump Junior and Veselnitskaya have never met since and have had no further contact with each other.

There is no evidence here of any crime or wrongdoing being committed or – contrary to what many are saying – of any intention to commit one.

Russiagate would not however be Russiagate if this important news that Mueller and his team have come to the same conclusion was not smuggled out in an NBC News article whose title gives the impression that it is about the totally meaningless fact that Veselnitskaya after leaving the meeting with Donald Trump Junior had a brief encounter in the lift of Trump Tower with a blonde woman who might – or might not – have been Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka.

So to quote Bannon about possibility of charges of money laundering (as in Beria famous quote: "Show me a man and I will find you a crime") (The Guardian) is clearly pandering to Russiagate hysteria in an attempt to increase sales of the book

The intensity of neoliberal MSM attack on Trump administration reminded me Steele dossier. As an amoral character in the center of scandal we can't exclude that Wolff did not have any some connections to Fusion GPS or other CIA or FBI front. In this sense we can view Michael Wolf book was essentially an opening shot of "unfit for the office" gambit, after fiasco of "Steele dossier" the fact that Wolff rehash standard propaganda about.

At one point Wolff mentions the alleged collusion with Russia. He asserts that if there was collusion, Trump was an unwitting victim of it, not realizing how his praise of Russia was affecting them and their actions. Paradoxically when Wolff writes about the Steele dossier, he touched that problem of rabid neoliberal press that is way too enthusiastic to promote it. Like now they promote Wolff's book. There was also Chunk Schumer advice not to piss off the Intel community or they'll have a 2-3 yr Russia investigation with daily leaks. Which implies that there's no validity to the Russia investigation. It's just a part of color revolution against Trump. But the same is actually true about the Wolff's book.

Veselnitskaya visit to the Trump tower could be an attempt of entrapment
of Trump team on the part of US intelligence community

The meeting took place in June 2018. If was organized by FBI contractor Fusion GPS (which might also has CIA ties via some associates and is in the center Steele dossier scandal and Strzokgate) and as such might be an attempt of entrapment. But now" Meeting in Trump tower" is part of neoliberal myth of "Trump collision with Russia" and permanent feature of anti-Russian hysteria in neoliberal MSMs. We can talk about mass paranoia fueled by neoliberal MSM in this case. A witch hunt.

Natalia Veselnitskaya was initially denied entry into the United States, only to be allowed in under "extraordinary circumstances" by Obama's Homeland Security Department and approved by former AG Loretta Lynch so she could represent Fusion GPS client Denis Katsyv's company, Prevezon Holdings - and attend the meeting at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. - arranged by Fusion GPS associate Rob Goldstone.

It is really interesting and not well know fact that it was a Fusion GPS associate British (beware of Brits setting up meetings ;-) "music publicist" Rob Goldstone (who was a tabloid journalist in the past, much like Wolff) was the person, who set up this meeting misrepresenting Natalia Veselnitskaya as a person connected with Russian government who might have goods on Hillary (The Guardian):

June 3, 2016: Rob Goldstone emails Trump Jr. offering "official documents and information" that "would be very useful to your father". Goldstone made clear the material came from Moscow and was "part of Russia and its government support for Mr. Trump".

In addition to this he fraudulently used the name Russian-Azeri businessman Aras Agalarov to set-up the meeting (The Guardian):

Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said it was "wild" that Trump's son was being blamed for speaking with a Russian attorney. Lavrov – who met Trump last week at the G20 summit in Hamburg, together with Vladimir Putin – said he knew nothing of the meeting with the lawyer. Serious people were trying to "make a mountain out of a molehill", Lavrov said.

In the emails, Goldstone said he made contact with Trump Jr. at the behest of the Russian-Azeri businessman Aras Agalarov and Aglaravov's pop-star son, Emin. The Agalarovs hosted Trump when he visited Moscow in 2013 for the Miss Universe beauty pageant.

On Wednesday, Aras Agalarov claimed the story was invented. "I think this is some sort of fiction. I don't know who is making it up," he told Russia's Business FM radio station, adding: "What has Hillary Clinton got to do with anything? I don't know."

Natalia own interests were more modest -- to lobby against Magnitsky act. That's why meeting was so short, no more then 20 min(CONFIRMED Mueller admits no collusion at Trump Tower meeting)

It turns out that Veselnitskaya was not working for Fusion GPS but rather Fusion GPS was working for her, in connection with her work on the Magnitsky case.

That in itself makes it inherently unlikely that she was acting as a catspaw for Fusion GPS when she met Donald Trump Junior.

More to the point, Glenn Simpson's comments about Veselnitskaya are anything but complimentary. He basically describes her – rather convincingly – as a self-important busybody and a minor league player, and expresses incredulity at the suggestion that she was a Russian intelligence agent who was working for the Kremlin.

And it is reasonable to assume that she was a selected patsy due to the fact that she was a Russian. Also strange that Fusion GPS associate from Britain was strangely active before the meeting travelling to Russia (probably collecting dirt for Steele dossier in Moscow musical circles and bars ;-):

Goldstone's posts indicate that he was in Moscow 10 days before the 9 June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower, and then returned to spend most of that July in Russia and Azerbaijan.

Also his later interview (to The London Times Magazine) suggest specific intent and attempt to avoid responsibility (Russiagate continues to unravel as Goldstone confirms Trump Junior's account of Veselnitskaya meeting):

"If I'm guilty of anything, and I hate the word guilty, it's hyping the message and going the extra mile for my clients. Using hot-button language to puff up the information I had been given. I didn't make up the details, I just made them sound more interesting."…..

[In] his first email to the younger Trump [Goldstone] appeared to give a very different impression. He wrote matter-of-factly: "This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin." Those words, he says now, were simply "puffery" from a publicist seeking to grab Trump Jr's attention.

"What I was talking about there was that I'd been in Russia many times and I'd seen how both government figures and the public adored and supported Trump, and that included Emin and Aras. But because it's a rushed email, I understand that the implication sounds like it's me giving an official statement about Russian government support. But it wasn't. And with hindsight, yes, I would have written it differently."

Much has also been made of how Goldstone said Aras Agalarov had met Russia's "crown prosecutor". Given that Russia has not had a crown since the 1917 revolution, there was a widespread presumption that Goldstone was referring to Vladimir Putin's prosecutor general, Yuri Chaika. It has since been reported that the lawyer Veselnitskaya met Chaika in Moscow in the run-up to her trip to New York, sharing with him the talking points that she delivered at Trump Tower. But Goldstone insists Veselnitskaya was the one described to him by Emin as a "well-connected prosecutor" and that in his haste, he had said "crown prosecutor" as that was a British term he used to use as a young reporter.

As WaPo stated Mark Corallo, a spokesman for President Trump's outside counsel, alleged that ( The Washington Post July 11, 2017)

the meeting had been set up under false pretenses and implied that Veselnitskaya's association with Fusion GPS was relevant to the alleged deception.

"Specifically, we have learned that the person who sought the meeting is associated with Fusion GPS, a firm which according to public reports, was retained by Democratic operatives to develop opposition research on the president and which commissioned the phony Steele dossier," Corallo said in a statement.

Even before Trump's legal team suggested the Veselnitskaya meeting was a dirty trick to set up the younger Trump, pro-Trump media outlets had been calling on federal and Senate investigators to look into the activities of the firm, which is run by two former journalists and has done research for both Republicans and Democrats alike.

What is really funny that later " William Browder, the chief of Hermitage Capital ... filed the complaint against Fusion GPS and several other entities he alleges were working on behalf of the Russians." William Browder is suspected to be the former agent on MI6, much like Christopher Steele was. As Josh Rogin wrote ( The Washington Post July 11, 2017) :

Browder told me the he will testify that the fact Veselnitskaya was trying to convince Trump campaign officials and family members to change U.S. policy on Russia clearly shows she was acting as an agent of the Russian government.

... ... ...

Fusion GPS has said that it was working for the law firm BakerHostetler, which was representing Prevezon, a Russian holding company based in Cyprus, in its defense against Justice Department allegations that Prevezon laundered money stolen in the fraud Magnitsky uncovered. Veselnitskaya was Prevezon's lawyer. Fusion GPS started working on the case in 2013 and the case settled in May with no admission of guilt by Prevezon.

... ... ...

Prevezon is owned by Russian businessman Denis Katsyv. His father, Pyotr Katsyv, was vice premier and minister of transport of Moscow region from 2004 to 2012. Katsyv's deputy minister was Alexander Mitusov, Veselnitskaya's ex husband.

Another funny story is that "Veselnitskaya's meeting with Donald Trump Jr. is not mentioned in Steele dossier that Fusion GPS produced for its American political clients." Despite all super-duper connection that Christopher Steele supposedly has had on the highest levels of the Russian government ;-). Such a James Bond II.

Bannon was not part of Trump organization at this time (he joined the campaign only on Aug 17, 2016, two month later), so why he uttered such suicidal (self-immolating as Karl Rove put it) comments about the meeting he has no first-hand information about is completely unclear. Rage can do such things even if one has no first hand knowledge of the event. Wolff decided to milk the Trump administration and write the book only in Feb 2017. So it is natural that he decided to spice the book with this quote, which was probably made after Bannon ouster is September 2017.

There were eight persons in this very short meeting. One was the translator, as Natalia Veselnitskaya does not speak English (big problem for a Russian agent sent to infiltrate Trump campaign; I do not thing Russian FSB, or whatever agency charged with such things, is that stupid ;-).

Another funny thing about this meeting is that presence of Rob Golstone guaranteed that all information from this meeting goes directly to FBI and Clinton campaign. So are supposed to believe that Russians with (according to Russiagate hysteria) all-seeing and super-capable intelligence agencies did not know who he was and whom he represented.

Actually a couple of hours of Google browsing on this topic convinced me that the main audience of neoliberal MSM such as CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT, etc are brainwashed dummies, who are incapable or too lazy to do a couple of Google searches ;-)

Which later became artificially inflated as a proof of "collision" with Russian of Trump team. As widely used in "Russiagate color revolution" against Trump propaganda. As CNN reported (Trump Tower Russia meeting At least eight people in the room - CNNPolitics, July 15, 2017):

The June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort included at least eight people.

The revelation of additional participants comes as The Associated Press first reported Friday that a Russian-American lobbyist named Rinat Akhmetshin said he also attended the June 2016 meeting with Donald Trump Jr. CNN has reached out to Akhmetshin for comment.

So far acknowledged in attendance: Trump Jr., Kushner, Manafort, Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, Akhmetshin and publicist Rob Goldstone, who helped set up the meeting. A source familiar with the circumstances told CNN there were at least two other people in the room as well, a translator and a representative of the Russian family who had asked Goldstone to set up the meeting. The source did not provide the names.

WH aides exposed to scrutiny over Russia meeting response

Akhmetshin is a registered lobbyist for Veselnitskaya's organization, which has focused on lobbying Washington to overturn the Magnitsky sanctions, according to lobbying records. The Magnitsky Act allows the US to withhold visas and freeze the assets of Russians thought to have violated human rights. Veselnitskaya founded a group purporting to seek the removal of Moscow's ban on the adoption of Russian children by US citizens, which it put in place in retaliation for the Magnitsky Act. She has also sought to repeal that law.

In early Jan 2018 the bank for opposition research firm Fusion GPS handed over financial records on Friday, after a Federal judge struck down the firm's attempt to conceal the records from the House Intelligence Committee the previous day. At issue are 70 financial transactions from 2016, however Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) demanded "complete" records going all the way back to Aug. 2015 Fusion filed for an injunction - claiming Nunes issued the subpoena illegally, it was overly broad, and it was a violation of the 1st amendment.

The request also covers a period in which Fusion was paid $523,651 by a law firm for a Russian businessman whose company, Prevezon Holdings, Ltd. settled with the U.S. Justice department for $5.9 million. The Russian's attorney for this settlement was none other than Natalia Veselnitskaya of Trump Tower meeting fame.

Federal District Court Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote a scorching denial to Fusion's request - concluding that Nunes legally issued the subpoena, it wasn't overly broad, and that the transactions are not covered by the first amendment.

In late November, The Daily Caller's Chuck Ross reported that heavily redacted Fusion GPS bank records unsealed Tuesday reveal DNC law firm Perkins Coie paid Fusion a total of $1,024,408 in 2016 for opposition research on then-candidate Donald Trump - including the 34-page dossier.

Ross also reported that law firm Baker Hostelter paid Fusion $523,651 between March and October 2016 on behalf of a company owned by Russian businessman and money launderer Denis Katsyv to research Bill Browder, a London banker who helped push through the Magnitsky Act -- named after deceased Russian accountant Sergei Magnitsky who helped Brower to avoid taxes in Russia via criminal schemes.

Katsyv was busted for a high level embezzlement and money laundering scheme, sanctioned by Russian Officials, in which large sums of money were stolen from the Russian government and invested in New York real estate. Some of the missing funds were traced to Katsyv's firm, Prevezon Holdings Ltd., which settled with the Justice Department in 2017 - paying $5.9 million in fines. Nunes' Subpoena cover banking records from the period in which Katsyv utilized Fusion GPS services.

How in fact she was the lawyer for a company which was stealing from the Russian government and laundering money in the Western banks. In other words "the Russians" in this story could well be Fusion GPS, FBI Mayberry Machiavellians and some Justice Department People.

Taras Bulba Jan 6, 2018 10:35 PM
A couple of points on the Browder matter, which in an era of anti-Russian hysteria, seems to taken on a life of its own and resulted in the passage of the Magnitsky Act by our "diligent" congress:

A very suspicious timeline of Veselnitskaya visit

From treatment of general Flynn we can assume that FBI Mayberry Machiavellians were capable of pretty dirty tricks. We all remember Strzok words about "insurance". So arranging this meeting might well be a step in creating such an insurance which allow later to blackmail Trump and his team, or even depose him. Some event that happened before the visit look somewhat suspicious (and some highly suspicious, such as Jun 3, 2016 Goldstein email). Partially adapted from Luke Harding timeline in The Guardian

During election campaign and shortly after Trump was highly critical of "intelligence community" (which is more a can of worms then a community) and attacked CIA understanding the they are out to get him:

Donald Trump spent a lot of time trashing the United States intelligence community when he was candidate Trump. And with less than 40 days until he becomes the boss of every intelligence officer in the government, President-elect Trump is once again questioning the competence of America's spies.

His public comments, most recently a statement on Friday, have left some intelligence officials stunned and worried about a contentious relationship between the White House and the intelligence services, at a time when the country is still tracking and killing suspected terrorists and working to improve its footing in the growing world of cyberwarfare.

Late Friday night, after a Washington Post report revealed a CIA finding that Russian-backed hackers actively worked to influence the course of the 2016 election in favor of Trump, the president-elect's transition team sent out a scathing statement.

"These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction," the statement read. "The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It's now time to move on and 'Make America Great Again.'"

Possible CIA role in this attempt of entrapment

Wolff describes the speech Trump made to the CIA shortly after his inauguration. He says, "Witnesses would describe his reception at the CIA as either Beatles-like emotional outpouring or a response so confounded and appalled that, in the seconds after he finished, you could hear a pin drop."

It looks like Wolff interpretation that Trump speech changed attitude of CIA staff, which after his speech experienced some kind of "Beatles-like emotional outpouring" of support and it is no longer so hostile to Trump is false and just a wishful thinking. CIA is an organization which is interested in maintenance and expansion of global neoliberal empire led by the USA. And this is a problem as "tail is wagging the dog" and this causes overextension of the USA resources which flow into empire-relates tasks instead of improving life of Americans at home. sometimes loot from such imperial adventures compensates spending (Iraq, Libya), but often it is not (Afghanistan). Also it produces a steady steam of crippled US servicemen who need to be supported for the rest of their life.

So my take is that CIA reaction was deeply hostile. And this Wolff's idea of a 'Beatles-like emotional outpouring' is a pure crap. CIA was (Brennan is an important figure in anti-Trump color revolution) and remnants hostile to ideas of Trump election campaign (which he himself by-and-large abandoned since April 2017), considering them, as a threat for its existence and prosperity, especially a large caste of "national security parasites" deeply entrenched in Washington headquarters who does not experience danger and deprivation of field CIA officers stationed abroad. Michael Morell is a nice example such glib "national security parasite" (Former Acting Director of CIA Mike Morell Sought to Covertly Kill Russians in Syria - YouTube). He never served abroad (Brennan actually did). He openly stated that Donald J. Trump represents "... a threat to our national security." (Former CIA deputy director on why he endorsed Clinton - YouTube) Later he actually admitted the existence of the coup d'état against Trump within "intelligence community".

Former Prosecutor Katie Phang called to investigate CIA Director John Brennan over whether he leaked information about the Russian hacking investigation to the media (CIA Director under fire, Dec 19, 2016)

Steele dossier "golden showers" tactic used: Wolff's book presents unproven but damaging to Trump hypothesis as a fact

It would be more interesting if it had some notes on sources, but there is no way
to determine 1st hand info, 2nd hand info, and third hand in a mirror info
.

Customer Review

Like Steele dossier (especially golden showers), Wolff books promote unproven hypnosis' as a fact. Here instead of "golden showers" we have Veselnitskaya meeting. In both case CNN, MSNBC and several other neoliberal MSM teamed up with a rogue intelligence community hype those rumors to stratosphere in order to slime Trump and destroy his presidency.

Of course, Wolff himself is now laughing to the bank, but as got into "intelligence agencies staff" (iether as patsy or as a willing accomplice) he can lose his shirt as this is a big game, much bigger than his slimy personality. He failed to understand this while writing this particular chapter of his book. There are two main possibilities here:

the most regions is Wolff quote which suggests that the meeting of Natalia Veselnitskaya with Trump Jr. is equal to treason. This amounts to slander and characterize Wolff as a tool of Clinton wing of Democratic party pushing Russiagate story. Veselnitskaya was a private lobbyist against Magnitsky law representing one of Russian oligarch or Russian bank, not an agent of the Russian government.

But this is exactly like Steel dossier was written and that suggests that it would be interesting to probe for Wolff connections with FBI contractor Fusion GPS (private intelligence agency) . Which, as proven, paid journalists and news outlets to blackmail Trump.

After the except were published, Bannon claimed that critical quotes about Trump Tower meeting are not accurate and that alone can get Wolff in hot water. When confronted with the request to provide confirmation to events described in his book Wolff only managed to say "read the book" (Michael Wolffs Alternative Facts). On Jan 8, Bannon issues a statement that was reproduced in many MSM including NYT: Steve Bannon's Statement on Donald Trump Jr. - The New York Times

"Donald Trump Jr. is both a patriot and a good man. He has been relentless in his advocacy for his father and the agenda that has helped turn our country around.

"My support is also unwavering for the president and his agenda - as I have shown daily in my national radio broadcasts, on the pages of Breitbart News and in speeches and appearances from Tokyo and Hong Kong to Arizona and Alabama. President Trump was the only candidate that could have taken on and defeated the Clinton apparatus. I am the only person to date to conduct a global effort to preach the message of Trump and Trump_vs_deep_state, and I remain ready to stand in the breach for this president's efforts to make America great again.

"My comments about the meeting with Russian nationals came from my life experiences as a Naval officer stationed aboard a destroyer whose main mission was to hunt Soviet submarines to my time at the Pentagon during the Reagan years, when our focus was the defeat of 'the evil empire,' and to making films about Reagan's war against the Soviets and Hillary Clinton's involvement in selling uranium to them.

"My comments were aimed at Paul Manafort, a seasoned campaign professional with experience and knowledge of how the Russians operate. He should have known they are duplicitous, cunning and not our friends. To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr.

"Everything I have to say about the ridiculous nature of the Russian 'collusion' investigation I said on my '60 Minutes' interview. There was no collusion and the investigation is a witch hunt.

"I regret that my delay in responding to the inaccurate reporting regarding Don Jr. has diverted attention from the president's historical accomplishments in the first year of his presidency."

Cue bono? Was Wolff in any shape or form paid by Clinton wing of Democratic Party ?

"And, really, sex with someone other than his wife and the attention of other people is all Michael Wolff really wants, at the end of the day."

Are Michael Wolff and Victoria Floethe Done

Literally meaning "who benefits?," cui bono? is a rhetorical Latin legal phrase used to imply that whoever appears to have the most to gain from a crime is probably the culprit. More generally, it's used in English to question the meaningfulness or advantages of carrying something out.

20 Latin Phrases You Should Be Using Mental Floss

Wolff is an extremely greedy and unscrupulous individual. The idea of writing the book to improve his financial wellbeing was a brilliant business move, but you need "startup" money for such thing beyond advance from the publisher. I doubt that advance exceeded $100K in this case. And speeding considerable time in Washington (if we are to believe Wolff) costs a lot of money. Just 25 train trips (and Wolff has had 17 confirmed meetings in WH) for several days $4K each (assuming train $600, hotel $1.2K and "other expenses" $2K) is already around $100K. If one need to collect dirt in some Washington social circles, add to this cost "presents", cost of dinners with potential source (some females Bannon associates with whom Wolff was schmoozing really like expensive champagne), and you might need to double that. Add to those expenses schmoozing in NYC such as a dinner with Roger Ailes and Bannon, etc.

Truth be told Wolff did not took any brake for writing the book. He continued to produce his columns, so he has no lost income and continued to get his regular salary (which probably now is much less then in his Vanity Fair days).

But he is the guy for whom exceeding expenses over income is a way of life and he probably has debts to service. So it can well be that he got some financial help from external sources, possible from Clinton circle of fiends and financiers including FBI contractor Fusion GPS. It is well known that Fusion GPs paid certain journalists and media outlets for blackmailing Trump. That's why they probably resisted the disclosure of their financial records ( https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2018/01/07/devin-nunes-gets-slam-dunk-fight-fusion-gps/(

Why is Fusion GPS fighting so hard to resist the subpoena? Because the redacted records already released showed Fusion GPS paying money to journalists and to media organizations. We don't know if these payments were for pushing the totally irrelevant Trump dossier but we can be very sure that we will soon know the names of the journalists and organizations involved.

Two interesting questions are: (1) what was Wolff's financial position at the end of 2016 ? (2) Was he desperate for money to pay debts ? He has a young girlfriend (around 30 year younger or so see Victoria Floethe 8 facts About Michael Wolff's Younger Girlfriend) so may be he has additional expenses and not only on Viagra ;-). He also might need some money for legal expenses if lawsuits against him and his former wife were not settled before (according to one old lawsuit they cheated on Manhattan apartment swap and stole and sold Wolff's mother-in-law jewelry). He wife was adamantly against Wolff leaving with his girlfriend so he might need to pay support/settlement for his divorce.

And living with a "trophy wife" usually also add to expenses. She need to be entertained, clothes and pandered or she might say a goodbye. Also in February 6, 2015 Richard Johnson reported that the couple is expecting a baby (Page Six) so you need add child caring expenses:

Media scourge Michael Wolff and his much younger girlfriend Victoria Floethe are infanticipating. Floethe is sporting a baby bump and expecting a baby girl in the spring.

Trout-pouted Wolff, 61, whose think-pieces have moved from Vanity Fair to USA Today, has been dating the blond journalist since 2009, the year he suddenly left his wife, lawyer Alison Anthoine, the mother of his three grown children.

Gawker adds (Awful Michael Wolff's Awful Girlfriend Is Pregnant):

After her relationship with the married Wolff was exposed, Floethe-a writer for Wolff's information curation site Newser-wrote an essay for the Spectator casting herself as the victim of a moralizing New York gossip media and puritan Internet websites. Would she leave the city? Or would the free spirit flourish, despite (or perhaps even as a result of!) the haters?

I would not be too surprised if Fusion GPS was involved ;-). They are all over the place in a conspiracy to get Trump removed. Bear in mind that John Derbyshire once wrote a column titled "Journalists are scum."

Sara Sanders said the same about Wolff, but in more diplomatic form: "Participating in a book that can only be described as trashy tabloid fiction exposes their sad desperate attempts at relevancy" hinting at both Wolff and Bannon.

Wolff's "unfit for office" meme is a propaganda of a palace coup

One more comment here about Michael Wolff and his claim that everybody in the White House thinks that Trump's a child, that he's a moron, he doesn't like to read, he's mentally unbalanced, all this. This is really irresponsibly absurd. And for this claim to be 100% of the people around Trump, and Wolff is the guy saying that he can't guarantee everything in his book is right, and he's also admitting that he did anything to get his story, including not tell people they were on the record when he was talking to 'em.

Nuking the Wolff Book The Rush Limbaugh Show

In East Germany, Stasi leader Markus Wolfe took things a step further with the "zersetzung" tactic. The idea was to *induce* a "personal crisis" through clandestine harassment, including at the hands of acquaintances secretly recruited by the Stasi. In other words, ... trying to cause *real* mental illness by relentlessly gaslighting selected individual dissidents until they cracked.

John Grudlos, January 26, 2018 at 9:49 am

"Trump's mental state presents a clear and present danger to our nation and individual well-being."

The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President

Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, hoping to make them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize the target and delegitimize the target's belief.[1][2]

Gaslighting - Wikipedia

Wolff is just "number six card", a toady in a much bigger game. He just capitalized on the rather obvious opportunity created by other and (successfully) tried to get some money out of it. But witch hunt of Trump and his administration is far more important event that gossip columnist insinuations.

If he was so concerned about Trump unfitness to the office why he waited so long to tell this horrible turn to people? Why he concealed those explosive materials for year and put them into gossipy book instead of doing what concerted citizen should do in such cases -- try to inform Congress. that actually another confirmation that we are dealing with unscrupulous and sleazy gossip columnist, who in no way is interested in the well being of the country, only about his own.

Politically Wolff book can be viewed as an opening salvo for the palace coup, which became more interesting and existing because of the fiasco with Steele dossier and exposures by Nunes commissions of malefactors in FBI and Justice Department. So this is just a part of the counterattack of neoliberalism and neocons after Trump surprise victory. The neoliberal US elite felt the threat to its legitimacy and that's why the attacks on Trump are so vicious and unrelenting. This is the game of elimination under smoke screen of Russiagate.

Presenting any political who is "dissident" and does not support neoliberal globalization as crazy, dishonest and morally deprived traitor is a variation of methods used in classic (BTW invented by Brits) war propaganda. It's principles are well known since the WWI (Falsehood in War-Time):

1. We do not want war.
2. The opposite party alone is guilty of war.
3. The enemy is the face of the devil.
4. We defend a noble cause, not our own interest.
5. The enemy systematically commits cruelties; our mishaps are involuntary.
6. The enemy uses forbidden weapons.
7. We suffer small losses, those of the enemy are enormous.
8. Artists and intellectuals back our cause.
9. Our cause is sacred. "The ages-old 'God bless America' is playing once more."
10. All who doubt our propaganda, are traitors.

It's definitely objectionable that such a sleazy hack like Wolf with his penchant to alcohol (and may be some other controlled substances) assumes the role of psychiatrist and tried to declare the President "mentally unstable" or, worse, "unfit for the office". But this theme/meme is not his invention. It was actually invented directly after the election as a part of Russiagate witch hunt with such insinuations and Trump "stupid" questions about nuclear weapons and his obsession with the access to the "red button" (and fake concern that he might use it at impulsively, at the whim of the moment, as if the President is that sole decision maker in this case). Weaker variant ("unprepared for the office") was used by Hillary Clinton campaign. As Caitlyn Johnstone aptly noted in her article Russiagate Isn't About Trump, And It Isn't Even Ultimately About Russia (Jan 28, 2018):

Establishment muppets like Swalwell and the unelected elites who own them don't care about Trump, they care about crippling China's right arm Russia so that they can set about sabotaging the agendas of a potential rival superpower unimpeded by the skilful opposition of a nuclear superpower. But, getting back to the hypothetical situation I asked you to envision earlier, they can't just come right out and say that.

They can't. The US oligarchs, the oligarch-owned media outlets, and the oligarch-aligned intelligence/defense agencies can't just come right out and say "Hey America, we need to ensure our power structures remain unrivalled for the foreseeable future, so we're going to have to try and shut down Russia's influence using ever-tightening economic sanctions, NATO expansionism, proxy wars and troops along Russia's border to squeeze them until they lose the capacity to interfere with our ability to crush China. We'll also need a vastly inflated military budget to help facilitate our geopolitical agendas and prepare for a possible world war, please." A few Americans might consent to it, but by and large the US public would rather see those resources spent on making their lives better.

In several media interviews, Wolff with a confidence of chronic alcoholic insisted that all his interviewees – "100 per cent of people" – were concerned about President Trump's mental fitness. The "dog whistle" words for "unfit for office" meme are words "paranoid, unstable, impetuous, repetitive, infantile and semi-literate".

Which can be viewed in total as a direct instigation of a palace coup. That also suggests that even such a small threat to global neoliberal empire led by the USA as election of Trump on "economic nationalism " platform caused really visceral counterattack from the US neoliberal elite, which unleashed this witch hunt against Trump (with Mueller investigation as a pretty regular hunt, without prefix "witch") using media as attack dogs. Recently

MSNBC's Chris Hayes asked a question of his Twitter that nicely summarize the "gaslighting" of the American public by neoliberal MSM:

"Aside from genuine cranks, is there anyone left denying it was the Russians that committed criminal sabotage in the American election?".

In the context of insinuation about Trump mental health this question can be reformulated as "Aside from genuine cranks, is there anyone left denying it Trump is insane and unfit for the office of the President?"

Demonization of Trump is part of this witch hunt and "gaslighting" of the US public goes full speed. Recently
MSNBC's Chris Hayes asked a question of his Twitter that nicely summarize the situation "Aside from genuine cranks, is there anyone left denying it was the Russians that committed criminal sabotage in the American election?". In the context of insinuation about Trump mental health this question can be reformulated as

"Aside from genuine cranks, is there anyone left denying it Trump is insane and unfit for the office of the President?"

All this means that this part of the book should be viewed as a part of general campaign by neoliberal MSM for gaslighting Trump. Throughout the campaign and Trump's first year in office, news, articles, op-eds, interviews of "very important persons" and now books pushed this meme. We can see routinely deployed "dog whistle" words such as "crazy," "insane," and "unstable" as epithets. Dog-whistle politics is political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has an additional, different, or more specific resonance for a targeted subgroup. But what are the implications of the use of mental health language in analyzing Trump actions? This is just the necessary pre-condition for the palace coup -- removal of Trump using 25th Amendment.

This meme was expressed probably the best in the NYT article The 25th Amendment Solution for Removing Trump by ( May 16, 2017):

It was just three days and a lifetime ago that I wrote a column about Donald Trump's unfitness for the presidency that affected a world-weary tone. Nothing about this White House's chaos was surprising given the style of Trump's campaign, I argued. None of the breaking scandals necessarily suggested high crimes as opposed to simple omni-incompetence. And given that Republicans made their peace with Trump's unfitness many months ago, it seemed pointless to expect their leaders to move against him unless something far, far worse came out.

As I said, three days and a lifetime. If the G.O.P.'s surrender to candidate Trump made exhortations about Republican politicians' duty to their country seem like so much pointless verbiage, now President Trump has managed to make exhortation seem unavoidable again.

He has done so, if several days' worth of entirely credible leaks and revelations are to be believed, by demonstrating in a particularly egregious fashion why the question of "fitness" matters in the first place.

The presidency is not just another office. It has become, for good reasons and bad ones, a seat of semi-monarchical political power, a fixed place on which unimaginable pressures are daily brought to bear, and the final stopping point for decisions that can lead very swiftly to life or death for people the world over.

One does not need to be a Marvel superhero or Nietzschean Übermensch to rise to this responsibility. But one needs some basic attributes: a reasonable level of intellectual curiosity, a certain seriousness of purpose, a basic level of managerial competence, a decent attention span, a functional moral compass, a measure of restraint and self-control. And if a president is deficient in one or more of them, you can be sure it will be exposed.

Trump is seemingly deficient in them all. Some he perhaps never had, others have presumably atrophied with age. He certainly has political talent - charisma, a raw cunning, an instinct for the jugular, a form of the common touch, a certain creativity that normal politicians lack. He would not have been elected without these qualities. But they are not enough, they cannot fill the void where other, very normal human gifts should be.

In case of Wolf such a behaviour is simply unethical and represents slander. This is also related to so called Goldwater rule (Psychiatrist Bloviating About Trump's Sanity Raises Questions About Who's Nuts )

Both psychiatrists and psychologists operate under ethical rules that prevent them from offering professional diagnostic opinions about the mental health of public figures they have not personally examined. The American Psychiatric Association's version of this is known as the Goldwater Rule - named for another polarizing Republican presidential candidate.

The rule has its roots in the September/October 1964 issue of a magazine called Fact, which was entirely devoted to parsing the results of a survey the editors had sent to more than 12,000 psychiatrists. The survey only had one question: "Do you believe Barry Goldwater is psychologically fit to serve as president of the United States?"

Most of the psychiatrists - 9,939 of them, to be exact - didn't respond. Of those who did, 571 said they didn't know enough about Goldwater to answer, and another 657 declared him fit as a fiddle. But 1,189 psychiatrists said "no," and many of them added colorful commentary that the magazine reprinted under a headline ("FACT: 1,189 Psychiatrists Say Goldwater is Psychologically Unfit to Be President!") that conveniently left out the fact that they didn't represent a majority opinion. The Republican presidential candidate was called "paranoid" and "a dangerous lunatic." One respondent suggested that Goldwater had "a stronger identification to his mother than to his father" - fighting words in 1964 America, apparently.

In the aftermath, Goldwater sued Fact (and won), Fact went defunct, and the American Psychiatric Association tried to make sure that none of this would ever happen again. The result was Section 7.3 of the APA's Principles of Medical Ethics:

Before you read Wolff's book please listed to Trump old interview Donald Trump -- Charlie Rose. IMHO he does not come out of this interview as bumbling idiot. I strongly recommend to listen to it in full.

Before you read Wolff's book please listed to Trump old interview Donald Trump -- Charlie Rose. IMHO he does not come out of this interview as bumbling idiot. I strongly recommend to listen to it in full.

This "coverage" also proves duplicitous nature of Wolff, who previously defended Trump administration from neoliberal MSM attacks (or more correctly pretended to defend). See, for example, Michael Wolff on Hillary's Self-Delusion, Trump's S- Show and the Media's Final, Frantic 100 Days Hollywood Reporter

The Democrats' strongest card was to present Trump as an existential threat and to foresee the breakdown of democracy's fail-safe mechanisms. This also was quite an alarming approach. The guttural "Lock her up!" chants at the RNC seemed extreme enough. But in a way, the Democrats' position was much more radical. Trump cannot be allowed; Trump is immoral; Trump is - the ultimate disqualifier - insane. In other words, if Duck Dynasty-type voters carry the day in November, that would not be an example of democracy but a failure of it.

... ... ...

The Democrats' approach, in a convention whose television ratings outpaced the Republicans until the final day (Trump himself remains a bigger draw than Hillary) was to argue that there is an onrushing Trump apocalypse, but not to address any of the issues causing people to vote for the apocalypse.

Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, said: "This book is filled with false and misleading accounts from individuals who have no access or influence with the White House." Trump own attempt to inject some humor in the situation ( "being, like, really smart…" and "and a very stable genius at that!") badly backfired:

Speaking at the weekend from his Camp David retreat outside Washington DC, Trump's rebuttal of the claims about mental instability were far from convincing. He described himself as a "stable genius".

"Throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart… I went from very successful businessman to top TV star to president of the United States… I think that would qualify me as not smart, but genius… and a very stable genius at that!"

I view this as a bad attempt of humor, because in all other scenarios it really created concerns about Trump mental fitness (he does not consume alcohol, which would be another fitting explanation ;-)

Wolff is seasoned journalist who can write entertaining "celebrity gossip" and he really excelled in this "concerns about Trump mental fitness" ( although is post publication interviews he was way to too smug to be convincing). Still I really admire execution of this meme. This probably is the only literary success of Wolff as a writer. He managed to inject this poisonous (and destructive to the country) line into lion part of the book which no small fit. I would expect that most readers of the book probably were moved in "unfit for the office" direction, if they were not at this point already. And "smart genius" twit does not help iether. It actually strengthens this hypoesthes.

that also means that while a bad (sophomoric in case of Trump Tower meeting description) writer, Wolff certainly knew his market, and that NeverTrumpers are less interested in facts, sourcing, and evidence of truth in statements, and far more interested in the confirmation of pre-existing bias. And ready to pay, say $14 (Kindle edition) for even as little entertainment as Wolff book provides. In addition being outdated even at the moment of publication, these feeding of pre-existent prejudices probably suggests that the cost on a used copy will drop to about 1 cent in a year or two.

We can distinguish several subtypes of his "unfit for the office" meme in Wolff's book. among them:

  • President actions like was in case of Bush II are based on instinct, not so much of rational calculations. Might by more plausible hypothesis, but looks at Trump track record in real estate. And the fact that he managed to depose all republican contenders. That can't be done instinct.
  • Those closest to the President wield the most power. This is always true in any WH administration. Like for example was the case with Carter and Brzezinski to great detriment of the USA. So trying to exaggerate this just show the evil nature of gossip columnist, not so much the inner working of Trump WH.
  • The president is unfit for the office. This is also not a news. actually few presidents were fit for the office in a sense having the necessary political experience (Kennedy, Nixon, Bush I come to mind). You need to have at least a couple of terms as the US senator to be prepared. But the US presidency is more then one person. We also have a Deep state to provide the balance ;-). And the fact that left hand does not know what right is doing is also a possibility with such amount of staff and various Departments in federal government. For example intelligence agencies are semi-autonomous entries, which like praetorian guard can revolt against the president and FBI did this recently.

And despite such a long time for writing rather short book, his writing remained clumsy and the book has no plan. It is just a collection of episodes and hearsay. Now let's discuss how disingenuously Wolff pushes those quotes. Which along with Veselnitskaya meeting quote represent the most powerful attack lines on Trump in the book.

First of all those quotes are provided without any context, which makes them a malicious slander. For example it is common in any large corporation to call management "those f--ing idiots" to protest against excessive bureaucratization or other typical large organization ills. This is just a release valve for frustration, nothing more then that. In such cases people do not put in such phrases the meaning that the other person is stupid, just that fact that the organization led by those people behave disappointing and/or disrupting some reasonable plan or action. Or provide distorted vision of the situation (corporate-speak). The real meaning is "I got in some troubles due to your action or the organizational problems". Or even simply "I disagree with you".

This constant elevation of "watercooler chat" to the level of revelation about Trump is annoying and probably that's why the book got around 12% of three and less stars reviews on Amazon. So even people who would like a confirmation of their anti-Trump bias, and were ready to pay $14 for this (Amazon does not allow the reviews form people who did not buy the book), sometimes are very disappointed with the content of the book. Here is a typical example of such a review:

Jaco's Friendon January 7, 2018

Rambling psycho-babble sprinkled with salacious quote

If you value your time, read the excerpts variously published. The book adds marginal value and fails on several fronts.

First, the book isn't particularly well-written. The prose is inflated, laborious to read, not the tight disciplined accounts we are accustomed to from wordsmith journalists. More the writing of a tabloid writer trying too hard to appear otherwise.

Second, on the content side, the book is essentially a psycho-babble that is sprinkled with salacious quotes, some over-interpreted and others clearly speculative. There are many instances where staffers and friends/advisers of Trump allude to him in unfavorable terms ("idiot," "fool," etc.). If you've been in an organization, for a period of time, with underlyings and superiors, sometimes that's how others refer to you behind your back. Or, even in your company. It's not that uncommon. In many cases, this doesn't mean a whole lot beyond a temporary relief of feelings. The author makes too much of it. The book is organized around such quips.

Sure, when it comes to the President of the United States, one would think that more caution and discipline would be in order. However, keep in mind that Trump has been a reality TV star for many years which breeds false familiarity. People feel they know him, they have a measure of the man, and are more prone to engage in discourse reserved for pals, colleagues, and overbearing bosses. And, certainly the oftentimes crass manner in which Trump expresses himself does not lend itself to an atmosphere of civility and decorum by those around him.

The speculative component permeates as a narrative glue of the book. A mild example is the statement, "for many years, he had humored Trump more than embraced him" (referring to J. Kushner) which, obviously, no one outside Jared Kushner can truly know. I even don't know if I "humored person XYZ more than embraced him" without engaging in significant contemplation and reflection. Even then I might not. The book is replete with such speculative account.

A second weakness on the content-side is the over-simplified superficial characterization of Trump as a person. There is a penchant for popular media, including journalists, to engage in a cartoonish characterization of Trump which should be left to political cartoonists and comedians. This book is no exception. We are inundated with personal deficiencies of Trump which have been evident, for all to see, from the moment he ran for office in the Republican primaries. Surely, the leaking of the Billy Bush tapes was horrifying (whether locker room talk or not) and would have sunk the candidacy of any other man/woman. How did Trump manage to get elected despite all that? His uniquely polarizing opponent, Hillary Clinton, had something to do with it. So did the concerns of the middle class that the establishment, Democrat or Republican, had not given sufficient voice to. But surely Trump, beyond the superficial characterization espoused in the book, had something to do with it as well.

Distilling the information provided by the author, there is little insight. The author doesn't seem to know Trump. Nor have those who have been part of Trump's inner circle for many years confided in the author. All that the author has going are quips, anecdotes, and second hand accounts, from which he weaves a story consistent with the dysfunction and chaos we have been coming from The White House. Oh yeah, and the book's not particularly well-written.

Money do not smell or more petty insinuations:
If you've changed that, what else have you changed?
If you've manipulated that, what else have you manipulated?

"What happens, ... is that people say, well if you've changed that, what else have you changed? If you've manipulated that, what else have you manipulated?"

Michael Wolff;

"Uninterested in the working press, Wolff's special focus (fixation, even) has always been on the power players-the moguls-most of whom he has relentlessly and repeatedly skewered, scraping away the sheen of power and money to reveal the warts, flab, and psychic scars plaguing that rarefied breed of (in Wolff's view) super-wealthy narcissists who buy, run, and ruin media companies for the gratification of their insatiable egos." ... "Much to the annoyance of Wolff's critics, the scenes in his columns aren't recreated so much as created-springing from Wolff's imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events. Even Wolff acknowledges that conventional reporting isn't his bag. Rather, he absorbs the atmosphere and gossip swirling around him at cocktail parties, on the street, and especially during those long lunches at (a then-hot restaurant) Michael's."

Michelle Cottle (cited from vanityfair.com)

"Michael will say anything about anybody. He's fearless in a way that people attribute to sociopathology but that I always thought was a business strategy.

David Carr, the late New York Times media writer(cited from vanityfair.com)

If Michael Wolff really has the level of access he claim to have (which is strongly doubtful; only seventeen visits with 90% of them to Bannon; which means all but one), he is the most inept/corrupt journalist I ever encountered -- he squandered really golden opportunity to tell American people about the fight between globalists and neocon on one hand and rag tag coalition of oppositing forces. He also was from the beginning highly suspect about the methods he uses to collect the information (Telegraph, Jan 5, 2018)

Michael Wolff, a balding and bespectacled journalist with a sharp tongue, has previously written books on Rupert Murdoch and other big media "money guys". His acerbic columns for magazines and newspapers over the years have become known for their "first-class gossip" and unrivaled access to those in the know. The writer has at times become the source of media attention himself, not least over his divorce and a new relationship with a women 30 years his junior. But it is the method behind Mr. Wolff's vivid accounts that has been thrust into the spotlight after his new book, Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, sent shockwaves through Washington.

Wolff has been known for perfecting an art out of blurring the lines between gossip and facts, creating salacious re-creations of events he did not witness himself and only heard rumors about. Such a modern fairy tale story-teller, a highly perverted version of Hans Christian Andersen.

There are obvious inconsistencies in salacious details and gossip that fill the book. Also most of the people who were "interviewed" by Wolff do not suspect this and were never consulted about accuracy of their quotes before the publication of the book. The most evident victim of "Wolff treatment" of his sources is Bannon. Wolff essentially pored gasoline on Bannon and lighted it. Bannon now is ostracized.

  1. Trump didn't intend to win, nor did he live a life planning toward the Presidency. This is a very weak rumor (I would like to avoid the word "insinuation" here for political correctness reasons ;-) on Wolff's part. And he already was hand slapped for this even in a couple of "kid gloves" interviews. This blunder is way to obvious to ignore and there are not members of Trump team who confirmed this rumor. There are two issues with this rumor
    • It Trump and his close team did not expect to win why bother with "collision with Putin", Is not Wolff compete and utter idiot putting two mutually excusive narratives in the same book? And that was noted by some commenters early on:
      Phyllis Arringtion 4 days ago

      if Trump didn't really want to win the election (as noted in Fire and Fury ) then why would he collude with Putin to win the election? It doesn't make sense. I'm a Democrat and strongly believe Donny is one can short of a six pack. Covfefe!

      Funny that neoliberal MSMs never asked this question to this sleazy gossip columnist. It's like destroying cherished myth. they just can't handle the disappointment.

    • If we assume the Trump is a narcissist this is also a very shaky hypothesis. Such people organically can't image themselves losing. The fight to the bitter end to win even in cases where opponent superiority is evident. That's what makes them dangerous. In other words in such case then behave like Bruce Willis in Die Hard.
  2. Claiming that Ivanka is a "dumb as brick" and attributing this quote to Bannon. such a generalized statement taken out of context might be a defamation as quoting defamatory statement by somebody else does not release the author from the legal responsibility even if the quote is accurate. This alone can sink Wolff and leave him without a shirt. He can't claim that he is a website and thus is not responsible for spreading malicious rumors. This is a book. Ivanka Trump is 'as dumb as a brick' according to Steve Bannon, new book claims The Independent

    Former White House strategist Steve Bannon once called President Donald Trump's daughter and White House adviser Ivanka Trump "dumb as a brick", according to the latest excerpt from a book that claims to provide a near-inside view of the tumult within the West Wing during the first year of Mr. Trump's presidency.

    Mr. Bannon's quote is detailed in an excerpt provided to the Wall Street Journal. The book has been met critically by some who point out seeming factual inaccuracies. The White House has also denied many of the allegations.

    This statement does not correlates well with her grades from the University. According to Wikipedia: "After graduating from Choate,[13] she attended Georgetown University for two years, then transferred to the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, from which she graduated cum laude with a bachelor's degree in economics in 2004" ... "In December 2012, members of 100 Women in Hedge Funds elected Ivanka Trump to their board"

    At the same time within specific context, for example her rumored behaviour in instigating rocket launch on Syrian airbase based on unproven allegation of chemical attach she can be extremely stupid or even worse. See Khan Sheikhoun gas attack

    She also Ivanka is definitely more neoliberal then Trump himself (especially election time Trump), so her "stupidity" in a sense not understanding the deep crisis of neoliberalism which led to election of her father and despite that defending neoliberal globalization extents to a wider range of political behaviour. It might be fair to say that politically Ivanka is stupid.

  3. Suggesting that Melania cried in the day of election as she does not want Trump to win. Disputed by many people who were present. can be classified as malicious rumor from a questionable source. Actually Melania looks like a tremendous asset for Trump on company trail, in a sense of supporting her husband and providing family comfort in a tough political environment of elections (with such lows as sex tapes, etc). Her behaviour in case of malignant allegations against her by tabloids suggests that she is a fighter. And probably does not cries very often.
  4. Trump infatuation with junk food. This is probably just a malignant rumor based of some self-depreciating quote that Trump excels in (which often do not viewed as a humor -- look a the case of " 'I'm, like, a really smart person'", which in my book is a sarcastic remark, a bait for #neverTrump crowd. According to his former butler, he actually prefers very high quality stakes and does not eat many vegetables including, but not limited to, french fries). It's just trivial anecdote after trivial anecdote, all with questionable sources.

    Trump's famous love of the fast food chain is explained, to some degree, by being motivated by his fear of being poisoned. Wolff writes that Trump's one reason why "he liked to eat at McDonald's - nobody knew he was coming and the food was safely remade."

  5. That Trump did not recognize the name Boehner, when he was suggested as the head of his staff ('Fire and Fury' Biggest Revelations in Michael Wolff's Trump Book – Variety). Various thing are possible when you are 70 year old, but this one is not very probable:

    During the transition, when former Fox News chief Roger Ailes suggested John Boehner, the former House Speaker, for chief of staff, Wolff writes that Trump responded, "Who's that?" White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders has already cited this story as one of the false assertions in the book, as Trump had tweeted extensively about Boehner in the lead up to the 2016 campaign.

  6. That Wolf has had direct access to Trump in WH (one five minutes or so phone call only), plus probably a couple of usual "Hello"
  7. That the book based on "200 interviews" with WH staff and key players in election campaign. Only a dozen of interviews (90% of which were with Bannon) were confirmed so far. Everything else is probably a product of Wolff own overactive imagination. Some liars believe in what they are saying. This is BTW quite typical for sociopaths. And it is the way Wolff typically works: he engage anybody who foolishly wants to speaks to him provoking the person to reveal some dirty laundry that can be used and by taking notes or illegally recording the conversation, even if the conversation marked "off record". this is what is called "Wolff's three card monte". Then by flattery or other means he tried to extract salacious details that he can use. And then he equates such an entrapment to "interview". The actual number of people with which he has format interview is probably less then a dozen. Some people like Dr. Gorca recognized the trap and refused cooperate.
  8. That Ailes and Bannon were close fiends/confidants and Ailes treated Bannon as equal. Rush disputes that, and he knows quote a bit about Ailes.
  9. Wolff attributes to former deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh [in the New York magazine excerpt] he quoted her saying managing Trump is 'like trying to figure out what a child wants.'] Katie told me she never said those things; and when I told that to Wolff's spokeswoman she said he stands by his reporting.'" Yes, that's pure Wolff. "As CNN New Day co-host Alisyn Camerota this morning: "We should mention that it sounds like Michael Wolff's modus operandi was to let the people he interviewed spin yarns. And then he didn't necessarily fact-check them. He didn't necessarily need two sources. This isn't really journalism" vanityfair.com. Now Bloomberg reports that Kathie can lose her current job due to Wolff's quote White House Weighs Ousting Katie Walsh From Pro-Trump Group - Bloomberg
  10. At an event at Mar-a-Lago just before the New Year, Trump "failed to recognize a succession of old friends," Wolff wrote in The Hollywood Reporter, previewing the book, bolstering his theme that Trump was "incapable of functioning in his job." Unlike Wolff Trump does not drink.
  11. Sam Nunberg, a campaign aide, was given the task of having to explain the Constitution to Trump. "I got as far as the Fourth Amendment before his finger is pulling down on his lip and his eyes are rolling back in his head," Nunberg is quoted as saying. For good of for bad trump co-authored a number of books (not as salacious of Wolff's) and graduated from Walton School.
  12. "Trump liked to say that one of the things that made life worth living was getting your friends' wives into bed." In a juicy story in the book, Wolff writes that Trump, in pursuing a friend's wife, "would try to persuade the wife that her husband was perhaps not all that she thought." Wolff writes that Trump would bring the male friend into his office, engage in sexual banter, while the wife would be listening in on speakerphone.
  13. Wolff writes that Trump "was visibly fighting with his wife" Melania on Inauguration Day, and that she "seemed on the verge of tears." He writes that "almost every word he addressed to her was sharp and peremptory."
  14. Ivanka Trump would mock her father's hair. Wolff writes, "The color, she would point out to comical effect, was from a product called Just for Men - the longer it was left on, the darker it got. Impatience resulted in Trump's orange-blond hair color." In the famous meeting of Trump and NYT staffers in Trump tower Trump hairs were examined and presumed to be natural.
  15. Wolff makes clear that Trump and Murdoch converse regularly, much to the dismay of Bannon, who saw the media mogul as a part of the establishment. Wolff writes that Ailes, after his dismissal from Fox News, told Bannon at a dinner that Trump "would jump through hoops for Rupert. Sucks up and s-s down. I just worry about who's jerking whose chain." The conversation reportedly took place at a Jan. 4, 2017, dinner party at Wolff's home.
  16. Various "What a f-ing idiot," quotes designed to support Wolff's main thesis "unfit for the office".

    After a meeting with tech industry executives, Trump talked to Murdoch, Wolff writes, and the mogul asked him how the meeting went. "These guys really need my help. Obama was not very favorable to them, too much regulation. This is really an opportunity for me to help them," he said.

    Murdoch, however, then informed Trump that "for eight years these guys had Obama in their pocket," sharing a sentiment common among traditional media executives.

    Murdoch, Wolff writes, also found it problematic that Trump seemed willing to help the tech executives with H-1B visas - a position that would conflict with his hardline on immigration.

    "What a f-ing idiot," Murdoch is quoted as saying.

  17. Trump's family is not just his saving grace, they are part of who he is and who provides him balance. This undermines the key Wolff's hypothesis that Trump is a narcissist. The latter are "lone wolf" type of people, who family usually hates and fear.

In short Trump is simply unable to picture the real picture of Donald Trump or understand what his election was about: it was about the crisis of neoliberalism in the USA and rejection by electorate establishment stooges like Hillary. The victory of this neocon warmonger would be a much bigger slap in the USA face then Trump.

Treatment of Ailes as Wolff's confidant in the book is probably Wolff's fantasy

Kicking a corpse

Ultimately, Wolff's cruel streak surfaced again. In March he wrote a hate-filled elegy for Elaine Kaufman, who ran the restaurant Elaine's on the Upper East Side. Although Kauffman was unable to defend herself, being dead and all, Wolff began kicking the corpse of this "loud, stupid, uncomprehending woman":

She would slog through her restaurant, Elaine's on the Upper East Side, like a punch-drunk prizefighter, or a low-class madam, or public-house wench vastly past her prime, more threatening than hospitable, muttering discordant and guttural oaths, and, given her size, taking up far more space than the front room in her narrow establishment could afford.
Her crime? She ran a successful club room for famous New York media folk. Media and advertising walk hand in hand in New York, and some have not forgiven him for this act of cowardice. His ability to alienate people was one of the reasons he was let go.

Cruelty Rewarded Michael Wolff Adds Adweek to His List of Failures - CBS News, Oct 19, 2011

Wolff claims that Ailes was close to him and openly shared his views on Trump sound like a stretch. First of all Ailes, being a high level media executive did not care much about such a small fish as Wolff, when he was at the helm of Foxnews. And after his ouster he probably cared even less about Wolff taking into account Wolff insinuations about the event (Michael Wolff Roger Ailes' Stunning Fall Marks the End of a Murdoch Era Hollywood Reporter ):

It was James Murdoch's cold calculation that ended the hand-wringing debate: Whither Fox News and its $1.2 billion in annual profits without Roger Ailes, no small concern of his older brother Lachlan and their father, Rupert? "Ailes is 76 and unhealthy, so how much longer could he last anyway?" the younger Murdoch is said to have asked, and to have argued: Since they would lose Ailes soon enough anyway, why not turn lemons into lemonade and get credit for kicking him out for being a sexist pig?

This quote alone (with "a sexist pig" metaphor) means that, in no way they could be friends, or Ailes could be Wolff's confidant. Moreover, he was a real professional in Presidential politics and for him Wolff was always a second rate gossip columnist. He probably understood who Wolff is as a person better then most, and behaved accordingly keeping him at a safe distance. Rush Limbaugh who was a friend of Ailes was dismissive about Wolff claims. He actually took Wolf down and that suggest the Ailes probably would do this too (Rush Limbaugh Wolff's reference to me '100% false' ):

Setting aside the unworkable logic, however, Limbaugh said Wolff's reference concerning his attendance at the Roger Ailes memorial is unconnected to reality.

"At the funeral, nobody spoke other than members of the family. It was at the memorial that people took turns speaking. But, folks, I can tell you, Donald Trump never came up! The subject of Donald Trump was never discussed at the memorial, much less 'Trump_vs_deep_state.' I don't even know what this means."

Yet the book claims, at the event, "Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham struggled to parse support for Trump_vs_deep_state even as they distanced themselves from Trump himself…"

It also describes an encounter between Wolff and Limbaugh. However, the talk-show host said, "This didn't happen."

Here is more details take down of Wolff's clams (Limbaugh Sets the RECORD Straight About Wolff's "Fire and Fury" - The Proud Conservatives)

"Now, as to the Wolff book, I learned over the weekend that I'm mentioned in this thing," Limbaugh said on his program.

"It's not a big mention, but it's totally false. And I'm just gonna throw my experience of being in this book in the column of 'it's fake.' I mean, it is so untrue, it's not even close. There's not even a single word in this reference that is anywhere near the truth," the famous radio host explained.

Rush then referenced the specific paragraph in the "Fire and Fury" book that dealt with him.

"(Roger Ailes') funeral in Palm Beach on May 20th was quite a study in the currents of right-wing ambivalence and even mortification," Wolff wrote.

"Right-wing professionals remained passionate in their outward defense of Trump but were rattled, if not abashed, among one another. At the funeral, Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham struggled to parse support for Trump_vs_deep_state even as they distanced themselves from Trump himself."

That's where Rush interjected and called out the anti-Trump author for simply making things up.

"At the funeral, nobody spoke other than members of the family," Rush said. "It was at the memorial that people took turns speaking. But, folks, I can tell you, Donald Trump never came up!"

"The subject of Donald Trump was never discussed at the memorial, much less 'Trump_vs_deep_state.' I don't even know what this means," Limbaugh continued.

"This is entirely… I mean, it is completely made up. I don't even understand what the basis for that little reference is. Cause it's totally fake, a hundred percent."

In other words, Wolff took a small sliver of fact - the memorial for Ailes - and then turned it into fantasy. He created a version of events that only happened in his own mind, but peddled it as fact.

Incredibly, even Michael Wolff himself has admitted that he played fast and loose with reality when writing the book.

"These conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book," the author wrote in the prologue of the very same book. Yet the press has conveniently ignored this warning and treated the writing as some sort of anti-Trump gospel.

Roger Stone views Wolff tendency to invent quote is important in this context (Roger Stone Anything Written By Michael Wolff Has To Be Taken With A Grain Of Salt Video RealClearPolitics)

Back to Videos
Roger Stone: Anything Written By Michael Wolff Has To Be Taken With A Grain Of Salt
Posted By Tim Hains
On Date January 4, 2018

... ... ...

ROGER STONE: Based on many years experience with him, anything Michael Wolff writes has to be taken with a grain of salt.

He once quoted the great Roger Ailes saying something about me that perturbed me. When I went back to Ailes, Ailes said he had never said anything of the kind. Wolff had no recording to disprove it. I would prefer to believe my friend of 30 years, Roger Ailes.

So, also I think some context is important here, Alex. When you are in a presidential campaign --and I have been in 10-- when you are in the bunker, you are seeking grenades to throw over the wall at the enemy, and you are approached by someone you know who claims authoritatively that they have information that would be of value to you, you take the meeting. The meeting is not illegal. The meeting is not improper. The meeting could be politically embarrassing if it turns out to be a setup.

In this case, the Russian woman lawyer who reached out to Don Jr. through a British PR man who Don Jr. knew, and who had worked with, turns out to be a nothing burger. She has nothing. Making it clear that it was just the meeting itself she was trying to achieve, so it could then be spun into something it was not...

Look, Steve Bannon's animus for the president's son in law is well known. The president's son in law was the helmsman who inserted so many of these establishment quislings around the president: H.R McMaster comes to mind.

I have tried to mute my criticism of the president's son in law, because frankly, I would rather be shooting at liberal Democrats or outside the tent Republicans instead of shooting at our own people, even when I have my own disagreements.

If you are Secretary of State Tillerson, UN Ambassador Haley, and you disagree with the president... you are supposed to keep it to yourself, or verbalize your objections to the president directly ina private conversation, but going public and urinating on the person who appointed you to high public office, who gave you the privilege to serve your country at the highest levels, that is treasonous. A lack of protocol, lack of manners, and entirely inappropriate in my opinion.

Playing disgruntled Bannon like a violin and Bannon Stunning Betrayal of Trump

The firing of Wolff as editor of Adweek has got all the ingredients he loves most: the proud rise and hubris-laden fall of a prominent media figure, sex, ugliness and just the right amount of snark and unfairness to start a catfight.

A clue to Wolff's character emerged in 2009, when the "bald, trout-pouted" 55-year-old was caught sleeping with a 28-year-old intern at Vanity Fair. His wife kicked him out of their Manhattan home, but not before joining him in an attempt to evict her 85-year-old mother because they wanted to sell the apartment she lived in. As you can tell, he's a charmer.

If you think abandoning your wife and cashing in on your "batty" mother-in-law's home is cruel, it turns out this is par for the course.

...Wolff came to fame when he published Burn Rate in the late 1990s, a book that charted the comically inept efforts of venture capitalists and other investors to cash in on the worthless new media dot-com that he owned. As the company bled money, he asked his staff to take a cut -- three months without pay. Then he wrote himself a check for $70,000 and left -- for Tuscany.

... He recycled his New York experiences into a book titled Autumn of the Moguls, about media owners such as Rupert Murdoch and Barry Diller et al. The tome was distinguished by two things:

  • The abject lack of access he had to his subjects (in one chapter he manages to spend only seconds with financier Steve Rattner, simply to exchange pleasantries; in another he fails to meet Martha Stewart entirely).
  • His prediction -- in 2003 -- that Rattner, Murdoch etc. were all at death's door, and thus their empires would shortly totter. Needless to say, they're all still going strong. Unlike Wolff.

Jim Edwards, Cruelty Rewarded Michael Wolff Adds Adweek to His List of Failures - CBS News, Oct 19, 2011

The history repeats. And "a charmer" managed to claim another victim.. Who was caught in a typical disgruntled employee rage against Trump which was meticulously recorded and presented in the book as the key to get "fast money". Bannon quotes, especially Veselnitskaya Trump tower visit quotes does represent a stunning betrayal of a person who he in the past claimed to be his personal friend.

Truth be told Trump objections to Bannon quotes in the book are somewhat questionable. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" Before Bannon stunningly betrayed Trump by providing Wolff (who as a neoliberal is opposed to everything Bannon represents and was happy to push him under the bus) with the salacious information Trump reneged on almost all his election-time promises, which in part represented the platform of economic nationalism -- fuzzy and incoherent replica of ideas of the New Deal promoted by Bannon as something new under the label of "economic nationalism" (Steve Bannon on white nationalism, Donald Trump agenda - CBS News )

"It's everything related to jobs," Bannon said and seemingly bragged about how he was going to drive conservatives "crazy" with his "trillion-dollar infrastructure plan."

"With negative interest rates throughout the world, it's the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Ship yards, iron works, get them all jacked up," he proposed. "We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks. It will be as exciting as the 1930s, greater than the Reagan revolution - conservatives, plus populists, in an economic nationalist movement."

Bannon, in the Reporter interview, also gave some insight into how he viewed his political foes (presumably, liberals and the media) -- and the "darkness" he touts in fighting against them.

"Darkness is good," Bannon said. "Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they...get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing."

But on a personal level Bannon behaviour toward Trump, who put him on the national political stage, leaves much to be desired. As Oliver Stone aptly put it "it is stunning betrayal". This is a typical petty behaviour of disgruntled (and foolish -- revealing all this information to Wolff was definitely foolish and self-destructing) former employee.

Also some of his views are incorrect, not to say foolish, which depicts him as a very limited individual unable to grasp the complexity of the political events, especially the mechanics of the color revolution against Trump. This is excusable for a sleazy gossip columnist, but is inexcusably primitive and misguided for the top Presidential advisor.

For example, Mr. Bannon had been quoted in the book saying that a meeting between Donald Trump's son and Russian-linked layer Natalia Veselnitskaya in Trump tower was a almost a treason. If true, and not the product of Wolff overactive imagination, that suggest that Bannon really lost his mind; the meeting was about lifting Magnitsky sanctions by a minor Russian lobbyist acting on behave of some affected oligarch and not directly connected to the Russian government.

Still the fact remains that Michael Wolff in his book quoted Bannon describing a June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower in New York between Donald Trump Jr., Trump campaign aides and a Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya as "treasonous" and "unpatriotic." As Guardian which got the book before anybody else (which is, of course, a mere coincidence and is not connected with Steele dossier and MI6 efforts to depose Trump) reported (The Guardian):

Donald Trump's former chief strategist Steve Bannon has described the Trump Tower meeting between the president's son and a group of Russians during the 2016 election campaign as "treasonous" and "unpatriotic", according to an explosive new book seen by the Guardian.

Bannon, speaking to author Michael Wolff, warned that the investigation into alleged collusion with the Kremlin will focus on money laundering and predicted: "They're going to crack Don Junior like an egg on national TV."

... ... ...

He is particularly scathing about a June 2016 meeting involving Trump's son Donald Jr, son-in-law Jared Kushner, then campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower in New York. A trusted intermediary had promised documents that would "incriminate" rival Hillary Clinton but instead of alerting the FBI to a potential assault on American democracy by a foreign power, Trump Jr replied in an email: "I love it."

The meeting was revealed by the New York Times in July last year, prompting Trump Jr to say no consequential material was produced. Soon after, Wolff writes, Bannon remarked mockingly: "The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn't have any lawyers.

"Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it's all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately."

Bannon went on, Wolff writes, to say that if any such meeting had to take place, it should have been set up "in a Holiday Inn in Manchester, New Hampshire, with your lawyers who meet with these people". Any information, he said, could then be "dump[ed] … down to Breitbart or something like that, or maybe some other more legitimate publication".

Bannon added: "You never see it, you never know it, because you don't need to … But that's the brain trust that they had."

Bannon also speculated that Trump Jr had involved his father in the meeting. "The chance that Don Jr did not walk these jumos up to his father's office on the twenty-sixth floor is zero."

It is clear that Bannon tried bury Trump Jr. as a part of his revenge on Trump family members. It looks like Bannon also deeply hates Ivanka and Kushner, who, in his view, are much more close to neoliberal camp then to Trump camp.

In is interesting to note that the Guardian article cited above contains most "talking points" which in slightly modified form became a standard feature on articles about the book in neoliberal MSM in the USA as well as questions in Wolf's "kid gloves" interviews about the book by neoliberal MSM.

Mr. Bannon infuriated Mr. Trump with comments to author and Trump gave one in life opportunity for minor sleazy gossip columnist to get millions for his book. Bannon also suffered a quick demise, which he actually deserved (Bannon Betrayal Latest Deep State Attack On MAGA - Capitol Hill Outsider ):

Bannon Fired for Leaks

Rush Limbaugh said that he believes Steve Bannon was responsible for the majority of the first-year leaks coming out of the Trump administration.

"Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was," the president added.

Any attacks on our President's children are verboten whether you like what the children do or not, and that's where Steve Bannon's alleged statements against Don Junior and Jared and Ivanka have created animus from Mr. Trump. Our President trusts his family, and well he should over any outsiders.

Matt Drudge's headlines on Wednesday morning, 3 January 18, linked to an article from The Guardian, one that was headlined, Trump Tower meeting with Russians Treasonous, Bannon says in explosive book. Matt Drudge is not a hardcore Trump supporter

Alleged inflammatory quotes from Bannon about President Trump and his family are in Michael Wolff's tawdry tabloid, Fire and Fury.

I didn't believe the story about Bannon when I first read it, but I expected Steve to go on Dobbs, Carlson and Hannity's shows last Wednesday evening and deny it. He did not. Now, Rebekah Mercer and her father, who funded Breitbart, have pulled their funding, and the new billionaire benefactor behind Bannon is allegedly Chinese businessman, Miles Kwok, aka Guo Wen Gui.

Leftwing website Axios claims Wolff has dozens of hours of recorded conversations with Trump officials even though many of them thought they were off the record. Perhaps that is why Bannon is not denying the words he's been quoted as saying, even if they've been embellished by Wolff. However, Sean Spicer said in an interview that Wolff claims he just took notes.

All-in-all the book reads more like a leaked by Bannon revenge tale. Or even a Steve Bannon book. It pushes Bannon and his agenda. It makes Bannon seem far more important in WH than President Trump. But in reality Bannon was a fiasco. His economic nationalism were empty words, a bait. He has no real economic program. He has no real ideas of how to bring jobs back and is, in heart, yet another neoliberal hell-bent on deregulation (which not surprising taking into account his biography).

That means that in Trump administration Bannon with his pandering to Israel, desire to deregulate as much as possible and political adventurism and jingoism toward Iran and China was a part of the problem not a part of the solution.

But anyway Trump himself quickly moved to traditional republican platform with deregulation as the key. Trump also betrays most of his election promises in foreign policy and continues the positioning the USA as the world gendarme

Here how Vanity Fair described the development of events *https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/01/did-steve-bannon-talk-himself-out-of-his-own-movement)

Steve Bannon had just finished hosting his daily Breitbart radio show on Wednesday morning when he received an urgent e-mail from an adviser. Donald Trump Jr. had just called; he was furious over quotes attributed to Bannon that appear in Michael Wolff's bombshell new book about the Trump White House. The Guardian had obtained a copy and was reporting that Bannon called Trump Jr.'s June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russians "treasonous" and "unpatriotic." Bannon's shocking comments seemed to suggest the Trump campaign colluded with Russia-or at least tried to. The adviser warned that Bannon risked his political future if he didn't issue a statement walking them back. "This is the president's family," one Bannon ally told me.

While Bannon had granted Wolff extensive access, he was caught off guard by the book's rollout and hadn't read the Guardian piece. Working from the Breitbart Embassy, steps from Capitol Hill, Bannon quickly organized a series of conference calls with his kitchen Cabinet that included, among others, political adviser Andy Surabian; Breitbart Washington editor Matt Boyle; communications strategist Arthur Schwartz; and Breitbart London editor Raheem Kassam. According to sources briefed on the conversations, Bannon denied making the comments about Trump Jr. to Wolff, but was resistant to the idea of issuing a statement disputing them. He explained to his advisers that Trump Jr. "surely knew" he would never say those things to a journalist. "Steve was like, 'I don't respond to bullshit attacks,'" a source briefed on the conversation said. (Bannon declined to comment).

The other people on the line told Bannon he was badly misjudging the situation. "Steve can be kind of delusional," a Bannon ally told me. Bannon's camp had been in touch with Trump Jr. and White House official Ira Greenstein throughout the morning, and they were told the president was preparing for war if Bannon didn't recant. Another concern: Bannonworld worried that while Trump Jr. was a media punch line, he remained highly popular with the deplorables from his many appearances on the campaign trail. In a blood feud with Trump's son, Bannon might actually lose. "The base loves Don Jr.," an adviser said. And, in the early stages of the crisis, the Breitbart audience, Bannon's own constituency since before the president began his campaign, appeared to be siding with Trump.

Reluctantly, after much lobbying, Bannon agreed to draft a statement. According to a person who viewed the draft, it read Trump Jr. was a "patriot" who "loves his country," and went on to trash Wolff. A copy was sent to both the White House and Don Jr., and was approved. The plan was to release it to Axios's Jonathan Swan.

But Bannon had waited too long. Around 2 P.M., Trump released a blistering four-paragraph statement ripping Bannon and questioning his mental health. "Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind," Trump said. "Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn't as easy as I make it look." The level of vitriol in the press release reflected the contempt Trump had built up for Bannon. On his way to Mar-a-Lago for Christmas, Trump had reportedly wanted to flame Bannon for comments Bannon had made to me about his disdain for Ivanka and Jared Kushner, not to mention his frustration with Trump; but at the time, White House aides successfully persuaded Trump not to speak out.

Wolff behaved like a spy in West Wing: possible violation of "off the record" agreement and illegal recoding of conversations

Wolff definitely abused his status of the visitor by stating long after his interview was over. That's clear from his only description of his behaviour (which also proved that this guy lost large part of his IQ with age; this can be viewed as a typical senile boastfulness) 'Fire and Fury' author Wolff says 25th Amendment concept 'alive every day' at White House - NBC News

Wolff defended his tactics in gaining enough access to the White House that he was able to speak very freely with numerous top administration officials.

"I literally kind of knocked on the door and said, 'Can I come in?' and they said, 'OK.' And I came in, I sat on the couch, and that's the point of view I've written this," he recounted.

... ... ...

The author also claimed that he did not violate any "off the record" agreements with his sources but instead tried to blend in with work as usual in the West Wing.

"I tried to be inobtrusive," he said. "So I tried not to have anyone quite notice me, or not notice me above the level that they notice the furniture. So my goal was to keep going until somebody said go away."

Wolff probably also violated any "off the record" agreements with his sources. The fact the Wolff acted as a spy inside West Wing also can give a gifted lawyer some openings. And cost Wolff a lot of money to defend himself. But it was Bannon who served as lord-protector of this gossip columnist

Over the next few months, Wolff would get similarly conspicuous access at the White House. With his distinctive bald head and New York fashion affectations, he stood out from the throngs of Washington media seeking inside information from Trump's inner circle.

Armed with a blue "appointment" badge from the Secret Service - unlike the grey press badges that gain access to the press briefing room - he walked into the West Wing and, he says, took up semi-permanent residence on a couch in the lobby, where he could see the daily interactions of top players in the Trump White House.

Adding to the intrigue, the White House now says that it was Trump's chief strategist, Steve Bannon, who signed off on most of Wolff's access.

West Wing is not a cocktail party: what regulations Wolff's broke then he used deception inside West Wing

Wolff admits to use of deception to get juicy information from unsuspecting victims (Michael Wolff on His White House 'Cloak of invisibility' )

"I literally think you go in there and say, 'I'm writing a book,' and they go, 'Oh. A book.' It's like a cloak of invisibility," he told THR. "And then also they would do this thing that would be like, 'Oh, this is off the record.' And I would say, 'I would like to use it for the book.' And they would say, 'Well, when does that come out?' And I would say, 'Next year.' 'Oh, oh, yeah, OK, fine.'

After access that Wolff obtained was obtained via flattery and deception. for example he boasts that he manages to convert Trump "non-denial" into "yes" by himself.

A very sleazy way of getting access to White house

As Bloomberg reports Wolff misrepresented himself as a fighter against MSM witch hunt. He also deceived an inexperienced staff

Author Michael Wolff's pitch to the White House to win cooperation for his book included a working title that signaled a sympathetic view, a counter-narrative to a slew of negative news stories early in Donald Trump's presidency.

He called it "The Great Transition: The First 100 Days of the Trump Administration." And in part due to that title, Wolff was able to exploit an inexperienced White House staff who mistakenly believed they could shape the book to the president's liking.

Nearly everyone who spoke with Wolff thought someone else in the White House had approved their participation. And it appears that not a single person in a position of authority to halt cooperation with the book -- including Trump himself -- raised any red flags, despite Wolff's well documented history. His previous work included a critical book on Trump confidant Rupert Murdoch, the Twenty-First Century Fox Inc. co-chairman.

... ... ...

Wolff's entree began with Trump himself, who phoned the author in early February to compliment him on a CNN appearance in which Wolff criticized media coverage of the new president.

Wolff told Trump during the call that he wanted to write a book on the president's first 100 days in office. Many people want to write books about me, Trump replied -- talk to my staff. Aides Kellyanne Conway and Hope Hicks listened to Wolff's pitch in a West Wing meeting the next day, but were noncommittal.

Several aides said Hicks later informally endorsed talking with Wolff as long as they made "positive" comments for the book, which they said Wolff told them would counter the media's unfair narrative.

It wasn't until late August that alarm bells were raised in the White House -- when Hicks, Jared Kushner and their allies realized that fellow aides who had spoken with Wolff, especially Bannon, may have provided damaging anecdotes about them.

... ... ...

Publicly, White House officials have laid much of the blame for the book's most controversial revelations on Bannon, who arranged for Wolff to enter the White House grounds at least a handful of times. "Close to 95 percent" of Wolff's White House interactions were "done so at the request of Mr. Bannon," White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters.

But privately, Trump allies say other top aides also allowed Wolff into the building, including Conway on multiple occasions.

Some of Trump's senior-most staff believed that Hicks, one of Trump's longest-serving aides who has acted as a gatekeeper for his interview requests, had authorized their cooperation with Wolff. They recalled that she encouraged them to engage with the author as long as they made positive comments. Hicks hadn't greenlit the book, people familiar with her handling of the matter said -- but nor did she immediately put up a stop sign.

In fact, for the first six months of Trump's presidency no one in his White House -- including then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer -- stopped Wolff from repeatedly scheduling appointments in the West Wing. He visited about 17 times, according to a person familiar with the matter. Nor did they monitor what Trump's aides were telling the controversial author.

One former aide, Sebastian Gorka, said he was asked to meet Wolff "by an outside mutual contact" he declined to identify. "The second we met I had a bad feeling about him and his real agenda," Gorka said.

Wolff conducted himself with assurance on his visits to the West Wing, playing up his relationship with Trump. Officials recall Wolff telling them he'd known Trump a long time and that the president called him "the best."

Wolff lost access with Bannon removal although he claims otherwise. According to Sarah Sanders told during her press-conference Wolff was never grated an interview with the President despite numerous requests. Sarah 'Huckabee' Sanders gets IRRlTATED on bannon & wolff's trump book questions - YouTube

Bannon was sidelined in April and the book actually presents events after April exclusively from Bannon point of view. That suggests that Wolff did not have much real access despite his efforts to spy in West Wing.

But there might be some external forces that ted to push wolf toward better access Gorka reveled that he got an external call recommending him to be interviewed by Wolff (which Gorka declined). See Gorka says he was told to cooperate with Wolff

Now there are statement that Bannon himself was involved in efforts to remove Trump from the Presidential campaign done of behave of Mercer family:

Bannon and Mercer Group Collected Opposition Research Exposing Trump Mafia Ties

Breitbart Executive Chairman Steve Bannon's fall has accelerated into a plummet. A conservative watchdog group helmed by Bannon worked to discredit President Donald Trump during the onset of the 2016 presidential primary, according to opposition research obtained by CNN.

Collected by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) and author Peter Schweizer, the document reportedly describes connections between Trump's companies and mafia figures, allegations that have long circled the president's business enterprise. GAI was co-founded by Schweizer and Bannon in 2012 and received heavy funding from the Mercer family-one of Trump's largest campaign contributors. Before backing Trump, the Mercer family publicly supported Texas Senator Ted Cruz for the presidency.

"We research political figures from all political parties and our basic premise is follow the money. That's what guides our research approach," Schweizer told CNN.

A source familiar with the organization confirmed to CNN that GAI collected research on all Republican and Democratic candidates during the 2016 presidential election. Additional sources confirmed that the document was shared with GOP donors during the primary, but made no indication as to whether Trump was aware of its existence when he hired Bannon as his campaign's CEO.

Who is Michael Wolff?

"He is needy and amoral enough to just, you know, insult people for attention". ~Gawker

Who is Michael Wolff? In short -- a money hungry gossip columnist. As he is now 64 he has a long career and published half-dozen books. That was clear from his first book Burn Rate How I Survived the Gold Rush Years on the Internet published in 1999 before the crush of dot-com bubble. This "fire and Fury" book was impressively timed, which maximized the monetary value of his the slapdash gossip and, sometimes, slander.

This is a typical "greed is good" journalist. In a review of Wolff's book Burn Rate, Brill's Content criticized Wolff for "apparent factual errors" and said that 13 people, including subjects he mentioned, complained that Wolff had "invented or changed quotes." Check out, The truth about Burn Rate.

His writings are very uneven and some columns actually are not bad. But most often he is lazy, superficial and sensationalist. He also has penchant to sniff somebody else dirty clothing.

Writing is extremely sloppy, repetitious and it is clear that Wolff did not spend much time writing the book. It was definitely rushed. Even copyediting is extremely poor and in some parts of the book (probably added at the last minute) completely absent. For example, this James Bond of Trump White House calls Stephen Miller -- Jason. May parts of the book look like a product of over-excited (by alcohol ? ;-) imagination" ;-). And the term "product of imagination" (aka figment) is a politically correct term for fabrication. When confronted with the request to provide confirmation to events described in his book Wolff only managed to say "read the book" (Michael Wolff's Alternative Facts):

An appearance with Katy Tur in the afternoon was bookended by a morning gig on Morning Joe and on Lawrence O'Donnell's show at night. And while Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough made their interview as much about them as Wolff, and O'Donnell was as solicitous as one could be, Tur was persistent in raising the basic questions about Wolff's modus operandi (Colbert articulated doubts but didn't forcefully inquire about them).

Why not release tapes of conversations that people are contesting? Why not go public with the evidence of is handiwork being flawed? "I am not in your business. My evidence is the book. Read the book. If it makes sense, if it rings true, it is true"!!!

Yes, yes, Tur said, she read the book. "There were a lot of factual errors." Wolff pooh-poohed the premises of her queries, as if bring up errors was even vaguely relevant to his great undertaking. And, anyway, what might surface were the kind of mistakes "you will find in any book, including yours (also on Trump)." I've got bigtime author friends, whom I've occasional helped a bit with editing, and that's baloney.

"I am up to a particular scrutiny because I am threatening the president of the United States," Wolff said, sounding as if he were a journalistic Archibald Cox, the independent special counsel fired by President Nixon during the Watergate scandal (part of the Saturday Night Massacre).

He at least offered Tur a self-serving rationalization. By comparison, there was the response to Brzezinski when she 13 hours earlier noted that an anecdote about Trump and daughter Ivanka is flat wrong. In reality, the particular interaction he purports to describe involved Trump and Brzezinski, not Ivanka, at a particular function.

Oh, well, said Wolff with cavalier nonchalance, sometimes you just rely on your sources and are wrong. Sheesh. On this day he seemed rather more prudent about his neckwear than the genesis of his gaudy revelations.

As Sam Nunberg put it Wolff's book for Democratic Party is like Obama birth issue for Republican Party after Obama victory. It is the matter of faith as well as the rallying cry: "let's win midterm" (Ex-Trump aide: I called Trump a fool).

Looks like Wolff in his attempt to "make money fast" by denouncing Trump and helping to prove that he is unfit for the office (as if this fact is of primary importance when the deep state runs the country and managed to coerce Trump into compliance in foreign policy is just three months) hit the nerve of NeverTrumpers. It created such an outpouring of hate toward Trump administration that far exceeds the animosity toward Bush II, or Obama. And Wolff's portrait of Trump makes Bush II look like a good president ;-) A wall of hate from neoliberals of all sorts directed at Trump, that far exceeds in intensity the same wage against Bush II after Iraq war, although Bush II deserved such a level of hate much more then Trump. With all his fought Trump yet did not invade and destroy another small country.

On Amazon Wolff's book on Jan 11 has had slightly over 2K reviews, the number reached 3K on Jan 20(with around 90% positive) and 3.6K on Jan 25. For the same period the book was sold in over one million copies (all formats, including Kindle and audio). Talk about average IQ of the population and the level of hate of Trump in neoliberal camp ;-)

It not it so difficult to understand that Wolff's insinuations notwithstanding "Trump Isn't Another Hitler. He's Another Obama": the POTUS that is under full or almost full control of the "deep state" and who easily betrayed most of his election promises in order to survive that color revolution (Russiagate, or Purple revolution against Trump) launched against him after elections.

And if Trump was another dictator, who just came to power, there would be already a round hole in Wolff's scull, or some mysterious car crash with Wolff as one of the fatalities. So this is simply stupid. Actually the level of chaos and the fact that Wolff was able to wander in West Wing suggests quite an opposite -- that Trump is a sense was much more liberal then Obama (who actually had pretty strict, CIA style control on the visitors to WH).

And Wolff is laughing running to the bank, capitalizing of this gigantic wave of hate, which is promoted and sustained by neoliberal MSMs and which resulted in fantastic sales of his mediocre and sleazy book. We, in "anti-neoliberal" camp, can denigrate Wolff as an mediocre tabloid writer as much as we want, but it is clear that he is a pretty shrewd businessman.

We, in "anti-neoliberal" camp, can denigrate Wolff as an mediocre tabloid writer as much as we want, but it is clear that he is a pretty shrewd businessman.

What a million of people who already bought Wolff's book do not understand is that independently of whether Trump is crazy or not, he does not matter much. No POTUS is. For example in foreign policy he was crushed and emasculated in just three months. His tax cut is a variation of the theme of Bush II -- so he acting like a regular Republican President would. If so, why we have an orgasm in neoliberal MSM masturbating on this mediocre and salacious book which sniffs President's dirty clothing. The attraction of the book is connected to definition of the word "gossip" cited by Bret Stephens in the NYT: "Hearing something you like about someone you don't." (The Wolff Eats Its Own - The New York Times). He also admits:

In "Fire and Fury," however, Trump really does have something resembling fake news. The book is replete with casual errors of fact. Invidious stories are unsourced or unverifiable or, on close inspection, simply nonsensical. It was written with white-hot venom. The book's only truly credible voice, if credible is the right word, is the peerlessly self-serving Steve Bannon.

The book also comes from a writer already accused of playing it fast and loose with the facts.

"Fire and Fury" is catnip for everyone who detests this president. But truth be told the Deep State forced to betray most of his election promises very quickly, so his difference with President Hillary during the first year is overstated. Not much, especially in foreign policy, depends on POTUS. For example, "Trump the isolationalist" was gone in April, 2017. That means that the executive branch is partially a Potemkin Village now, and in some important areas it is the "Deep State" that runs he country. The book also was used as smoke screen to hide Steele dossier fiasco.

BTW Wolff does not mentioned the crisis of neoliberalism in his book even once, but this was the key factor that propelled Trump to victory. Instead he tried to sniff Trump dirty clothing. And you can hate Trump, but it should on principal issues like domestic or foreign policy issues, not on dirty clothing issues. The latter just proves Wolff's pettiness and personal insignificance.

In this sense "Kid gloves" interviews of Wolff on CNN, MSNBC and other neoliberal MSM channels are disgusting. This is not journalism. This is 100% pure anti-Trump propaganda. Of worst kind. I watched around a dozen interviews of neoliberal MSM of this guy. And all of them insult the intelligence. Only Megan McCain in ABC interview tried to put a little bit of cold water on Wolff's overheated from sudden success bold head. But issues she mentions were really minor.

Is Wolff a typical neoliberal idiot?

"Life contains but two tragedies. One is not to get your heart's desire; the other is to get it"

George Bernard Shaw
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/george_bernard_shaw_129961

kick a man when he's down

(v.) To kick a man when he's down is to attack at the persons weakest moment. It defies the gentlemanly code of ethics, and does detract from reputation. Used literally or figuratively, it still has pretty much the same meaning.

Urban Dictionary kick a man when he's down

"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

~ Mark Twain

"There are four kinds of people to avoid in the world: the assholes, the asswipes, the ass-kissers, and those that just will shit all over you."
Anthony Liccione

In his book and, especially, in his interviews Wolff repeatedly claimed that his book can lead to successful coup d'état against Trump. So in his interviews he pretends that his depiction of Trump might lead to Trump removal. Moreover he pretends that this is his most cherished goal (in reality it is money). There is saying fully applicable to his dream: "Life contains but two tragedies. One is not to get your heart's desire; the other is to get it"? In the second case this idiot will get President Pence, which is too much for his Hollywood Reporter fiends even in comparison with Trump.

Is Pence better then Trump is the areas that are dear to Hollywood and metrosexual crowd Wolff represents ? you need just to look at readers comments at Yahoo and similar neoliberal outlets to see when those people say about "true believer" Pence. Dunce, and "an opportunistic politician who may even truly believe his own bullshit" are probably the most polite words. This is the person who eschew dining alone with any woman other than his wife simply to appear squeaky clean and avoid accusations. Because he is a former radio talk show host, we knows which side his matzo is buttered on. With all his warts, Trump was and sill to a certain extent is a wildcard, who represents potential threat to neoliberal globalization. That's why the campaign by neoliberal MSM against him is so vicious. Pence is and was a neocon and globalist, a typical Washington sellout, not to say bottom-feeder. As for CIA operative Philip Giraldi said about Trump and Pence (Let's Keep Donald Trump)

I would like to see him go due to his sheer fecklessness, particularly if he can take Mattis, McMaster, Pompeo, Tillerson and Haley with him. But there is a serious fly in the ointment, namely what would come next? The answer is President Mike Pence.

Mike Pence caught some heat during the campaign because of some of his idiosyncrasies like "never eat[ing] alone with a woman other than his wife." Whether that was true because of the apparently overwhelming sexual urges that seem to afflict nearly all congressmen and Hollywood producers, or because of something in the Bible, or even to avoid possible allegations of misbehavior, was not at all clear.

And speaking of the Bible, Pence is both a Christian fundamentalist and a dispensationalist, which means that he thinks every word in the Good Book is literally true and that Christianity is going through phases or dispensations that will lead to the rapture of true believers into heaven followed by the wrath of God descending on those who refuse to see the light.

The odd thing about people like Pence is that they stick like glue to their Scofield Reference Bibles but apparently rarely venture into the New Testament part with its talk of compassion and forgiveness. They much prefer the fire and brimstone in the Jewish part with Joshua smiting and Philistines (Palestines?) falling left and right. Pence and his co-believers, who are sometimes labeled Christian Zionists, consider Jews to be the Chosen People of God and Israel's creation and survival are all part of the master plan that will lead to the end of the world as we know it. The re-creation of a Jewish state and the gathering in of as many of the world's Jews as possible is seen as a critical step to achieve the Second Coming of Christ, which Pence and his associates fervently hope will occur soon. At that point, it is assumed that the Jews will realize that Christ is truly their Messiah and will mass-convert. If they do not they will be consumed in fire like all the other unbelievers.

Well, Pence is undeniably a true believer in the worst way, but he can choose to believe whatever he likes. The problem with him is that, given his senior role in the government, his firmly held religious beliefs are no longer a personal issue. They inevitably have political, economic and national security consequences for all Americans, not just for those who see things as he does. Only 20% of Americans actually go to church and of those only a portion are aligned with Pence on what Christianity means, suggesting that his is a minority viewpoint within a minority viewpoint.

Pence's views on the Middle East as influenced by his particular religiosity were on full display during his recent trip to Israel, a country that he has visited eight times. The Vice President's speech before the Knesset first required the removal of all Arab members of that body, who had loudly expressed their disapproval of what they knew was coming.

When I recall Trump's inauguration speech there is this painful sense of a totally missed opportunity: to push neocons into dustbin of history and at least partially restore the sovereignty of the US to the American people. As well as return to a civilized and rational international policy. Instead of current schoolyard bully style excesses. This did not happen, but still the idea of the change of the neoliberal status quo was the key for many supporters of Trump.

And Trump after first three months of his administration actually deflated and became a regular neocon in foreign policy. In this area he is now just at sex change operation distance from Hillary election promises. Unrelenting attacks by neocons and infiltration of neocons into his administration (Kushner is a neocon, so is Haley and McMaster) make him more of Obama II in foreign policy, then "election time Trump". Such a "change we can believe in". And it is impossible to be non-neocon if you are pandering to military industrial complex as they are essentially lobbyists of MIC. I doubt that there is big difference between Nikki "Binomo" Haley a female neocon bully in best tradition of Madeleine Albright and Samantha Power, who was yet another neocon chickenhawk and a potential criminal as she was involved in "unmasking campaign" unleashed on Trump team after the elections.

As for creation of jobs, there are some jobs created in military industrial complex. that's for sure. Will super-inflected military budgets some cramps will go to this category of workers. But in all other areas this is "business as usual". The direct continuation policies of impoverishment of working class that Clinton, Bush Ii and Obama implemented so effectively.

The rule for civilized person, which Wolff pretends to be, is "Don't kick a man when he is down"

Wolff's History of Fabrication

A brief look at the credibility of 'Fire and Fury' author Michael Wolff

"Much to the annoyance of Wolff's critics, the scenes in his columns aren't recreated so much as created - springing from Wolff's imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events," Michelle Cottle wrote in the New Republic. "Even Wolff acknowledges that conventional reporting isn't his bag. Rather, he absorbs the atmosphere and gossip swirling around him at cocktail parties, on the street, and especially during those long lunches at Michael's."

An editor who worked with Wolff told the New Republic,"[Wolff's] great gift is the appearance of intimate access. He is adroit at making the reader think that he has spent hours and days with his subject, when in fact he may have spent no time at all."

Wolff's New York columns included several claims that were later decried by the people he was discussing, including book editor Judith Regan - who said she hadn't spoken to Wolff in 30 years when disputing a column about her - and New Republic columnist Andrew Sullivan.

Wolff's books have also been flagged by critics as not wholly representing the truth. His 1998 book Burn Rate - which itself included a story about Wolff lying about his father-in-law having open heart surgery, the Post noted - was heavily criticized as containing false reporting. Now-defunct publication Brill's Content cited 13 individuals mentioned, portrayed in or familiar with events in the book who said Wolff had either invented or changed quotes. None could recall Wolff recording or taking notes on their conversations.

"Wolff exploits the human tendency to confuse frankness and cruelty with truth-telling," Jack Shafer wrote in a review of the book for Slate.

Carr's 2008 New York Times review of Wolff's book on Murdoch also pointed out the factual inaccuracies in some of the author's reporting. He noted that Wolff "prefers the purity of his constructs."

"Historically, one of the problems with Wolff's omniscience is that while he may know all, he gets some of it wrong," Carr wrote.

In a 2004 review of his book Autumn of the Moguls published in the Atlantic, critic Eric Alterman acknowledged that "sometimes [Wolff] gets it righter than anyone" - though he, too, points out how "wrongheaded" the author's reporting sometimes can be.

"One doesn't read Wolff to find out what's true; one reads him to find out what people may think is true," Alterman wrote. "And the act of his writing and publishing it helps make it 'true' in this sense."

"Does it all add up? That depends on the meanings of 'it,' 'all,' 'add' and 'up,'" Alterman wrote. "As I said, there's a reality here to which Wolff is the world's greatest living anthropologist, but it is a reality that is lighter than air."

Bannon Betrayal Latest Deep State Attack On MAGA - Capitol Hill Outsider

"A provocateur and media polemicist, Wolff has a penchant for stirring up an argument and pushing the facts as far as they'll go, and sometimes further than they can tolerate, according to his critics," Washington Post media reporter Paul Farhi said in one report. "He has been accused of not just recreating scenes in his books and columns, but of creating them wholesale."

Roger Stone has said, "Based on many years' experience with him, anything Michael Wolff writes has to be taken with a grain of salt."

President Trump called out Michael Wolff for the lies in his book, and well he should have. Wolff admits not everything in his book is true and that he said whatever he had to say to get his story. He printed and embellished "off the record" statements, and therein lies the deceit. His claims are irresponsibly absurd.

Claiming our President is dumb, childlike, that he's a moron, he doesn't like to read, he's mentally unbalanced, etc. is pure libel. Trump did three and four rallies per day during the campaign, and has given some of the finest foreign and domestic speeches we have heard from a president in over 50 years, not to mention his first year accomplishments. Tell me how many people could accomplish in their lives what President Trump has accomplished! Our President is brilliant and in charge, and the left hates it, and they denigrate him for it. Obviously, publishing company Henry Holt and Co. is printing Wolff's pile of dung because they know their leftist friends will love the lies.

Quotes attributed to longtime Trump friend Thomas Barrack Jr. and former White House adviser Katie Walsh were denied or disputed. Tom Barrack adds, "It's clear to anyone who knows me that those aren't my words and are inconsistent with anything I've ever said." He says Wolff never ran that quote by him to ask if it was accurate.

Wolff reported that Melania Trump cried when her husband won the election because she didn't want him to win. However, it's a well-known fact that Melania actually encouraged her husband to run for President, and was thrilled when he won.

Roger Stone said that Bannon was right on one thing, that Don Jr. should have had an attorney with him when he met with the Russian woman who claimed she had info on Hillary, but there was nothing illegal or treasonous about it as Bannon was quoted as saying.

The Washington Post questions 'Fire and Fury' author, Michael Wolff's credibility

His reliability has been challenged before - over quotes, descriptions and general accounts he's provided in his many newspaper and magazine columns and in several books. Wolff has even acknowledged that he can be unreliable: As he recounted in "Burn Rate" - his best-selling book about his time as an early Internet entrepreneur - Wolff kept his bankers at bay by fabricating a story about his father-in-law having open-heart surgery.

"How many fairly grievous lies had I told?" he wrote. "How many moral lapses had I committed? How many ethical breaches had I fallen into? . . . Like many another financial conniver, I was in a short-term mode." Wolff's business collapsed in 1997.

"Burn Rate" came under siege from critics who challenged its credibility, including the long verbatim conversations that Wolff recounted despite taking scant notes. Brill's Content, a now-defunct media-review publication, cited a dozen people who disputed quotes attributed to them in the book.

Wolff followed up "Burn Rate" by taking over the media column at New York magazine, where he almost immediately ran into trouble. Judith Regan, then a hotshot book editor who had been a classmate of Wolff's at Vassar, vigorously disputed almost every paragraph of Wolff's column about her. She said she hadn't had a personal conversation with Wolff in 30 years.

Wolff's response: "She doesn't speak to me. . . . I suppose the world is full of people who no longer speak to me."

New Republic columnist Andrew Sullivan accused Wolff of putting words in his mouth when Wolff wrote in 2001 that Sullivan "believes that he is the most significant gay public intellectual in America today." Sullivan said he never made any such claim.

In a 2004 cover story for the New Republic, Michelle Cottle wrote that Wolff had become the "It Boy" of New York media after winning two National Magazine Awards for his commentary: "His quick wit, dizzying writing style, and willingness to say absolutely anything about anybody made his column a must-read," she wrote.

But she added, "Much to the annoyance of Wolff's critics, the scenes in his columns aren't recreated so much as created - springing from Wolff's imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events. Even Wolff acknowledges that conventional reporting isn't his bag." An editor who worked with Wolff told Cottle, "He is adroit at making the reader think that he has spent hours and days with his subject, when in fact he may have spent no time at all."

Even Wolff's anecdote about Trump being unaware of who Boehner was last year seems a bit suspect. The reason? Trump had tweeted about Boehner multiple times since 2011. In September 2015, for example, Trump tweeted this: "Wacky @glennbeck who always seems to be crying (worse than Boehner) speaks badly of me only because I refuse to do his show - a real nut job!"

Trump and other affected people legal options against Wolff

The "Fire and Fury" author, doing his best Kellyanne Conway, says his mistakes aren't important. That's nonsense.

James Warren, vanityfair.com, Jan 9, 201

New York law defines libel as a written statement of fact regarding the plaintiff published by the defendant that is false and causes injury to the plaintiff.

...(U.S. Supreme Court holding that a statement or publication containing provably false factual assertions constitutes defamation);

...A communication is defamatory if it tends so to harm the reputation of another as to lower him in the estimation of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him");

... Libel per se involves a false allegation that a person is engaged in a crime, or that otherwise tends to injure a person in his or her trade, business, or profession.

The book has garnered much attention thanks to explosive quotes, including from Bannon, who called a Trump Tower meeting with Russians "unpatriotic" and "treasonous."

Read Donald Trump's Full Legal Demand Over Michael Wolff's Book Hollywood Reporter

8

Trump can't file libel suit against Wolff for obvious reasons. Even cease-and-desist letter (which means nothing in legal sense and is just a warning that a lawsuit can be bought against you) already did more harm to him then good by somewhat increasing the book popularity. Mr. Trump's attorney Charles Harder sent a letter to Mr. Wolff and publisher Henry Holt and Co demanding no further confidential information is disclosed. Still the book was published on January 9 which means the legal fight is on.

"Your publication of the false/baseless statements about Mr. Trump gives rise to, among other claims, defamation by libel, defamation by libel per se, false light invasion of privacy, tortious interference with contractual relations, and inducement of breach of contract," the letter to Mr. Wolff read.

Mr. Bannon was also sent a letter informing him of coming legal action, citing "disparaging statements and in some cases outright defamatory statements" he is said to have made to Mr. Wolff.

The same in probably true about lawsuit against Bannon. Just image request for discovery of WH email by Bannon's lawyers. Boob did quit a bit for his self-destruction already and probably does not need outside help.

The truth is that Bannon is actually both a victim and a villain -- in exchange for the access to the White House Wolff had gotten during Bannon's tenure, Wolff has written a book exclusively from Bannon's perspective to serve his narcissistic ego and (what was probably the most important for Wolff) to sell his book to wider audience as Bannon is correctly depicted in the book not as a strategist but as a political arsonist eager to burn his bridges when he left the White House. You can virtually feel his rage against his dismissal. So while Bannon violated his NDA, he might pay a high price for his "revelations" in a different way that via lawsuit against him. the same actually is true for Wolff. He already was summoned by Grand Inquisitor Mueller, who probably was elated at such a chance to get even with Bannon and sink Trump with the hands of his former close associate (Trump rejecting Bannon's hard line against Mueller - CNNPolitics):

President Donald Trump has decided -- for now -- to stick with his strategy of cooperation with special counsel Robert Mueller, a day after the Russia investigation ensnared three of his campaign aides. That's despite being urged to take a harder line by his former chief strategist, Steve Bannon.

Bannon spoke with Trump following Monday's announcements from the special counsel, and advocated taking a harsher approach to Mueller, a person familiar with their conversation said. While Trump encouraged Bannon to lead the public charge against Mueller, the President made clear to aides Tuesday that he's not adopting Bannon's advice.

..A person close to the President said that more donors and outside friends are starting to wonder if Bannon is right, saying: "The thinking is 'you will take the same abuse whether you go after (Mueller) or you don't.' "

Formally it does not matter much, but still it is bad for Wolff that Bannon already claimed that critical quotes about Trump Tower meeting are not accurate which suggests actual malice on the part of Wolff. If we add to this his statement in his interviews that the book with bring Trump down that became even worse for Wolff.

But the critical peace here is Wolff's decision to include red meat about Veselnitskaya case. Which puts Wolff directly of indirectly into the conspiracy to take Trump down (the meeting probably was a designed by Fusion GPS trap for Trump team). Now he can legitimately be deposed to testify in House Intelligence committee. Or he can be suited for violation of security protocols for West Wing visitors (remember he did not have a press badge; he has had a regular visitor badge and as such was a subject to rules for visitors, not the press). Also Wolff might record conversations without informing the other party in WH (he boasted that he has tapes, but refused to release them) which taking into account Wolff's character is quite probable. Hidden recording of conversations is a crime in some states. So the fact that Wolff claimed that he has tapes might alone constitute an admission of the criminal act.

So in more then one way Wolff's "way too long tongue" and availability of more then a dozen interviews in addition to the book text can really hurt him. In such cases the more you talk the deeper you sink. For example, Veselnitskaya case involves national security and his repeated his claim that the "President is unfit for office" in each second interview looks somewhat suspicious and beg the question: "Did he took money from DNC, Soros, or Clinton wing of democratic party to write a book and not only an advance from the publisher?" Of course, Fusion GPS would probably be the best option ;-) . In this case Wolff would became a part of Strzok-gate.

So while direct legal attack on Wolff might fail, there are always multiple possibilities of indirect attack looming on the horizon for such a sleazy and unscrupulous character as Wolff (BTW Wolff was sued for 8 million by his mother in law, whom he allegedly cheated on Manhattan apartment swap, as well as stole and sold her jewelry (Page Six); It there is still a lawsuit pending it might benefit from a little bit of legal help from Trump supporters ;-).

But in an e-mail to Page Six, another family member fumed: "It's really, really creepy . . . This guy Wolff epitomizes everything that is simply wrong about this generation of spoiled-brat, entitlement children."

It might well be that some of those possibilities will prevent Wolff sleeping well at night, despite solid stream of money that are flowing right now to his account. Any person over 60 has an elevated risk of stoke, especially if he/she abuses alcohol and has a very young and demanding sexual partner (Wolff's girl friend Victoria Floethe, if he still has her, was around 30 years younger then him). And here the stakes are high while cards are currently hidden (for example, Hogan sued Gawker for 100 million) . The possibility of a long and expensive lawsuit can't be completely discarded.

All this means that while defamation suit against him from Trump is a "no go", it's not "all clear" situation for Wolff and his book.

Supplement 1: Some interesting negative Amazon reviews of Wolff's book

This is "reviews of the day" collection. In most cases only one review per day was selected for its relevance and insightful critique of the book. No positive reviews here. All reviews are three stars or below. Only around 17% of reviews belong to this category. As of Jan 12, there were around 2.4K reviews of the book. On Feb 12 5K, so the book is still selling well (mostly audio and Kindle). Few books exceed 2K reviews on Amazon. For example Edward Klain The Amateur has 2.5K. But as ancients said it is always wise to listen to opposition to mainstream opinion and most reviews are one-liners and a lot of selling was driven by MSM hype

kevin, February 8, 2018
This book should be called Bannon vs. Kushner

First 150 pages:

They should call this book Bannon vs. Kushner. This book so far is boring. I really wanted to love the book but the book is too repetitive and devotes whole Chapters to things that does not matter like CPAC. This book also is 90% about Bannon vs. Kushner not getting along. After 150 pages you will still be on the first month of Trump's presidency. This book should be 125 pages not over 300 pages.

151 pages- end of the book

How many Chapters do we need on Steve Bannon? I will tell you upfront that this book has at least 5 Chapters on Bannon. I can tell that Bannon played a large part in this book as the author makes it seemed that Bannon tried to warn Trump on how to do things like not firing the FBI Director Comey but Trump chose to listen to his son-in-law and daughter who keeps giving him bad advice and is the main reason for the leaks and the nonsense going on in the White House. This book did give out some inside information on the Trump White House such as Trump refusal to listen to his military advisers instead choosing to listen to Ivanka on troop deployments. The book also tells us how dumb Trump is and how he can't read or comprehend anything so his daughter and assistant must make child like videos for him to watch and comprehend military issues. Overall, this book needed more and fell way short of being great.

After reading this book. I do not want to hear Steve Bannon's name again because this book is largely about him.

neon19, February 6, 2018
Didn't Like the Writing Style

I am not judging whether Wolff was truthful or not. But, he wrote this like a sensationalist tabloid gossip column without citing any sources. I understand why he would not explicitly disclose his sources, but I think he should have at least vaguely hinted or even said something as simple as whether it came from his observations or somebody telling him, and if so, whether that source witnessed it first hand or was telling a second hand story. And how does he know what Trump is thinking in an exact moment? Is he inside Trump's brain? Did Trump tell him directly? Did he overhear something?

This book just gives Conservatives more leverage in the whole Fake News debate because Wolff wrote this book in a way that makes his information sound, frankly, like fake news. The book was disorganized and poorly written, frankly.

And why is there such a fuss over this? Trump is an incompetent troll and a misogynist-- What a surprise!!

dale remlee, February 5, 2018

Reminded me of the movie gossip magazines I loved when I was 12/13 years old

Helped make clear who/what/where some of the lesser known characters in this B- "script" Wolff's imagined responses of real people in actual situations was amusing if not factual. Reminded me of the movie gossip magazines I loved when I was 12/13 years old.

Merikatmom Mary, January 29, 2018

Fire and Fury

I don't like Donald Trump, didn't vote for him, and never would. That said, this book is pure speculation and innuendos about family, staff, enemies, and Trump himself. There are few, if any, sources for the things said and done. I think Michael Wolfe is as big a con man as Trump. The only real reason to read the book is because Trump tried to stop it's publication. Save your money, though, and check it out from your local library.

Jason Gallardoon February 3, 2018

All the juiciest parts have been in the news

I would recommend this book to those that like political gossip and or like to hear what people really say when the cameras are off. I would caution to the validity of the book, but point out that the over arching tone, that the president is ill informed or that he is unwilling to learn seems to be true. This book is also poorly written almost as if it was rushed out to beat the many other books set to hit the market about this administration. Happy Reading.

Customerspeakezswd on January 28, 2018

Written like a tacky tabloid on steroids.

The author takes huge liberties describing conversations, in quotes, as if he were there. The only information I believe is the author's name.

The writing style is tacky tabloid, the dates jump around enough to confuse, and the use of obscure vocabulary inconsistently, causes unintended humor. Save your money. In the old days of brick and mortar bookstores, this drivel would be on the 'take one leave one' table.

Dakota Benish January 26, 2018

Why isn't this listed in fiction?

Pure garbage. Michael Wolff continues his record of telling what he feels to be the most interesting story, regardless of the facts.

SagamoreHill1 on January 25, 2018

Disappointing. Seems like it was written by a 9th grader over a weekend

Such a poorly written book of innuendo and zero facts. Very hard to follow. Seems like it was written by a 9th Grader over a weekend. I learned NOTHING that hadn't been written about previously. Disappointing.

Carlos Guerra on January 24, 2018

This is a book with a clearly anti-trump agenda made to pander to those who already don't like Trump. He writes "everyone in the room felt ...

Needs to be in the fiction section. This is a book with a clearly anti-trump agenda made to pander to those who already don't like Trump. He writes "everyone in the room felt awkward", "They were thinking he was an idiot" without anything to verify the claims.

S. Young, January 24, 2018

Old news, with excellent sources proving the fake news is not so fake after all

If your watch anything other than conservative news, there's really no need to buy this book/ It's basically one more source to add to the pile of incidents and remarks the media has told us about ad nausea.

A couple sources might surprise you , Roger Ailes, now dead, and Rupert Murdoch, and a rich man who author states is Trumps best friend, Tom Barret.

In fact, with the news cycle and Trump News at present, the book was outdated two days after it was published. It was worth the dollars to show Trump how freedom of speech works, he apparently hasn't a clue.

It's a gossip book. Period.

Ian K. VINE VOICE on January 23, 2018

No surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to the news

Donald Trump's miniscule attention span, intellectual shallowness and massive narcissism should be no surprise to anyone who has read any of the Trump biographies or who closely follows the news. Fire and Fury has a few choice quotes and scenes from the Trump Whitehouse, but overall the sad truth is the book is boring. Almost all of the good parts in the book have been covered by publications like the New York Times and the Washington Post.

I finished the book, but I was really skimming through it. There is not much meat in this book. The definitive book on Trump, a President so disastrous that he makes George W. Bush look good, has yet to be written. That book will not be written by Michael Wolff, who is little more than a bitchy hack writer.

All this said... I bought the book as a political act. Trump will hate the fact that the book is a massive success. Trump also made a pathetic attempt to suppress the book. Both were motivations in my purchase. But if you want a great read, look elsewhere.

PRDude on January 22, 2018

There are many wonderful books on the inner workings of the White House

As a non-Trump supporter, this book is a disgrace, and even more disgraceful is the media's embrace of it. There are many wonderful books on the inner workings of the White House, the most recent being the excellent book by Chris Whipple, The Gatekeepers. It has verified facts, no mis-representations, no fabricated conclusions. Anyone who buys this book should claim fraud and ask for their money back.

C on January 19, 2018

It's like no one edited this book

Badly written. It's like no one edited this book. Really makes me question the author's credibility and journalistic integrity. Doesn't cite sources, even when providing direct quotes. That's not okay.

I'm glad someone had the courage to write about the imbecile in our White House, but this kind of crappy writing that borders on tabloid-level makes our side look just as bad as "the other side".

Wolff is lucky that the Bannon controversy happened, otherwise this book wouldn't have sold more than a handful of copies.

shoesarei on January 18, 2018

Interesting in a voyeuristic sense but stylistically and factually flawed.

The inaccuracies are off-putting. How credible is the rest of this book if he calls Stephen Miller Jason? I am far from being a Trump fan, but I am also far from being a Bannon fan. Wolff clearly likes Bannon and admires the daily chaos and "war footing" tactics he engendered. I would love to read a book like this but one that is edited and vetted before going to print.

Angela M. Hey VINE VOICE
Bannon's White House legacy

This chronicle of life in the White House is more about Steve Bannon and his buddies versus Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner's more liberal views. Highlights of President Trump's first nine months provide material for the book's chapters.

There are almost no good words for Trump. The reader gets tired of hearing he's confused, stupid or uninformed. The writing is tedious and relies on Yiddish and journalistic jargon to add gravitas. If you want to know more about Trump, this is not the book.

One reads about White House chaos and the book explains the political infighting that contributes to it. The communications professionals' comings and goings are explained. The chief of staff gyrations and Air Force One trip insights provide interest.

If you keep up with the news you won't learn much about Trump, but as a partial biography of Bannon this is worth reading.

Uppsala on January 17, 2018
Mediocre book about a crappy president.

To begin with, I was very irritated by all the editing mistakes that appeared in the Kindle edition. Writers lose some credibility when their "finished" product is riddled with grammatical errors. This book is just not well-written. At first the account was galvanizing, especially seeing in print one of Trump's speeches -- which I would assign a D-minus at best. Incoherent, highly repetitive writing (or in this case Trump's speaking) indicates incoherent thinking; the president does not argue, he asserts. He has anecdotes but no evidence. Facts are clearly anathema to him; logic escapes him. But all this is really no surprise because he has shown himself over and over to be a vain, emotionally needy idiot, who is a compulsive liar being propped up by immoral toadies (in his staff and in congress). That said, after the first 90 or so pages, I became really bored. And why not? Trump (the subject of the book, after all) has nothing to say. He has no plans to solve the country's many problems and seems dangerously susceptible to repeating what the last person he talked to said.

complexanimal on January 17, 2018
A Tabloid-esque Exposé Befitting our Time

This is a poorly sourced, hearsay laden book that would get ripped to shreds and given a C- if presented as a final project in any top 500 journalism graduate school in the country. However, I very much doubt the author intended it to adhere to The Rulebook of Journalistic Ethics and Integrity. In short, it revels in being a salacious story about gossip and innuendo -- fitting quite well in our age of social media, aggregated and questionable sources, and our own attention span lacking president. In effect, it reads like an extremely long, multi-part post in Reddit's /r/bestof section.

Regarding the "truthiness" and authenticity of the facts that lies within: yeah, I generally believe most of it is probably true. There is not much secrecy in the bumbling ineptitude of the Trump administration and the in-fighting that is hidden in plain sight. Rake stepping seems a constant favorite past time of our Dear Leader and his cohorts. Bear in mind, 'Fire and Fury' seems clearly on the side of Bannon, so I would certainly take any of his character opinions -- particularly, of those he clearly despises (Jarvanka) -- with a boulder sized grain of salt. Also, there are some factual errors that are troubling to say the least. For example, Wolff suggests that Trump's father was definitely a member of the KKK. From my cursory research on the topic, this claim seems circumstantial at best. There are also errors in poll numbers sprinkled throughout the text.

Should you read it? Perhaps, but don't expect anything terribly enlightening. If you're like me: a mainstream liberal who reads the failing New York Times and the Bozos Washington Post, I doubt any of this will be much of a surprise to you. What the book mainly does is sum up the top 50 forehead slapping headlines of this disastrous presidency in the past year, so if you've been paying attention, you've already read a version of this. I suppose it is useful to have a story arc within a single book that covers the first year of the Trump presidency. Had it been better written, properly sourced, and factually correct, it might have really been something.

Rodger on January 16, 2018

Reading this is like reading a tabloid

Reading this is like reading a tabloid. Lots of gossip and snark. Plenty of revealed secrets of the stars. A satisfying confirmation that all the received wisdom about Trump is true -- unless it isn't. Enjoy the book -- it's lots of fun -- but look for better resources when it comes to judging this president and his administration.

MS Smithy on January 15, 2018

Seriously? Slapdash, less informative the real-time news sources we already have

So poorly written and incoherent that I'm surprised the White House had trouble disputing what it says. Wolff constantly concludes a paragraph with seemingly unrelated, garbled points. The opening chapter was engagingly fly on the wall at Roger Aisle's dinner though what you get is no more than sugar candy. The next two chapters are a running account of how the campaign got down to serious business but nothing seems authoritative or thought provoking. Opening premise is that everyone thought Trump was a joke. Think we knew that. Painful to read because Wolff floats along the surface of second hand narrative with no interest exploring his material. Mostly a blab; written for money and no real care for discovery. Reads like a first draft. Maybe I'm not accepting of the standard for political books but this is an effort to read.

JanaJ on January 14, 2018

I was pretty disappointed in the book

I was pretty disappointed in the book, to be honest. There is SO MUCH conjecturing. How could Wolff know what people were doing and thinking behind closed doors? There are few reliable quotes. I saw Wolff on "The View" and he just did not seem to be a very honest person. The book DOES set down the facts of who was in the White House and when. If that interests you, go ahead and get this book.

I will not recommend this book to my friends as the juiciest parts of the book were already discussed on the major news outlets. They have already moved on to the sh*thole comment. (Which was predictably denied)

sdw on January 12, 2018
Gossip and Mind Reading

Terrible reading. The author must be a mind reader to know what so many people are thinking. Cannot believe this book got so much media coverage. About 90 percent unsubstantiated speculation that could easily have been plagiarized from Washington Post op-eds.

J. Cordi on January 11, 2018
At Least Yellow Journalism Should be Entertaining!

Michael Wolfe's "tell all" is a bore! The fact is we all know that the President is a narcissist. We all know that Steve Bannon is another narcissist and a snake.
We all know that the Kuschners are out of their depth! After the first 200 pages of gossip and already published facts and perceptions -- I gave up even after promising my (radio) listeners a full review of the book on my show. Oh -- I guess that is the review, isn't? I bought the book on Kindle -- don't waste your $14 bucks --

J. A. Wallace on January 8, 2018

Fish On! Wolff Does It Again

If one reads this with an open mind rather than an ideological bias, you'll soon discover that the big winner here is Michael Wolff. Not only did he publicly admit that he wasn't sure what was true and what was either false, conjecture, or opinion, he told us this was largely fiction with a not so well cloaked veil in the first 25 pages or so. He said that the press had ALWAYS given accolades and positive treatment to a new president--the first time they did not was with Donald Trump. Ha! Many readers will remember how the press treated G.W. Bush from day one, actually before the election, and I'm old enough to remember the fire and fury the press gave Ronald Reagan. At the time, I had been working for Jimmy Carter traveling the region setting up campaign booths and forums, and I well remember how the vicious comments about Reagan somewhat softened the blow of us losing the second term. So, with some clouded honestly, right there he told us this book was not to be regarded as factual.

And, for fiction, I actually enjoyed it. It's so removed from what has been known to us previously as the current White House reality that even a stalwart Trump fan should not be offended. Nor should a neverTrumper or solid Democrat think this book is going to make a particle of difference in the coming years and elections. It won't because it's narrative and mostly fiction--we don't know what could be true as there's no sourcing.

As a non-fiction publisher, I admire Wolff's execution of a fast money publishing plan. He certainly knew his market, and that this market was less interested in facts, sourcing, and evidence of truth in statements, and far more interested in confirmation bias content. And, that's OK from an enterprise point of view, and that's partially why he gets three stars, even in the face of largely fictional and sometimes fraudulent content.

One reviewer mentioned he uses $5 words when a $.05 word would suffice, and I'll agree that was annoying. Others have complained about editing, and that publication phase was apparently all but absent; the errors are glaring. His writing, although it does not flow well, nor is any chronology evident, is typical of a pulp fiction detective novel, which I do enjoy on occasion.

I don't feel cheated from buying the book, as this isn't Wolff's first rodeo, and the writing is not atypical of his previous works. His "insider secrets" never are, and his conclusions are always subjective and always lacking sourcing. Still, he's fun to read and he's a pretty good story teller.

Vegans need not apply--this is USDA red meat, Select grade.

Jaco's Friend, January 7, 2018

Rambling psycho-babble sprinkled with salacious quotes

If you value your time, read the excerpts variously published. The book adds marginal value and fails on several fronts.

First, the book isn't particularly well-written. The prose is inflated, laborious to read, not the tight disciplined accounts we are accustomed to from wordsmith journalists. More the writing of a tabloid writer trying too hard to appear otherwise.

Second, on the content side, the book is essentially a psycho-babble that is sprinkled with salacious quotes, some over-interpreted and others clearly speculative. There are many instances where staffers and friends/advisers of Trump allude to him in unfavorable terms ("idiot," "fool," etc.). If you've been in an organization, for a period of time, with underlyings and superiors, sometimes that's how others refer to you behind your back. Or, even in your company. It's not that uncommon. In many cases, this doesn't mean a whole lot beyond a temporary relief of feelings. The author makes too much of it. The book is organized around such quips.

Sure, when it comes to the President of the United States, one would think that more caution and discipline would be in order. However, keep in mind that Trump has been a reality TV star for many years which breeds false familiarity. People feel they know him, they have a measure of the man, and are more prone to engage in discourse reserved for pals, colleagues, and overbearing bosses. And, certainly the oftentimes crass manner in which Trump expresses himself does not lend itself to an atmosphere of civility and decorum by those around him.

The speculative component permeates as a narrative glue of the book. A mild example is the statement, "for many years, he had humored Trump more than embraced him" (referring to J. Kushner) which, obviously, no one outside Jared Kushner can truly know. I even don't know if I "humored person XYZ more than embraced him" without engaging in significant contemplation and reflection. Even then I might not. The book is replete with such speculative account.

A second weakness on the content-side is the over-simplified superficial characterization of Trump as a person. There is a penchant for popular media, including journalists, to engage in a cartoonish characterization of Trump which should be left to political cartoonists and comedians. This book is no exception. We are inundated with personal deficiencies of Trump which have been evident, for all to see, from the moment he ran for office in the Republican primaries. Surely, the leaking of the Billy Bush tapes was horrifying (whether locker room talk or not) and would have sunk the candidacy of any other man/woman. How did Trump manage to get elected despite all that? His uniquely polarizing opponent, Hillary Clinton, had something to do with it. So did the concerns of the middle class that the establishment, Democrat or Republican, had not given sufficient voice to. But surely Trump, beyond the superficial characterization espoused in the book, had something to do with it as well.

Distilling the information provided by the author, there is little insight. The author doesn't seem to know Trump. Nor have those who have been part of Trump's inner circle for many years confided in the author. All that the author has going are quips, anecdotes, and second hand accounts, from which he weaves a story consistent with the dysfunction and chaos we have been coming from The White House. Oh yeah, and the book's not particularly well-written.

RobRock on January 6, 2018

Not one footnote, outlandish claims, no background material

Michael Wolff pushes all the right buttons. "Watergate" is even in the very first sentence of the book (author's note). The events described are based on "conversations that took place over a period of 18 months with the president, with most members of his senior staff -- some of whom talked to talked to me dozens of times." ***dozens of times*** The book starts out explaining how Trump had no idea what he was doing during the campaign, and get this... he was a puppet of Roger Ailes, Breitbart, Fox News and Bannon. (Are those not the right buttons to push) Trump never intended to win. He ran in order to get broadcast cred so he could start his own cable network. -- -- This is a novel with real names.

There are no footnotes and conversations held when Wolff was NOT present are amazingly detailed. Conversations in which the chatting parties engaged, could not talk enough about how big a louse and scumbag Trump is. This piece of fiction validates everything Trump-haters have already claimed, with loads of bonus dirt. He's delusional, phony, and is even a crook. As the author claims, real estate is a good front for money laundering. The extraordinarily outlandish claims continue, Trump was the leaker of Melania's nudes early in her career. "...a shoot that Melania had done early in her modeling career -- - a leak that everybody other than Melania assumed could be traced back to Trump himself." (No footnotes).

Before they wedded, Melania asked Trump if that's the way things are going to be, because she wouldn't be able to take it. Trump told her to sue him and he subsequently set up lawyers for her to see. The pages are full of this type soap opera material. -- - The locker room talk tapes are apparently supposed to give us the impression Trump reveals this sort of stuff all the time, and to a guy like Michael Wolff. -- -- Those who want to hate Trump will love it. It really is a sign of the times. Someone can make as many groundless and preposterous claims they want, and there is a large audience who will eat up every syllable. I have read the first two chapters and it's hard to read because it's so surreal. I will attempt to plod on.

Karen J. Shingleton on January 6, 2018
described in detail gets really boring. As far as a story goes

Assume a fly on the wall listened to each and every meeting and phone conversation from Trump and all of his campaign members. Then accept all quoted remarks, especially from each party during a phone conversation. That would be a remarkable assumption. Yet that is what you would have to accept to believe this book.

Personally, there is nothing new for anyone following political news closely. But acknowledging a plethora of characters, and most you probably could care less about, described in detail gets really boring. As far as a story goes, this jumps all over the place with no consistency of time line, place, or even continuity of thought.

It is quite obvious discovering a political bias at play but where the prejudices get lost is the attempt to describe the elected leader of the free world as an uneducated low IQ moron even though this same person managed to reach the apex of New York business success and recognized as brilliant throughout the world. In the real estate development arena, Trump could memorize a complex construction critical path much to the amazement of contractors yet according to the book, did not know what a spread sheet was.

Surprise, surprise! He didn't even know his way around Washington. That made him an idiot. To make him look bad, mention that sometimes he would not even see his wife for two weeks. If this is the kind of information that strengthens your disgust and energizes your hate, then this can be an enjoyable read, For me, if is just plain gossip and exaggerations to support a Hate Trump campaign!

Comorant on January 6, 2018

Michael Wolff-Clairvoyant or Clever Profiteer

It would be an understatement to simply indicate that Trump demonstrates the characteristics of a short sighted, pompous ego driven narcissist; A conclusion easily reached by his daily Twitter rants combined by his apparent inability to intelligently string multiple words together and not sound like a 12 year old child. I concede that he is far from presidential and further admit that he received my vote, not a vote of support but a vote against Hillary, basically the lesser of two evils.

Michael Wolff's book adds little to my impression of the Trump organization but is an affront to my intelligence in his attempt to sell this rubbish as the result of investigative reporting. Short of Mr. Wolff having a supernatural gift of clairvoyance and thought reading, it would be impossible for him to create a factual representation of Trump and staff as throughout the book he references the collective and inner thoughts of groups and individuals. I suggest the reader highlight the terms " everyone", "they", "in Trump's view", etc. Somehow Mr. Wolff is able to discern the unspoken thoughts of essentially every member of the Trump team, Trump's wife, daughter, son-in-law and acquaintances without them actually saying what is written in the book. The author liberally takes every opportunity to inform the reader what an individual or collective group of people are not saying but "believe", "think", "in their view", etc.

While there may be much truth in the story that the White House is far from organized and the President has few redeeming attributes, this book falls short in meeting the standards of credibility based on well researched facts. Mr. Trump's questionable character, demeanor and erratic behavior should give reason for concern for our nation. The impossible perspective and insight required for Mr. Wolff to present this as a factual account of the Trump organization is an insult to any one of average intelligence.

Jeffrey Murray on January 6, 2018

...Only a few pages in and I will probably stop reading this book. I caught a factual error that shouldnt have been missed. Wolff states that Boehner was ousted by the Tea Party in 2011. Not true. He resigned frustrated by the Tea Party in 2015. When you write a book about the president, especially one who constantly disparages the press for being wrong, you better to further call the press fake.

J. FRY LOFTON on January 6, 2018
Badly written and nothing new

This book is nothing more than a rehashing of publicly available information about the Trump administration with a few shock quotes thrown in to get headlines and sell the book. I'm neither a never-Trumper nor am I a supporter, and was hoping to gain some insight through Wolff's supposedly exclusive access. Instead, there is hardly anything in this book that we didn't already know. I suppose there is some value in hashing it all together in one place, but not a lot. In addition, it's very poorly written. Wolff uses hip-hop slang words like "dis" and pens confusing sentences like: "She and Jared, or Jared, but by inference she too, were in effect the real chief of staff-or certainly as much a chief of staff as Priebus or Bannon, all of them reporting directly to the president." Goodness, where is the editor? Regardless of whether you like or hate President Trump, don't waste your money on this book, as you won't learn anything.

Frantastic on January 5, 2018
Lazy writing and editing.

Fire and Fury reads like a book-length blog entry. The insider perspective is interesting and entertaining but Henry Holt and Co. should be ashamed of themselves for being quick to release a book that is filled with awful writing habits and A LOT of typos and grammatical errors. The lack of editing is frustratingly distracting. The author constantly interrupts his sentences with tidbits of mildly interesting, but not crucial, information and he has a bizarre fondness for parenthetical "fun facts." THEY'RE CALLED FOOTNOTES. USE THEM. To write in the voice of the author, "I can't even believe he writes for GQ and Vanity Fair."

Read it, or don't read it, but I'd advise keeping your expectations low.

kmk427 on January 5, 2018
That's pure crap. The whole books is like that

I can barely get through this book. While there are some surprising admissions, most of what is in the book, we already know or assumed. The rest of the book is a tribute to Bannon and creates more smoke screen for Trump.

At one point Wolff mentions the alleged collusion with Russia. He asserts that if there was collusion, Trump was an unwitting victim of it, not realizing how his praise of Russia was affecting them and their actions. When Wolff writes about the Steele dossier, he addresses two positions. The dossier is either true or false but believed true by a rabid press. He also mentions that the Trump administration was advised not to piss off the Intel community or they'll have a 2-3 yr Russia investigation with daily leaks. This implies that there's no validity to the Russia investigation. It's just vengeance being taken by an angry Intel community.

Wolff describes the speech Trump made to the CIA shortly after his inauguration. He says, "Witnesses would describe his reception at the CIA as either Beatles-like emotional outpouring or a response so confounded and appalled that, in the seconds after he finished, you could hear a pin drop." While, the latter description is accurate, Wolff slips in a positive reaction that sounds completely false. I can't believe anyone at the CIA responded to Trump's speech with a 'Beatles-like emotional outpouring'. That's pure crap. The whole books is like that. It's supposed to be a tell-all, but there is this undercurrent of praise and 'alternative facts' about Trump. I've only read about 20% of the book and I don't think I can go any further.

Lars H on January 5, 2018
The book doesn't ring true

This book doesn't ring true and it doesn't serve a purpose. It's like listening to Alex Jones or reading National Enquirer on steroids, just gleeful childish destruction. Wolff writing is the journalistic equivalent of the straw-men he portrays.

The story started as an article and just grew endlessly. There is little structure, pointless mean gossip and no analysis. Wolff is lacking focus and strategy. He doesn't know why he wrote the book and he feels surprised about the success of the book. The juiciest parts of the book has already been published for free in The Guardian, New York Magazine and GQ.

I'm not American and I don't live in the US so I have no personal agenda writing this review. I follow American politics and have read several good books about the subject and the characters involved, including biographies of key people in US history. Trump is "the great white hope" for many conservative populist voters in Europe. We have suffered much worse leaders and are 40-50 years ahead of US in disaster immigration politics. Compared to most ultra-liberal leaders in Europe, Trump is full of wisdom

I read 4-5 chapters. The beginning and the end and some chapters in the middle. I asked for a refund and was granted one of this sad tabloid. Thank you Amazon. Wolff just won a lottery ticket and is now running around ruining his life and reputation.

RobRock on January 6, 2018
Not one footnote, outlandish claims, no background material

Michael Wolff pushes all the right buttons. "Watergate" is even in the very first sentence of the book (author's note). The events described are based on "conversations that took place over a period of 18 months with the president, with most members of his senior staff -- some of whom talked to talked to me dozens of times." ***dozens of times*** The book starts out explaining how Trump had no idea what he was doing during the campaign, and get this... he was a puppet of Roger Ailes, Breitbart, Fox News and Bannon. (Are those not the right buttons to push) Trump never intended to win. He ran in order to get broadcast cred so he could start his own cable network. -- -- This is a novel with real names.

There are no footnotes and conversations held when Wolff was NOT present are amazingly detailed. Conversations in which the chatting parties engaged, could not talk enough about how big a louse and scumbag Trump is. This piece of fiction validates everything Trump-haters have already claimed, with loads of bonus dirt. He's delusional, phony, and is even a crook. As the author claims, real estate is a good front for money laundering. The extraordinarily outlandish claims continue, Trump was the leaker of Melania's nudes early in her career. "...a shoot that Melania had done early in her modeling career -- - a leak that everybody other than Melania assumed could be traced back to Trump himself." (No footnotes).

Before they wedded, Melania asked Trump if that's the way things are going to be, because she wouldn't be able to take it. Trump told her to sue him and he subsequently set up lawyers for her to see. The pages are full of this type soap opera material. -- - The locker room talk tapes are apparently supposed to give us the impression Trump reveals this sort of stuff all the time, and to a guy like Michael Wolff. -- -- Those who want to hate Trump will love it. It really is a sign of the times. Someone can make as many groundless and preposterous claims they want, and there is a large audience who will eat up every syllable. I have read the first two chapters and it's hard to read because it's so surreal. I will attempt to plod on.

Supplement 2: A quote from Wolff's article
Michael Wolff at Democratic Convention: Case for Hillary as Only Sane Candidate

Indeed, the underlying theme last night was a shift away from selfless and caring Hillary - a message from the previous sessions targeted to Democrats and, specially, women Democrats - to seeing her more broadly as the contrast gainer. It was a clearer pitch to the independent and undecided and, thinking big, to perhaps even a meaningful part of the Republican Party. It was, in a sense, a formal lowering of the bar. Hillary was at least sane.

And yet, taking Trump on his face, as a set of literal political positions and attitudes, preposterous as they may be, had over the course of a year not worked very well. John Hutson, a former Judge Advocate General of the Navy, gave an angry rejoinder last night to Trump's casual attitude about international rules and laws, and his general besmirching of the military.

"You're not fit to polish John McCain's boots," said Admiral Hutson, unmindful that Trump's famous dismissal of McCain for having been taken prisoner - one of the early disqualifiers of Trump as a credible candidate in the eyes of all reasonable people - had no effect on his standing at all. Except perhaps to buoy it.


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Feb 18, 2018] Michael Wolff, Class Rule, and the Madness of King Don by Paul Street

Notable quotes:
"... Power elite theorists and chroniclers (I am one) attuned to the dominance of business and military chieftains in the making of U.S. policy can also find grist for their mills in Fire and Fury ..."
"... The Wall Street masters are represented by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, top economic advisor Gary Cohn, and National Security Council appointee Dina Powell, Goldman Sachs veterans all, along with Kushner (an acolyte of the blood-soaked globalist Henry Kissinger, curiously enough) and Ivanka. ..."
"... missed the key point ..."
"... The problem with Donald Trump is not that he is imbecilic and inept – it is that he has surrendered total power to the oligarchic and military elites. They get what they want. They do what they want Trump, who has no inclination or ability to govern, has handed the machinery of government over to the bankers, corporate executives, right-wing think tanks, intelligence chiefs and generals. ..."
"... They are eradicating the few regulations and laws that inhibited a naked kleptocracy. They are dynamiting the institutions, including the State Department, that served interests other than corporate profit and are stacking the courts with right-wing, corporate-controlled ideologues. Trump provides the daily entertainment; the elites handle the business of looting, exploiting and destroying. ..."
"... He is useful to those who hold real power in the corporate state, however much they would like to domesticate him. ..."
"... Trump's bizarre ramblings and behavior serve a useful purpose. They are a colorful diversion from the razing of democratic institutions ..."
"... As cable news networks feed us stories of his trysts with a porn actress and outlandish tweets, the real work of the elites is being carried out largely away from public view. ..."
"... the Pentagon, given carte blanche, is engaged in an orgy of militarism with a trillion-dollar-a-year budget and about 800 military bases in scores of countries around the world. ..."
"... The "liberal" corporate media – itself a key part of the nation's business and military establishment – has focused especially on the president's weird behavior and transgressions, and on the oversold and deeply conservative, diversionary, and imperialist Russiagate narrative. Lost in all this are the far more important problems that Hedges mentions: the accelerated plundering and spoliation of the common good, including above all livable ecology, the ramped-up plutocratic ruination of what's left of democracy and popular sovereignty by the nation's unelected and interrelated dictatorships of wealth and money. ..."
Feb 18, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

Wealth and Power Elite Games

Power elite theorists and chroniclers (I am one) attuned to the dominance of business and military chieftains in the making of U.S. policy can also find grist for their mills in Fire and Fury . Somewhat inadvertently, the book portrays a first-year White House torn between establishment globalist Wall Street centrists on one hand and revanchist, hard-right renegade capitalists like the hedge-fund billionaire Robert Mercer and the casino magnate Sheldon Adelson on the other hand.

The Wall Street masters are represented by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, top economic advisor Gary Cohn, and National Security Council appointee Dina Powell, Goldman Sachs veterans all, along with Kushner (an acolyte of the blood-soaked globalist Henry Kissinger, curiously enough) and Ivanka. The renegade capitalists provided backing for the China-hating Bannon and his team of proto-fascistic staffers including Stephen Miller, a 32-year old PR hack who became Trump's "political strategist" after Bannon engineered his own removal (by leaking to the crusty liberal commentator and former Obama-worshipper Bob Kuttner) in August.

Trump is himself a billionaire. By Wolff's account, he spends hours each day seeking advice from, and complaining to, a small "club" of other right-wing moguls. The president holds the opinions of the super-rich in special high regard, consistent with his belief that the possession of a fortune marks a man as "really smart."

"And Yet OMG!!!"

Ultimately, though, the main thing portrayed in Fire and Fury is an off-the-rails Crazy Train administration driven by the image-, media,- and attention-addicted narcissism and relentless prideful stupidity of a man-child president whose sole allegiance is to himself and to the defeat of those who fail to understand how great he is. Wolff sounds concerned about the constant media spectacle that is the Insane Trump Clown Show:

contravening all cultural and media logic, Donald Trump produced on a daily basis and astonishing, can't-stop-following it narrative. And this was not because he was changing or upsetting the fundamentals of American life. In six months as president, failing to master almost any aspect of the bureaucratic process, he had, beyond placing his nominee on the Supreme Court, accomplished, practically speaking, nothing. And yet OMG!!! . There almost was no other story in America- and in much of the world. That was the radical and transformational nature of the Trump presidency: it held everybody's attention (251).

Ironically enough, however, Fire and Fury itself quickly became a major chapter in the seemingly interminable Trump freak-show.

"A Colorful Diversion": Behind the Clown Show

Looking back on the period covered in Fire and Fury (mainly November 2016-October 2017) now seven weeks after Trump and the Republican Congress pleased his billionaire friends by passing an arch-regressive Christmas-season tax cut for the wealthy corporate and financial Few in a country where the top tenth of the upper 1 Percent already possessed as much net worth as the bottom 90 percent, it strikes me that Wolff missed the key point about the Trump circus. As the left commentator Chris Hedges recently argued on Truthdig ::

The problem with Donald Trump is not that he is imbecilic and inept – it is that he has surrendered total power to the oligarchic and military elites. They get what they want. They do what they want Trump, who has no inclination or ability to govern, has handed the machinery of government over to the bankers, corporate executives, right-wing think tanks, intelligence chiefs and generals.

They are eradicating the few regulations and laws that inhibited a naked kleptocracy. They are dynamiting the institutions, including the State Department, that served interests other than corporate profit and are stacking the courts with right-wing, corporate-controlled ideologues. Trump provides the daily entertainment; the elites handle the business of looting, exploiting and destroying.

He is useful to those who hold real power in the corporate state, however much they would like to domesticate him.

Trump's bizarre ramblings and behavior serve a useful purpose. They are a colorful diversion from the razing of democratic institutions.

As cable news networks feed us stories of his trysts with a porn actress and outlandish tweets, the real work of the elites is being carried out largely away from public view.

The courts are stacked with Federalist Society judges, the fossil fuel industry is plundering public lands and the coastlines and ripping up regulations that protected us from its poisons, and the Pentagon, given carte blanche, is engaged in an orgy of militarism with a trillion-dollar-a-year budget and about 800 military bases in scores of countries around the world.

Yes, the "OMG Trump!" media (including Wolff's publisher) has been consumed with its fixation on the orange-tinted beast in the White House. But Wolff fails to note the ideological selectivity in its obsession.

The "liberal" corporate media – itself a key part of the nation's business and military establishment – has focused especially on the president's weird behavior and transgressions, and on the oversold and deeply conservative, diversionary, and imperialist Russiagate narrative. Lost in all this are the far more important problems that Hedges mentions: the accelerated plundering and spoliation of the common good, including above all livable ecology, the ramped-up plutocratic ruination of what's left of democracy and popular sovereignty by the nation's unelected and interrelated dictatorships of wealth and money.

(Speaking of environmental ruin, Wolff omits Trump's supremely flawed, dysfunctional, and insultingly racist response to the climate change-driven hurricanes that ravaged Texas, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Island and Florida in August of 2017. How those epic storms and Trump's predictably botched reaction to them escaped attention in Fire and Fury is a bit of a mystery.)

[Feb 16, 2018] Mueller does have the leverage to twist Bannon to his will.

Feb 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Mzhen Fri, 02/16/2018 - 14:26 Permalink

Breitbart is a Zionist mouthpiece. Steve Bannon is a mouth. Robert and Rebekah Mercer (not Jewish) decided to shift their allegiance and money from Cruz to Trump. They met with Jared and Ivanka to discuss. The Mercers threw Bannon into the deal. Once Bannon had infiltrated the campaign, and later the WH, maybe the Zionists were still pulling his strings. Bannon was also colluding with Chinese nationals, so Mueller does have the leverage to twist Bannon to his will.

[Feb 05, 2018] CONFIRMED Mueller admits no collusion at Trump Tower meeting

Feb 05, 2018 | theduran.com

As is now becoming the way as the Russiagate scandal unravels, confirmation of the collapse of one of its central pillars – the claim of proof of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign which some have claimed to see in the meeting in Trump Tower in June 2016 between the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and Donald Trump Junior – has slipped out in the most covert way possible.

Nonetheless the confirmation is there and originates in what all the indications suggest is a deliberate leak either from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team or from the White House's legal team.

The confirmation is provided in an NBC News article which reads as follows

Two sources familiar with the questions Mueller's team have been asking about the meeting say the investigators are most interested in why the president crafted a misleading statement about the meeting much later, in July 2017, after a New York Times report about it. The sources say Mueller's office is trying to confirm every detail it can about the meeting.

Mueller's team is less interested in the meeting as a direct example of collusion, the sources said, although Trump Jr. accepted the meeting after being told he would receive incriminating information about Hillary Clinton as part of the Russian government effort to help his father.

No evidence has emerged publicly to contradict Veselnitskaya's account that she wanted to press a case about U.S. Magnitsky Act sanctions, and that she did not possess significant derogatory information about Clinton, despite the email from a music promoter to Trump Jr. promising incriminating details about the Democrat.

Moreover, no evidence has emerged publicly that connects the Russians in the meeting with the Russian intelligence effort to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

The issue of Donald Trump's supposedly misleading statement about the meeting is a red herring since it can have no possible connection to the collusion allegations which Mueller's inquiry is supposed to be investigating.

Even assuming that Trump's statement was misleading – which some might question – it would hardly be the first case of a US President making a misleading statement, and it is impossible to see how it can possibly give rise to a law enforcement issue for Mueller to investigate.

Of much more importance is the confirmation that Mueller's team now acknowledge that there is no evidence to connect Veselnitskaya to Russian intelligence and that her and Donald Trump Junior's accounts of their meeting must be accepted as true since there is no evidence to contradict them.

In truth this was obvious from the start as I pointed out in an article I wrote on 12th July 2017, written immediately after details of the meeting came to light

The meeting with Veselnitskaya duly took place on 9th June 2016. It turned out that she had no information about Hillary Clinton to offer and was not a "Russian government attorney". Instead she wanted to discuss the Magnitsky Act, upon which a baffled Donald Trump Junior politely showed her the door.

That is the unanimous account of all the participants of the meeting including Donald Trump Junior and Veselnitskaya herself. All agree that the meeting lasted no more than 20 minutes.

There is no evidence that contradicts their account and the absence of any follow-up to the meeting essentially corroborates their account.

It seems that Donald Trump Junior and Veselnitskaya have never met since and have had no further contact with each other.

There is no evidence here of any crime or wrongdoing being committed or – contrary to what many are saying – of any intention to commit one.

Russiagate would not however be Russiagate if this important news that Mueller and his team have come to the same conclusion was not smuggled out in an NBC News article whose title gives the impression that it is about the totally meaningless fact that Veselnitskaya after leaving the meeting with Donald Trump Junior had a brief encounter in the lift of Trump Tower with a blonde woman who might – or might not – have been Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka.

To such ridiculous lengths to conceal embarrassing truths about Russiagate is the media in the US increasingly reduced to.

Though the Veselnitskaya-Trump Junior meeting is now being finally acknowledged to be the red herring it always was, there is one further point about it to make.

In my 12th July 2017 article I speculated that the meeting might have been a sting intended to corroborate the collusion allegations between the Trump campaign and Russia which were to achieve written form in the first 20th June 2016 entry of the Trump Dossier, written a few weeks after the Veselnitskaya-Trump Junior took place.

What led others subsequently to speculate along the same lines was that there appeared to be a connection between Veselnitskaya and Fusion GPS, the political consultancy firm which commissioned the Trump Dossier on behalf of the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Glenn Simpson's testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee should put all this speculation to rest.

It turns out that Veselnitskaya was not working for Fusion GPS but rather Fusion GPS was working for her, in connection with her work on the Magnitsky case.

That in itself makes it inherently unlikely that she was acting as a catspaw for Fusion GPS when she met Donald Trump Junior.

More to the point, Glenn Simpson's comments about Veselnitskaya are anything but complimentary. He basically describes her – rather convincingly – as a self-important busybody and a minor league player, and expresses incredulity at the suggestion that she was a Russian intelligence agent who was working for the Kremlin.

Simpson's characterisation of Veselnitskaya in testimony in which he strongly promotes the Russiagate collusion allegations and vouches for the truth of the Trump Dossier makes it all but inconceivable Veselnitskaya was involved in a sting to set Trump Junior up.

Despite taking place at a time when the Trump-Russia collusion allegations were about to take off, Veselnitskaya's meeting with Trump Junior must instead be seen as one of those annoying coincidences which lawyers, journalists, policemen and the public automatically distrust, but which happen in real life.

[Feb 05, 2018] It's the Michael Wolff self-destruction tour by Erik Wemple

Notable quotes:
"... Toward the end of the book is a passage laced with Wolffian innuendo regarding Trump's relationship with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley. Washington Post book critic Carlos Lozada spotted it right away ..."
"... Getting back to the underlying stuff, Brzezinski wasn't having it. "I'm gonna go as far as to say that you might be having a fun time playing a little game dancing around this, but you're slurring a woman, it's disgraceful," Brzezinski said. ..."
"... "Read me the language," importuned Wolff. "Are you kidding me?" asked Brzezinski, apparently inferring something less than good faith from Wolff's bluster. She declared the interview over. ..."
Feb 01, 2018 | www.trendli.net

Here's the full chronology:

Jan. 5: "Fire and Fury" is released ahead of schedule on account of "unprecedented demand" fueled by the release of book excerpts and general astonishment that President Trump is so unfit for the presidency. Toward the end of the book is a passage laced with Wolffian innuendo regarding Trump's relationship with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley. Washington Post book critic Carlos Lozada spotted it right away :

Carlos Lozada @CarlosLozadaWP

.@MichaelWolffNYC on Trump and Nikki Haley: "She had become a particular focus of Trump's attention, and he of hers....The president had been spending a notable amount of private time with Haley on Air Force One, and was seen to be grooming her for a national political future."

11:01 AM-Jan 5, 2018

There were other passages hinting at Trump-Haley closeness, including an affirmation that Haley, "with requisite submission, could be [Trump's] heir apparent."

Jan. 19: In an appearance on HBO's "Real Time," Wolff banters with host Bill Maher about a current presidential extramarital affair. Saying he's "absolutely sure" that such activity is occurring, Wolff concedes that he lacks the "blue dress" to prove it for the book. Even so, he tells the audience that a passage toward the end of the book includes the goods. "You'll know it. Now that I've told you, when you hit that paragraph, you're going to say 'Bingo,'" says Wolff.

Jan. 26: Politico interviews Haley, who denies any affair and calls the rumors that resulted from Wolff's book and the Maher appearance "disgusting."

Jan. 31: Interviewers from theSkimm press Wolff on Haley's being "distraught" over the rumors that Wolff so artfully propagated. "I would say she seems to have embraced it," argues Wolff, who goes on to say, "The book doesn't accuse her, I didn't accuse her. So, in effect, some other reporter accused her."

Feb. 1: On "Morning Joe," Wolff faces more grilling on the topic. "I found it puzzling that she would deny something she was not accused of," says Wolff. Co-host Mika Brzezinski asks him, "Do you regret inferring anything about Nikki Haley?" Wolff refrains from correcting the infer-imply problem and goes with the misuse: "I didn't infer anything about Nikki Haley. What I inferred was that the president is -- that many of the people around the president believe he is still involved with various women."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/DZbYAdOdqEw?feature=oembed

The God of Infer-Imply Propriety thereupon folded over in pain.

Getting back to the underlying stuff, Brzezinski wasn't having it. "I'm gonna go as far as to say that you might be having a fun time playing a little game dancing around this, but you're slurring a woman, it's disgraceful," Brzezinski said. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg asked Wolff if he was "suggesting that the language is not ambiguous in any way in the things that you've said and the way you've stated it?"

"Read me the language," importuned Wolff. "Are you kidding me?" asked Brzezinski, apparently inferring something less than good faith from Wolff's bluster. She declared the interview over.

... ... ...

Erik Wemple writes the Erik Wemple blog, where he reports and opines on media organizations of all sorts. Follow @ErikWemple

[Feb 01, 2018] Michael Wolff Kicked Off Morning Joe By Mika Brzezinski Mid-Interview

Notable quotes:
"... On Thurdsay morning, in a rare example of the antipathy many journalists feels toward "Fire and Fire" author Michael Wolff, MSNBC co-host Mika Brzezinski abruptly cut off her interview with Wolff on Morning Joe, after the author of the scandalous, if largely fictional, "tell all" book of the Trump presidency, said he never suggested that U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley had an affair with President Donald Trump. ..."
"... To that Brzezinski replied, " You might be having a fun time playing a little game dancing around this, but you're slurring a woman. It's disgraceful." ..."
"... Melania feelings dont seem to worry her ..."
"... "Hey...you cannot lie on our show...we're the only ones allowed to do that".. ..."
Feb 01, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

The anti-Trump "resistance" appears to be turning on itself.

On Thurdsay morning, in a rare example of the antipathy many journalists feels toward "Fire and Fire" author Michael Wolff, MSNBC co-host Mika Brzezinski abruptly cut off her interview with Wolff on Morning Joe, after the author of the scandalous, if largely fictional, "tell all" book of the Trump presidency, said he never suggested that U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley had an affair with President Donald Trump.

To that Brzezinski replied, " You might be having a fun time playing a little game dancing around this, but you're slurring a woman. It's disgraceful."

"We're done" the Morning Joe then cut off the interview after asking, with a straight face, " are you kidding? you're on the set of Morning Joe, we don't BS here."

The exchange comes after Wolff recently appeared on Real Time With Bill Maher, where he said he was "absolutely sure" the president was having an affair with someone, and alluded to who that person was in one paragraph of his White House tell-all -- that person being Haley, according to the Daily Beast . In the following days, Haley - a former South Carolina governor - has vehemently denied any relationship with Trump.

Minutes after Wolff was kicked off, he tweeted: " My bad, the President is right about Mika "...


Cognitive Dissonance Feb 1, 2018 10:18 AM Permalink

Righteous indignation in all its glory. First you destroy the others, then you destroy your own, then you destroy yourself. It is the inevitable conclusion to the self reinforcing insanity of righteous indignation.

Badsamm -> Cognitive Dissonance Feb 1, 2018 10:21 AM Permalink

Melania feelings dont seem to worry her

eclectic syncretist -> DownWithYogaPants Feb 1, 2018 11:17 AM Permalink

"We don't BS here" ROFLMFAO!

Jerry Springer is Amateur hour compared to these assclowns.

j0nx -> Nameshavebeenc Feb 1, 2018 10:31 AM Permalink

Mika and Joe never had terrible things to say about Trump until he didn't let them into his little party and tweeted about her bloody post-surgery face. It's such a personal vendetta with them at this point that it isn't even legitimate news TV anymore. Has nothing to do with him or his policies. They are just pissed that he dissed them. They have lost all relevance. Sad.

CheapBastard -> j0nx Feb 1, 2018 10:40 AM Permalink

One slime bag bashing another slime bag. Glorious! Winning!

northern vigor -> Nameshavebeenc Feb 1, 2018 10:39 AM Permalink

"Hey...you cannot lie on our show...we're the only ones allowed to do that"..

newmacroman -> Nameshavebeenc Feb 1, 2018 10:43 AM Permalink

ZBigly embarrassing

[Jan 28, 2018] Glowing portrait in Bannon in November 2016 Wolff's Hollywood reporter article

Actually Wolff failed to describe how Bannon's economic nationalism is different from "national socialism without ethnic minorities elimination".
Notable quotes:
"... The Democratic Party betrayed its workingman roots, just as Hillary Clinton betrayed the longtime Clinton connection -- Bill Clinton's connection -- to the workingman. ..."
"... In sum, the workingman was betrayed by the establishment, or what he dismisses as the "donor class." ..."
"... To say that he sees this donor class -- which in his telling is also "ascendant America," e.g. the elites, as well as "the metrosexual bubble" that encompasses cosmopolitan sensibilities to be found as far and wide as Shanghai, London's Chelsea, Hollywood and the Upper West Side -- as a world apart, is an understatement. ..."
"... In his view, there's hardly a connection between this world and its opposite -- fly-over America, left-behind America, downwardly mobile America -- hardly a common language. ..."
"... And this, in the Bannon view, is all part of the profound misunderstanding that led liberals to believe that Donald Trump's mouth would doom him, instead of elect him. ..."
Nov 11, 2016 | www.hollywoodreporter.com

Originally from: Steve Bannon Trump Tower Interview Trump's Strategist Plots New Political Movement Hollywood Reporter

The focus on Bannon, if not necessarily the description, is right. He's the man with the idea. If Trumpism is to represent something intellectually and historically coherent, it's Bannon's job to make it so. In this, he could not be a less reassuring or more confusing figure for liberals -- fiercely intelligent and yet reflexively drawn to the inverse of every liberal assumption and shibboleth. A working class kid, he enlists in the navy after high school, gets a degree from Virginia Tech, then Georgetown, then Harvard Business School. Then it's Goldman Sachs, then he's a dealmaker and entrepreneur in Hollywood -- where, in an unlikely and very lucky deal match-up, he gets a lucrative piece of Seinfeld royalties, ensuring his own small fortune -- then into the otherworld of the vast right-wing conspiracy and conservative media. (He partners with David Bossie, a congressional investigator of President Clinton, who later spearheaded the Citizens United lawsuit that effectively removed the cap on campaign spending, and who now, as the deputy campaign manager, is in the office next to Bannon's.) And then to the Breitbart News Network, which with digital acumen and a mind-meld with the anger and the passion of the new alt-right (a liberal designation Bannon derides) he pushes to the inner circle of conservative media from Breitbart's base on the Westside of liberal Los Angeles.

What he seems to have carried from a boyhood in a blue-collar, union and Democratic family in Norfolk, Va., and through his tour of the American establishment, is an unreconstructed sense of class awareness, or bitterness -- or betrayal. The Democratic Party betrayed its workingman roots, just as Hillary Clinton betrayed the longtime Clinton connection -- Bill Clinton's connection -- to the workingman. "The Clinton strength," he says, "was to play to people without a college education. High school people. That's how you win elections." And, likewise, the Republican party would come to betray its workingman constituency forged under Reagan. In sum, the workingman was betrayed by the establishment, or what he dismisses as the "donor class."

To say that he sees this donor class -- which in his telling is also "ascendant America," e.g. the elites, as well as "the metrosexual bubble" that encompasses cosmopolitan sensibilities to be found as far and wide as Shanghai, London's Chelsea, Hollywood and the Upper West Side -- as a world apart, is an understatement.

In his view, there's hardly a connection between this world and its opposite -- fly-over America, left-behind America, downwardly mobile America -- hardly a common language. This is partly why he regards the liberal characterization of himself as socially vile, as the politically incorrect devil incarnate, as laughable -- and why he is stoutly unapologetic. They -- liberals and media -- don't understand what he is saying, or why, or to whom. Breitbart, with its casual provocations -- lists of its varied incitements (among them: the conservative writer David Horowitz referred to conservative pundit Brill Kristol as a "renegade Jew," and the site delighting in headlines the likes of "Trannies 49Xs Higher HIV Rate" and "Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy") were in hot exchange after the election among appalled Democrats -- is as opaque to the liberal-donor-globalist class as Lena Dunham might be to the out-of-work workingman class. And this, in the Bannon view, is all part of the profound misunderstanding that led liberals to believe that Donald Trump's mouth would doom him, instead of elect him.

Bannon, arguably, is one of the people most at the battle line of the great American divide -- and one of the people to have most clearly seen it.

He absolutely -- mockingly -- rejects the idea that this is a racial line. "I'm not a white nationalist, I'm a nationalist. I'm an economic nationalist," he tells me. "The globalists gutted the American working class and created a middle class in Asia. The issue now is about Americans looking to not get f -- ed over. If we deliver" -- by "we" he means the Trump White House -- "we'll get 60 percent of the white vote, and 40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote and we'll govern for 50 years. That's what the Democrats missed. They were talking to these people with companies with a $9 billion market cap employing nine people. It's not reality. They lost sight of what the world is about."

[Jan 28, 2018] General Flynn story in Wolff book: The Wolff allegations in Trump's Collusion with Israel, not Russia, and Covering It Up

Notable quotes:
"... Acting on orders from Jared Kushner, Trump's senior advisor and son-in-law, Flynn contacted Kislyak to ask if Russia would delay or veto a UN Security Council vote criticizing Israeli settlements. ..."
"... Flynn also reached out to Kislyak on December 29, 2016, the day after former President Barack Obama signed an executive order imposing sanctions against Russia as punishment for alleged Russian "meddling" in the 2016 US presidential elections. According to the indictment, Flynn asked Russia to "refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against Russia." ..."
Jan 28, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

According to the excerpt published Thursday, Bannon informed Ailes that President Donald Trump, Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu, and their billionaire benefactor Sheldon Adelson are in agreement with moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. Adelson is an American casino mogul who donated $25 million to the Trump campaign and funds Israel's most popular daily newspaper, Israel Today, which is widely understood to be pro-Netanyahu.

The exchange between Bannon and Ailes adds further confirmation to the Trump administration's collusion with Israel, which was revealed in special prosecutor Robert Mueller's indictment of General Michael Flynn. He lied to FBI agents about his conversations with Sergey Kislyak, then-Russian Ambassador to the United States, in December 2016, when Trump was president-elect. Acting on orders from Jared Kushner, Trump's senior advisor and son-in-law, Flynn contacted Kislyak to ask if Russia would delay or veto a UN Security Council vote criticizing Israeli settlements.

Flynn also reached out to Kislyak on December 29, 2016, the day after former President Barack Obama signed an executive order imposing sanctions against Russia as punishment for alleged Russian "meddling" in the 2016 US presidential elections. According to the indictment, Flynn asked Russia to "refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against Russia."

... ... ...

The chain of command was clear: Donald Trump to Jared Kushner to General Michael Flynn. All of the brouhaha about collusion with Russia that led to the firing of Flynn was merely a smokescreen to cover up the Trump administration's collusion with Israel. And Flynn was the fall guy. Israel's highest-ranking foreign agent (Kushner) continues to guide Trump's Zionist foreign policy without the slightest impediment.

Israel is America's sacred cow; it is the third rail of politics. No one dares to criticize it, much less expose its manifold crimes. Israel is also America's Trojan Horse. Virtually the entire country (with America's evangelical Christian pastors and churches leading the way) is scared silly to say anything critical of Israel. Fortunately, the hackneyed moniker "anti-Semitic" is fast losing its sting, as more and more people are awakening to the rank evil and criminality committed by the Zionist state -- not the least of which are a plethora of Jewish people, including rabbis.

See also 'He's Totally Onboard': Wolff Book Describes Trump Admin's Collusion With Israel

[Jan 25, 2018] Trump, in the coming Trump-Mueller interview, doesn't know what Mueller may already know from his interviews with others so if he spins and lies he's toast

Notable quotes:
"... I do not think Mueller can get Trump on collusion with Russia ..specifically because there was no collusion with the Kremlin/official Government. Instead there were a lot of contacts with individual Russians seeking to get a deal on something to boost their own Russian creds with Putin or for their own private financial gain. ..."
"... Mueller's investigation has, according to this article, accidentally turned up something that should put Mueller in prison: https://www.sott.net/article/375184-Muellers-investigation-accidentally-exposes-FBI-cover-up-of-Saudi-role-in-9-11 ..."
Jan 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro , Next New Comment January 25, 2018 at 3:08 am GMT

Back to the matter at hand

I do not think Mueller can get Trump on collusion with Russia ..specifically because there was no collusion with the Kremlin/official Government.
Instead there were a lot of contacts with individual Russians seeking to get a deal on something to boost their own Russian creds with Putin or for their own private financial gain.
Also outreach by Kushner to Russian money men and bankers for his 1 billion in debt.

Mueller has a better chance of getting Trump on obstruction of justice and maybe lying to the FBI because Trump, in the coming trump- Mueller interview, doesn't know what Mueller may already know from his interviews with others so if he spins and lies he's toast.

I don't care about Trump being impeached as much as I care about removing Kushner. Kushner is dirtier than pig shit and using his position to trade influence for money for the Kushners in every foreign contact he makes.

Trumps relationship with Kushner is beyond weird, really, really weird .something ties them together and I would bet money that's its being party to money laundering thru their real estate deals and loans. Trump cant be the genius he claims to be, and claims Jared is. and they not know all the money flowing to them from Russian oligarchs and other known money movers isn't dirty as hell.

Twodees Partain , Next New Comment January 25, 2018 at 3:52 am GMT
@renfro

Mueller's investigation has, according to this article, accidentally turned up something that should put Mueller in prison: https://www.sott.net/article/375184-Muellers-investigation-accidentally-exposes-FBI-cover-up-of-Saudi-role-in-9-11

If Trump was the stable genius he says he is, he would have seen to it that Kushner would never have married his daughter. If he is even a little smart, he would give Kushner the boot now, though it's probably too late to avoid the consequences of his appointment of Kushner.

Dimwit that I am, my conclusion is that Trump isn't a genius after all.

Cloak And Dagger , Next New Comment January 25, 2018 at 4:33 am GMT
@Twodees Partain

Interesting link.

As The Free Thought Project has reported, Trump is also complicit in covering for the Saudis, as he went from calling for holding Saudi Arabia accountable for its involvement in 9/11, to ignoring the idea that the country could have had any involvement at all.

After months on the campaign trail, in which he pledged that if he was elected, Americans would "find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center," Trump made Saudi Arabia the first foreign nation he visited as president of the U.S.

Trump's visit with Saudi King Salman occurred on May 20 – just four days after Judge Altonaga ruled that the FBI should face a Freedom of Information trial in an attempt to pursue transparency surrounding the funding of the 9/11 attacks.

During the visit, Trump announced plans for a $110 BILLION weapons deal with Saudi Arabia, which adds a new level of context that should be considered when looking at why Altonaga then reversed her decision on June 29.

That is an unexpected twist!

[Jan 25, 2018] The Bubble Michael Wolff s book a gift to Trump, liberals say

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The New Republic's Alex Shephard said Wolff's work has always had a loose connection with the truth and that he has already "has been caught making very suspicious claims" in Fire and Fury. ..."
"... Wolff's work relies on gossip to tell us what we already know about the administration and in the process Wolff's apparent willingness to "say anything, whether or not it's strictly true ... only bolsters the Trump administration's case that the fake news media is out to get him," Shephard said. ..."
"... Wolff's recklessness fuels the Trump administration's critique of journalists and the media. It suggests that journalists really are out to get the president -- after all, in Fire and Fury, Wolff suggests that journalists will print anything, so long as it casts Trump in a bad light. ..."
Jan 25, 2018 | www.ksdk.com

From the left: Wolff's book is 'a gift to Donald Trump'

The New Republic's Alex Shephard said Wolff's work has always had a loose connection with the truth and that he has already "has been caught making very suspicious claims" in Fire and Fury.

Wolff's work relies on gossip to tell us what we already know about the administration and in the process Wolff's apparent willingness to "say anything, whether or not it's strictly true ... only bolsters the Trump administration's case that the fake news media is out to get him," Shephard said.

Wolff's recklessness fuels the Trump administration's critique of journalists and the media. It suggests that journalists really are out to get the president -- after all, in Fire and Fury, Wolff suggests that journalists will print anything, so long as it casts Trump in a bad light.

The rewards are clear: His cavalier reporting has led to TV bookings, a #1 Amazon bestseller, and insane traffic for any of the outlets that agreed to publish his work.

[Jan 24, 2018] Wolff book: Hope Hicks is his daughter and Ivanka his wife

This sleazy Wolff just can't stop...
This "Trump chicks theme" was definitely underutilized in fire and Fury" Wolff later tried to revive and capitalize of it as the tool to support the declining book sales with "Triumph mistress" rumor.
Notable quotes:
"... Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, who Trump blames for the bulk of the book, as he was one of Wolff's most prominent sources, reportedly told people that 'The daughter ... will bring down the father.' ..."
"... Me thinks Mr. Wolff has got bats in the belfry. ..."
"... ''I have included that which I believe to be true'' - a quote from Wolff himself. Also, The Author's Note to Wolff's book states the quotes in it are all "recreations". ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | dailymail.co.uk

Hope Hicks is his real daughter and Ivanka is his real WIFE: How Trump can't say no to his family and is totally reliant on his communications director

  • White House staff allegedly refers to the president's daughter Ivanka as his 'real wife,' as Communications Director Hope Hicks has been calls his 'real daughter'
  • That's because Melania Trump keeps a low profile, while Hicks and Ivanka Trump continue to play outsized roles in the West Wing, a new book reported
  • As President Trump has seen a string of resignations through his first year in office, Hicks has become his 'most powerful White House advisor'
  • The forthcoming book, 'Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House' also suggests that the president can't say no to his kids
  • That's how Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner were able to become top White House aides, against the advice of political veterans

With Melania Trump often keeping a low profile, White House staffers refer to first daughter Ivanka Trump as her father's 'real wife' and Communications Director Hope Hicks as the president's 'real daughter,' a new book alleged.

Author Michael Wolff, who wrote the forthcoming 'Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House' revealed these designations in the context of who is now closest to Trump, with many high-level aides leaving within the president's first year.

That distinction goes to Hicks, the president's 29-year-old former campaign press secretary who Wolff said is now Trump's 'most powerful White House advisor.'

'Hicks' primary function was to tend to the Trump ego, to reassure him, to protect him, to buffer him, to soothe him,' Wolff wrote in a story about the writing of his book, published Thursday by the Hollywood Reporter.

'It was Hicks who, attentive to his lapses and repetitions, urged him to forgo an interview that was set to open the 60 Minutes fall season,' the author continued. 'Instead, the interview went to Fox News' Sean Hannity who, White House insiders happily explained, was willing to supply the questions beforehand.'

In a preview of the book published Thursday in the Hollywood Reporter, Wolff also explained how Trump couldn't say no to his kids, casting this characteristic as 'foolishness.'

'It's a littleee, littleee complicated,' the president reportedly told his first Chief of Staff Reince Priebus when explaining why he wanted to give Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner official White House jobs.

They're now serving as senior advisers in the West Wing. However, Wolff did not describe their tenure as a happy one. 'By July, Jared and Ivanka, who had, in less than six months, traversed from socialite couple to royal family to the most powerful people in the world, were now engaged in a desperate dance to save themselves, which mostly involved blaming Trump himself,' Wolff wrote Thursday in the Hollywood Reporter.

'It was all his idea to fire Comey!' the couple nicknamed 'Javanka' reportedly said, referring to Trump's ouster of the former FBI director that prompted the appointment of a special counsel.

Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, who Trump blames for the bulk of the book, as he was one of Wolff's most prominent sources, reportedly told people that 'The daughter ... will bring down the father.'

Ashley Parker is a White House reporter for The Washington Post. She joined The Post in 2017, after 11 years at The New York Times, where she covered the 2012 and 2016 presidential campaigns and Congress, among other things.  Follow @ashleyrparker

EmmaJanesMommy , Jacksonville, United States, 2 weeks ago

Me thinks Mr. Wolff has got bats in the belfry.

Sen Dog, Everywhere, United Kingdom, 2 weeks ago

''I have included that which I believe to be true'' - a quote from Wolff himself. Also, The Author's Note to Wolff's book states the quotes in it are all "recreations". Nice try liberals .

[Jan 23, 2018] Hope Hicks Famous For 'Hard-To-Maneuver-In Short Skirts,' According To 'Fire And Fury' Author by Paula Mooney

This "Trump chicks theme" was definitely underutilized in fire and Fury" Wolff later tried to revive and capitalize of it as the tool to support the declining book sales with "Triumph mistress" rumor.
Notable quotes:
"... Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... The Stepford Wives ..."
"... Dallas Observer ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... Morning Joe ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | www.inquisitr.com
Hope Hicks is featured prominently in Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House by Michael Wolff, as proven by book excerpts that have made it to the public, as reported by the Inquisitr . The tome speaks of the 29-year-old Hicks' unlikely rise to become one of President Donald Trump's closest confidantes, even relating Hope's preferred manner of dressing to one that aligns with Trump's favorite look.

"Ten days before Donald Trump's inauguration as the forty-fifth president, a group of young Trump staffers -- the men in regulation Trump suits and ties, the women in the Trump-favored look of high boots, short skirts, and shoulder-length hair -- were watching President Barack Obama give his farewell speech as it streamed on a laptop in the transition offices."

Wolff notes that Hope was a 26-year-old when she was hired onto the Trump campaign as the first official hire. Hailing from Greenwich, Connecticut, Hicks worked as a model prior to getting into the PR business and working for Ivanka Trump's fashion line. After Ivanka captured Hope for her dad's political campaign in 2015, Hicks took the political ride of a lifetime to become the gatekeeper to President Trump.

Michael writes about Hope's family, who worried about Hicks "having been taken captive" into the Trump world, with friends and loved ones joking that Hope would need therapy once her time in the White House was done. Wolff describes Hicks as a young woman who was inexperienced but "famous among campaign reporters for her hard-to-maneuver-in short skirts."

Book: Hope Hicks Famous For 'Hard-To-Maneuever-In' Short Skirts, Rumored Uniform Trump Liked In White House Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

The overall tenor of Hope's portrayal in the best-seller paints her as a "yes woman" who is way too overeager to seek Trump's approval. Fearful of making errors, Hicks was protected by Trump from blame -- an act that baffled others, claimed the author. Hope rose in the ranks to become Trump's most trusted aide, albeit one who was assigned the difficult task of getting Trump positive press in the form of a winning New York Times article.

Hope always backed Trump's point-of-view, according to Fire and Fury , with Hicks often landing firmly on Trump's side when the president complained of the media being out to get him with negativity. Hicks even developed an instinct for the types of articles that would make Trump happy, with Hope presenting those clips to the president, even as others brought Trump bad news.

Wolff even likened Hope to the classic robotic wives seen in The Stepford Wives , calling Hicks "a kind of Stepford factotum, as absolutely dedicated to and tolerant of Mr. Trump as anyone who had ever worked for him." According to the Dallas Observer , even crossing the line and allegedly calling Hicks a " piece of tail " hasn't apparently dampened Hope's enthusiasm in working for Trump, in Wolff's estimation, with Hicks failing to get the coveted and positive New York Times coverage.

"That, in the president's estimation, had yet failed to happen, 'but Hope tries and tries,' the president said. On more than one occasion, after a day -- one of the countless days -- of particularly bad notices, the president greeted her, affectionately, with 'You must be the world's worst PR person.'"

Hicks was also the person who greeted Trump each morning, "quaking" to tell him what the latest Morning Joe episode said about the president in the wake of Trump refusing to watch the show. Either way, Trump's closeness with Hope was something that not only baffled White House insiders but caused concern and alarm.

Michael wrote that "the relationship of the president and Hope Hicks, long tolerated as a quaint bond between the older man and a trustworthy young woman, began to be seen as anomalous and alarming." Existing as a go-between in the middle of President Trump and the media, Hope's complete devotion to Trump and her accommodating nature to him was being blamed as part of the reason for Trump's "unmediated behavior."

"His impulses and thoughts -- unedited, unreviewed, unchallenged -- not only passed through him, but, via Hicks, traveled out into the world without any other White House arbitration. 'The problem isn't Twitter, it's Hope,' observed one communication staffer."

[Jan 22, 2018] Fire and Fury SMU's Hope Hicks' Star Turn in Michael Wolff's Scathing Trump Book by Stephen Young

This "Trump chicks theme" was definitely underutilized in fire and Fury" Wolff later tried to revive and capitalize of it as the tool to support the declining book sales with "Triumph mistress" rumor.
Jan 08, 2018 | www.dallasobserver.com
Hope Hicks can now add "being objectified by the president of the United States" to the narrow list of accomplishments she's racked up as she's gone from SMU English major to White House communications director .

According to Michael Wolff's new presidential tell-all Fire and Fury , Hicks, a former model and Gossip Girl novelization cover star who caught Trump's eye while modeling for Ivanka Trump's clothing line, had on an on-again, off-again relationship with former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. Hicks and Lewandowski's liaison culminated in a Page Six-covered screaming match on 61st Street near Park Avenue and Manhattan in May 2016.

The next month, Trump fired Lewandowski. In a moment of compassion, Hicks, who'd by then become one of Trump's closest, and tight-lipped, confidants, asked Trump how she could help Lewandowski.

"Why?" Trump replied, Wolff writes. "You've already done enough for him. You're the best piece of tail he'll ever have."

Hicks immediately fled the room after Trump's comments, according to Wolff, but it wasn't enough to stop her rise through the campaign's ranks. When Trump dumped former communications director Anthony Scaramucci last summer, Hicks, who did not return a request to comment on the contents of the book, took over as his interim replacement. In November, she took over the job full time.

Trump has disputed both the content of the book and Wolff's claim that he was granted extensive access to the White House in 2017. "I authorized Zero access to White House (actually turned him down many times) for author of phony book! I never spoke to him for book. Full of lies, misrepresentations and sources that don't exist," the president tweeted last week.

Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, called the book a "complete fantasy," during a press conference Thursday, the day before Fire and Fury 's release.

[Jan 22, 2018] US Intelligence Could Well Have Wiretapped Trump by Ron Paul

Notable quotes:
"... Unable to come to terms with losing the 2016 election, Democrats are still pushing the 'Russiagate' probe and blocking the release of a memo describing surveillance abuses by the FBI, former Congressman Ron Paul told RT. ..."
"... I don't think anybody is seeking justice or seeking truth as much as they're seeking to get political advantage ..."
"... "I would be surprised if they haven't spied on him. They spy on everybody else. And they have spied on other members of the executive branch and other presidents." ..."
"... "The other day when they voted to get FISA even more power to spy on American people, the president couldn't be influenced by the fact that they used it against him. And I believe they did, and he believes that." ..."
"... "I've always maintained that government ought to be open and the people ought to have their privacy. But right now the people have no privacy and all our government does is work on secrecy and then it becomes competitive between the two parties, who get stuck with the worst deal by arguing, who's guilty of some crime," the politician explained. ..."
"... Paul also blasted the infamous 'Russian Dossier' compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, and which the Democrats used in their attack on Trump, saying it ..."
"... "has no legitimacy being revealing [in terms of] of Trump being associated with Russia. From the people I know The story has been all made up, essentially." ..."
"... "I'm no fan of Trump. I'm not a supporter of his, but I think that has been carried way overboard. I think the Democrats can't stand the fact that they've lost the election, and they can't stand the fact that Trump is a little bit more independent minded than they like," he said. ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

Unable to come to terms with losing the 2016 election, Democrats are still pushing the 'Russiagate' probe and blocking the release of a memo describing surveillance abuses by the FBI, former Congressman Ron Paul told RT.

A top-secret intelligence memo, believed to reveal political bias at the highest levels of the FBI and the DOJ towards President Trump, may well be as significant as the Republicans say, Ron Paul told RT. But, he added, "there's still to many unknowns, especially, from my view point."

"Trump connection to the Russians, I think, has been way overblown, and I'd like to just get to the bottom of this the new information that's coming out, maybe this will reveal things and help us out," he said.

"Right now it's just a political fight," the former US Congressman said. "I think they're dealing with things a lot less important than the issue they ought to be talking about Right now, I don't think anybody is seeking justice or seeking truth as much as they're seeking to get political advantage."

Trump's claims that he was wiretapped by US intelligence agencies on the orders of the Obama administration may well turn out to be true, Paul said.

"I would be surprised if they haven't spied on him. They spy on everybody else. And they have spied on other members of the executive branch and other presidents."

However, he criticized Trump for doing nothing to prevent the Senate from voting in the expansion of warrantless surveillance of US citizens under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) earlier this week.

"The other day when they voted to get FISA even more power to spy on American people, the president couldn't be influenced by the fact that they used it against him. And I believe they did, and he believes that."

"I've always maintained that government ought to be open and the people ought to have their privacy. But right now the people have no privacy and all our government does is work on secrecy and then it becomes competitive between the two parties, who get stuck with the worst deal by arguing, who's guilty of some crime," the politician explained.

The fact that Democrats on the relevant committees have all voted against releasing the memo "might mean that Trump is probably right; there's probably a lot of stuff there that would exonerate him from any accusation they've been making," he said.

Paul also blasted the infamous 'Russian Dossier' compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, and which the Democrats used in their attack on Trump, saying it

"has no legitimacy being revealing [in terms of] of Trump being associated with Russia. From the people I know The story has been all made up, essentially."

"I'm no fan of Trump. I'm not a supporter of his, but I think that has been carried way overboard. I think the Democrats can't stand the fact that they've lost the election, and they can't stand the fact that Trump is a little bit more independent minded than they like," he said.

This article was originally published by RT -

[Jan 22, 2018] Trump Jr. on FISA memo Media, Democrats working together to deceive Americans

Jan 22, 2018 | www.washingtonexaminer.com

Donald Trump Jr. called for the release of a memo that allegedly contains information about Obama administration surveillance abuses and suggested that Democrats are complicit with the media in misleading the public.

"It's the double standard that the people are fed by the Democrats in complicity with the media, that's why neither have any trust from the American people anymore," Trump said on Fox News Friday.

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff Hints at Current Trump Infidelity Hidden in Fire and Fury

"These people are the lowest form of life; vicious, ignorant, scheming, petty, savage, manipulative -- if given the opportunity and the right incentive, he would stab any one of them, and not lose a minute's sleep... Again, what was his motivation -- something is missing from this puzzle. Drugs or drink or mental illness? ... those rats in that sinking sack, they're fighting... He may be the dictionary definition of a firestarter to some, to me he's a rancid piece of filth." Guardian comment
"If you think abandoning your wife and cashing in on your "batty" mother-in-law's home is cruel, it turns out this is par for the course."
"And, really, sex with someone other than his wife and the attention of other people is all Michael Wolff really wants, at the end of the day."
"A clue to Wolff's character emerged in 2009, when the "bald, trout-pouted" 55-year-old was caught sleeping with a 28-year-old intern at Vanity Fair. His wife kicked him out of their Manhattan home, but not before joining him in an attempt to evict her 85-year-old mother because they wanted to sell the apartment she lived in. As you can tell, he's a charmer."
This is really sleazy interview... Typical project of Wolff own behavior as in
Wolff: "If this is a book that will bring down his President.." And the only topic he is capable to discuss is dirty rumors about President infidelity. For Trump the book title "The great transition" ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... Maher asked if it was about a woman, to which Wolff answered, "Yeah. I didn't have a blue dress." ..."
"... Without hesitation, Wolff said yes. "You just have to read between the lines," he said, adding that it's toward the end of the book. "Now that I've told you, when you hit that paragraph you're going to say bingo." ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | www.thewrap.com

Everybody has been talking about Michael Wolff's best seller "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House" since it came out Jan. 5, but the author said there is one thing hinted at in its pages that he is surprised no has asked him about.

"Real Time With Bill Maher" kicked off its 16th season Friday night with Wolff, who hinted there was a tidbit near the end of the book that he thought would get tongues wagging. At first cagey, he said it's something he is "absolutely sure of, but was so incendiary that I just didn't have the ultimate proof."

Maher asked if it was about a woman, to which Wolff answered, "Yeah. I didn't have a blue dress."

Of course, the "blue dress" he's referring to is Monica Lewinsky's infamous outfit that was said to be stained with President Bill Clinton's semen.

His curiosity piqued, Maher wondered if it was somebody Trump is "f -- ing now?"

Without hesitation, Wolff said yes. "You just have to read between the lines," he said, adding that it's toward the end of the book. "Now that I've told you, when you hit that paragraph you're going to say bingo."

Watch the full interview above.


landshark123 , January 20, 2018 4:48 PM

25 years ago it would be categorized as nothing more then a Kitty Kelly gossip rag.

He wouldn't answer Bill's question because he didn't want to get his butt sued into oblivion. He seems to be reveling in how he BS'd his way into there.

Afra , January 20, 2018 10:16 AM

IMAGINE -- in your wildest imaginings -- that this was President O.
The more sordid America becomes the more his hyperverbal "base", along with our traditional "enemies", celebrate.

ErikKC2 , January 20, 2018 7:06 AM

And, it will only get more "interesting" over the next couple of weeks. I ordered the book on the first day I could. In fact, I pre-ordered it. And, it was just shipped today. Give it a couple of weeks for the shipments from Amazon to be delivered, and the book digested.

And, of course, it's Hope Hicks.

Afra ErikKC2 , January 20, 2018 10:18 AM

I'm going to say a creeper in that back door he mentioned. I like to give the young lady a little more credit. In my head. 😟

I Heart Suckabees , January 20, 2018 4:35 AM

get it, Sarah Sanders!

[Jan 22, 2018] Sleazy Wolff tried to prolong his five minutes of fame

This is the real Wolff -- sleazy and unscrupulous gossip columnist
Notable quotes:
"... Wolff said Friday on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" that he was "absolutely sure" of such a tryst, but acknowledged that he lacked "ultimate proof." "I didn't have the blue dress," Wolff told Maher, referring to the key piece of evidence from Bill Clinton's notorious Oval Office dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.nydailynews.com

Originally from: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/michael-wolff-claims-trump-affair-white-house-article-1.3767521

President Trump may be having an extramarital affair in the White House, according to the latest bombshell claim from "Fire and Fury" author Michael Wolff.

Wolff said Friday on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" that he was "absolutely sure" of such a tryst, but acknowledged that he lacked "ultimate proof." "I didn't have the blue dress," Wolff told Maher, referring to the key piece of evidence from Bill Clinton's notorious Oval Office dalliance with Monica Lewinsky.

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff's Trump Affair Clues Point to Nikki Haley, and We Hate This Story (Column) by Tim Molloy

Yahoo tried to amplify the unsubstantiated and malicious rumor. Not the first time, not the last. So Yahoo bottom feeders are happy to feast on Wolff's excrements...
Notable quotes:
"... By October, however, many on the president's staff took particular notice of one of the few remaining Trump opportunists: Nikki Haley, the UN ambassador. Haley -- 'as ambitious as Lucifer," in the characterization of one member of the senior staff -- had concluded that Trump's tenure would last, at best, a single term, and that she, with requisite submission, could be his heir apparent. Haley had courted and befriended Ivanka, and Ivanka had brought her into the family circle, where she had become a particular focus of Trump's attention, and he of hers. ..."
"... Bingo? Wolff adds that Trump "had been spending a notable amount of private time with Haley on Air Force One and was seen to be grooming her for a political future." Wolff cited one "senior Trumper" who said the problem with Trump mentoring Haley "is that she is so much smarter than him." ..."
"... The White House, Haley and Wolff did not immediately respond to a request for comment. There are many problems with this theory, aside from Wolff going on national television to accuse people of having affairs. Among them: Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, was one of Trump's early Republican critics. ..."
"... She campaigned for Marco Rubio and then supported Ted Cruz. When she gave the Republican response to President Obama's final State of the Union address, she seemed to criticize Trump when she said: "During anxious times, it can be tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices." Trump responded by calling her "weak" on immigration . ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | www.yahoo.com

"Fire and Fury" author Michael Wolff's accusation that President Trump is currently having an affair set off online speculation Saturday about who the other party might be. Based on Wolff's clues, it appears he's making insinuations about UN Ambassador Nikki Haley.

A quick side note before we go further: This is gross on every level. We don't have any evidence whatsoever to suggest that what Wolff is hinting at is true, so please consider this a story about an author making an accusation he admits he can't prove.

That said, Wolff went on "Real Time With Bill Maher" Friday to provide some encouragement to readers who may have given up halfway through "Fire and Fury" when he said a passage near the end of his book hints at the affair.

Also Read: Trump Demands Babies Not Be Born After Nine Months: No, Really, He Said This

"Now that I've told you, when you hit that paragraph you're going to say bingo," Wolff told Maher.

We've read the book. While there are icky descriptions about Trump's behavior with his spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, they come before the book's midway point. ("You're the best piece of tail he'll ever have!" Trump is quoted as telling Hicks about an ex, which Wolff says sent Hicks "running from the room.")

The only passage we've found near the end of the book that references a Trump relationship with a woman who isn't his wife or daughter is this one:

By October, however, many on the president's staff took particular notice of one of the few remaining Trump opportunists: Nikki Haley, the UN ambassador. Haley -- 'as ambitious as Lucifer," in the characterization of one member of the senior staff -- had concluded that Trump's tenure would last, at best, a single term, and that she, with requisite submission, could be his heir apparent. Haley had courted and befriended Ivanka, and Ivanka had brought her into the family circle, where she had become a particular focus of Trump's attention, and he of hers.

Bingo? Wolff adds that Trump "had been spending a notable amount of private time with Haley on Air Force One and was seen to be grooming her for a political future." Wolff cited one "senior Trumper" who said the problem with Trump mentoring Haley "is that she is so much smarter than him."

Also Read: 'Real Time': Michael Wolff Hints at Current Trump Infidelity Hidden in Bombshell Book (Video)

The White House, Haley and Wolff did not immediately respond to a request for comment. There are many problems with this theory, aside from Wolff going on national television to accuse people of having affairs. Among them: Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, was one of Trump's early Republican critics.

She campaigned for Marco Rubio and then supported Ted Cruz. When she gave the Republican response to President Obama's final State of the Union address, she seemed to criticize Trump when she said: "During anxious times, it can be tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices." Trump responded by calling her "weak" on immigration .

... ... ...

[Jan 22, 2018] The Justice Department and FBI set up the meeting at Trump Tower between Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner with controversial Russian officials to make Trump's associates appear compromised

Highly recommended!
People are really angry, judging from comments
Notable quotes:
"... Six U.S. agencies created a stealth task force, spearhead by CIA's Brennan, to run domestic surveillance on Trump associates and possibly Trump himself. ..."
"... To feign ignorance and to seemingly operate within U.S. laws, the agencies freelanced the wiretapping of Trump associates to the British spy agency GCHQ. ..."
"... GCHQ did not work from London or the UK. In fact the spy agency worked from NSA's headquarters in Fort Meade, MD with direct NSA supervision and guidance to conduct sweeping surveillance on Trump associates. ..."
"... Following the Trump Tower sit down, GCHQ began digitally wiretapping Manafort, Trump Jr., and Kushner. ..."
"... OK Ron Johnson (R-WI), the author was Steven Boyd, Assistant for Legislative Affairs / DOJ - Hold him in contempt of congress. ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

SethPoor -> BennyBoy Jan 22, 2018 9:47 AM Permalink

  • Six U.S. agencies created a stealth task force, spearhead by CIA's Brennan, to run domestic surveillance on Trump associates and possibly Trump himself.
  • To feign ignorance and to seemingly operate within U.S. laws, the agencies freelanced the wiretapping of Trump associates to the British spy agency GCHQ.
  • The decision to insert GCHQ as a back door to eavesdrop was sparked by the denial of two FISA Court warrant applications filed by the FBI to seek wiretaps of Trump associates.
  • GCHQ did not work from London or the UK. In fact the spy agency worked from NSA's headquarters in Fort Meade, MD with direct NSA supervision and guidance to conduct sweeping surveillance on Trump associates.
  • The illegal wiretaps were initiated months before the controversial Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele.
  • The Justice Department and FBI set up the meeting at Trump Tower between Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner with controversial Russian officials to make Trump's associates appear compromised.
  • Following the Trump Tower sit down, GCHQ began digitally wiretapping Manafort, Trump Jr., and Kushner.
  • After the concocted meeting by the Deep State, the British spy agency could officially justify wiretapping Trump associates as an intelligence front for NSA because the Russian lawyer at the meeting Natalia Veselnitskaya was considered an international security risk and prior to the June sit down was not even allowed entry into the United States or the UK, federal sources said.
  • By using GCHQ, the NSA and its intelligence partners had carved out a loophole to wiretap Trump without a warrant. While it is illegal for U.S. agencies to monitor phones and emails of U.S. citizens inside the United States absent a warrant, it is not illegal for British intelligence to do so. Even if the GCHQ was tapping Trump on U.S. soil at Fort Meade.
  • The wiretaps, secured through illicit scheming, have been used by U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe of alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 election, even though the evidence is considered "poisoned fruit."
Jim in MN -> SethPoor Jan 22, 2018 9:52 AM Permalink

Bottom Line:

The party in power used the apparatus of the police state to spy on and damage an opposition candidate.

There really isn't a higher crime in our supposed system.

THEN there's the cover-up.....as in deleting files and pretending you never had them even though the IG already does.

otschelnik Jan 22, 2018 8:55 AM Permalink

OK Ron Johnson (R-WI), the author was Steven Boyd, Assistant for Legislative Affairs / DOJ - Hold him in contempt of congress. Have him arrested. During questioning, press him to the wall, get him to tell him who in the FBI told him 'they couldn't find them.' Then go arrest that guy too. Rinse and repeat. Look what these bastards did to Mike Flynn. Go get 'em. NOW!!!

VideoEng_NC Jan 22, 2018 9:10 AM Permalink

One of the silver linings in this mess is the clear view that the FBI is ridiculously compromised & has chucked its standard of non-political leanings right out the window. Shutting it down may have once seemed a long shot, now maybe not so much. If you haven't noticed, another Trump boomerang has happened to the Left with their favorite word starting with the letter S. This time I'm thinking Storm is what's about to follow instead of hole or house.

stustd Jan 22, 2018 9:14 AM Permalink

Business as usual continues: Comey to teach ethical leadership course at William & Mary:

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/369695-comey-to-teach-ethical-leadership-course-at-william-mary

wcole225 Jan 22, 2018 9:21 AM Permalink

If the republican leadership hiccup here on the release of the memo then it's things as usual and forget a full on war from them. I don't trust those bastards as far as I can throw them. Trump then needs to fire Sessions and Mueller and go full on attack mode with a press conference doing what he does and light the left's hair on fire like never before. This is war and it needs kicked off in grand fashion. The left's ability to guilt shame has been neutered and they know it and are scared to death.

CatInTheHat -> wcole225 Jan 22, 2018 11:03 AM Permalink

Why do people think Trump is going to do anything? When his actions say he is doing exactly what the WARMONGERING fuckers want??

Trump is Barry is Clinton is Bush...

the not so mig Jan 22, 2018 9:31 AM Permalink

these FBI Stazi guys are no good, shutter down

two hoots Jan 22, 2018 9:33 AM Permalink

The Genius has lost control. Washington is oozing and dripping its corrupt, manipulating, narcissistic and deceiving bile. Just one thin mint is all it will take. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJZPzQESq_0

wobblie Jan 22, 2018 9:50 AM Permalink

Nothing like a colossal waste of time to distract the herd.

https://therulingclassobserver.com/2018/01/07/unity-at-the-top-division

azusgm Jan 22, 2018 10:10 AM Permalink

At one point, Peter Strzok made reference to a phone that "could not be traced". He probably had a 2nd phone for a period. I'd be willing to bet it was a BlackBerry. While he had (if he had) that 2nd phone, he could have used that more secure phone for his communications with Lisa Page.

The IG may have all of Strzok's text messages with Lisa Page from his official phone, but none from the 2nd phone.

azusgm -> azusgm Jan 22, 2018 10:35 AM Permalink

Here's an article that includes the reference to the 2nd phone.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/peter-strzok-lisa-page-texts-trump-idiot/

The article says that it was Lisa Page who suggested using the 2nd phone. That message from her was in March 2016.

"Also in March, Page seems to be concerned about whether the things they say about Mr. Trump can be found out. "So look, you say we can text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it cant be traced," she wrote."

Haven't read through the entire thread here, but the end date of the interval for the missing data is also the date that Mueller was appointed.

Lostinfortwalton Jan 22, 2018 10:34 AM Permalink

All of this shit is at the NSA Blufdale, Utah, facility. Why are the taxpayers spending umpteen billion dollars collecting and storing this stuff if the government is going to pretend it doesn't exist? You can bet this internet post, and anyone who replies to it, is archived there. We are supposed to be afraid of being surveiled by assholes like Clapper and Brennan. Guess what? We're not.

enough of this Jan 22, 2018 10:34 AM Permalink

If Horowitz now claims he really didn't receive all the text messages he requested, then he too is part of a massive cover-up and any report that is issued by the DOJ's Inspector General's office can't be believed by definition.

insanelysane -> enough of this Jan 22, 2018 10:41 AM Permalink

It's possible Horowitz lied then to placate the Congressional inquiry. I believe that the Deep State believes that they can get Trump impeached before the shit hits the fan with the Sedition by the FBI. There is always Plan B for the Deep State but 50 years after they rid the world of 2 Kennedys the general population isn't buying it.

BendGuyhere Jan 22, 2018 10:37 AM Permalink

The FACT PATTERN supports a RICO indictment and prosecution.

RUDY GIULIANI for SPECIAL PROSECUTOR.

Hang Comey, Lynch, Mueller, Clinton, TO MAKE SURE IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN!

MrBoompi Jan 22, 2018 11:00 AM Permalink

If I understand how US communication systems work, every network has a splitter which copies all transmissions to NSA, or related agencies, storage devices. I would be shocked if they didn't collect everything from FBI or DOJ employees, and I mean everything, from FBI devices or their private devices. If the files are sitting safe and secure on NSA storage devices, only the NSA could really "lose" them. And this would also be true for every one of Clinton's messages. Why don't we ever see Congress ask NSA for anything? Is that verboten?

Arrow4Truth Jan 22, 2018 11:58 AM Permalink

"This glaring contradiction suggests someone is lying or perhaps simply incompetent." Wrong! It's both.

currency Jan 22, 2018 12:34 PM Permalink

FBI and DOJ and the Weasel Liar Rosenstein are LIARS. They don't want the world and the American people know what Liars, corrupt, in the tank for Hilray to know what they did are still trying to due. Trump needs to clean house of the FBI and DOJ of all Clinton and Obama people.

[Jan 22, 2018] From Elizabeth Taylor to Donald Trump Insinuations, Half Truths and Lies by Dr. Fred Eichelman

Notable quotes:
"... "No, it can really hurt" she replied. She went on to tell us how in one story the cover headline announced "Elizabeth Taylor is slowly killing her mother." As it turned out the story was about how her mom worried about her daughter's health and travels. Elizabeth went on to relate that in the United Kingdom you could not get away with such stories. She had sued successfully 15 times, winning each. "I did not need or want the money" she confided. "I just wanted a retraction. That is not possible in the United States." ..."
"... These kind of distortions about Elizabeth were not just prevalent in magazines. Books have done the same thing. There is a biography of Elizabeth Taylor by an author known for penning page turners about celebrities with as much dirt as possible. In one story she described an argument between Elizabeth and John during a political gathering locally here in the Roanoke Valley. One that had her storming off and not returning. We were there with other friends and no such thing happened. ..."
"... Now I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment and the idea of freedom of speech. I also know I do not have the right to go into a theater showing a film and shout "FIRE" if there is no fire. I could be rightfully arrested for that because of the possible danger to public safety. ..."
"... Today we see people in the liberal media distributing fake news with every opportunity they can find. They have done every thing they possibly can to see the presidency of Donald Trump fail. The Michael Wolff book makes a case that every one around the president, including family, think he is not competent and not smart. He is fair game for such fake news. ..."
Jan 13, 2018 | politichicks.com

The title may cause readers to think this is strictly about the half baked book by Michael Wolff on the Trump Administration. That is already being debunked by even some liberal sources like the Washington Post which has been finding errors on every page. The only criticism I would make is that too much is being said about it and that makes sales of the book go up. The old adage that "Get banned in Boston if you want a best seller" holds true.

The concern here is the interpretation by the courts of the First Amendment that people with a public position are fair game for the spreading of information whether true or untrue. This has been going on for some time and the first I became aware of it was with the entertainment media.

Dr. Fred Eichelman and Elizabeth Taylor

Back in the late seventies my wife Carolyn and I were privileged to host Elizabeth Taylor several times when her husband John Warner was running for the U.S. Senate here in Virginia. We found Elizabeth a very open person and easy to talk with and there was one question I had to ask.

I had seen a number of covers on Super Market magazines with stories hinting of scandals and Elizabeth Taylor was a popular subject. I had heard that Hollywood stars did not mind that sort of thing as bad publicity was still good publicity as long as it kept their name in the news. I had to ask Elizabeth if this was true in her case.

"No, it can really hurt" she replied. She went on to tell us how in one story the cover headline announced "Elizabeth Taylor is slowly killing her mother." As it turned out the story was about how her mom worried about her daughter's health and travels. Elizabeth went on to relate that in the United Kingdom you could not get away with such stories. She had sued successfully 15 times, winning each. "I did not need or want the money" she confided. "I just wanted a retraction. That is not possible in the United States."

These kind of distortions about Elizabeth were not just prevalent in magazines. Books have done the same thing. There is a biography of Elizabeth Taylor by an author known for penning page turners about celebrities with as much dirt as possible. In one story she described an argument between Elizabeth and John during a political gathering locally here in the Roanoke Valley. One that had her storming off and not returning. We were there with other friends and no such thing happened.

Now I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment and the idea of freedom of speech. I also know I do not have the right to go into a theater showing a film and shout "FIRE" if there is no fire. I could be rightfully arrested for that because of the possible danger to public safety.

Today we see people in the liberal media distributing fake news with every opportunity they can find. They have done every thing they possibly can to see the presidency of Donald Trump fail. The Michael Wolff book makes a case that every one around the president, including family, think he is not competent and not smart. He is fair game for such fake news. People with common sense know that a man who was an honor student in college, became a billionaire, was a success on TV and able to get elected president is no small potatoes. The success with our economy alone should erase such ideas.

Of course not being a born politician Donald Trump believes in fighting back and he makes ample use of Twitter for this. This is also not news as when Ronald Reagan was president his competence and ability to lead was often called into question. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neil labeled President Ragean as an "amiable dunce." Reagan made ample use of television to go over the heads of congressional critics and the media. In this digital age Donald Trump is only doing what many wish they could do to protect themselves.

While our president can protect himself, you have to wonder about so many others in government, business. the entertainment world and elsewhere who have found untrue criticism in the media too much to handle. The definition of what people are not exempt from untrue news keeps broadening. This sort of thing is even happening on college campuses where conservative teachers have found themselves under attack by student publications using the First Amendment as their defense even when not telling the truth.

There is no easy answer here and we can only wish that someday common sense will find a solution to protect us all from such attacks.

Dr. Fred Eichelman is a retired teacher and a director for Point North Outreach, a Christian media organization. He recently had a book published, Faith, Family, Film-A Teacher's Trek. Fred is a former local Republican Committee chairman and has attended hundreds of conventions from political to science fiction. He sees the two as compatible. Fred also tells us he values very much a title we gave him since he could not be a PolitiChick. PolitiDude.

[Jan 22, 2018] Gowdy Steve Bannon's Testimony Presented Personal 'Credibility Issue'

Notable quotes:
"... House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said that after lengthy closed-door testimony by two former top Trump aides, he found that one of the men appears to have a "credibility" problem. ..."
"... But, he said that Bannon's testimony was more eventful. Gowdy said that at one point, Bannon attempted to dodge questions by exercising a privilege that does not exist. "That was his slip-up," Gowdy said. "He got this notion that 'hey, I'm going to create a privilege that no one's ever heard of before that doesn't exist in the law." Gowdy said the only "dangerous" issue for President Donald Trump is if "credible evidence" is presented. ..."
"... He said Bannon's credibility has taken a hit, since he once said there was no chance the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. did not meet Trump Sr. ..."
"... But, after he was fired, Bannon reportedly told author Michael Wolff that there was no chance the meeting hadn't occurred. ..."
"... "This is the same witness that said that members of the president's family committed acts of treason. So, he's got a credibility issue," Gowdy said. "If they're hinging the entire case on Steve Bannon's credibility, good luck to the prosecution." ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | Fox News Insider

As seen on The Story with Martha MacCallum

House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said that after lengthy closed-door testimony by two former top Trump aides, he found that one of the men appears to have a "credibility" problem.

Former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and former White House adviser Steve Bannon spent several hours testifying before Gowdy's committee Tuesday.

Gowdy said Lewandowski wanted to answer every question posed to him, but that his lawyers advised him against answering those regarding his work after he left the campaign. "That [onus is] on the lawyer, not the witness. Corey is going to come back and answer every question anyone has," Gowdy said.

But, he said that Bannon's testimony was more eventful. Gowdy said that at one point, Bannon attempted to dodge questions by exercising a privilege that does not exist. "That was his slip-up," Gowdy said. "He got this notion that 'hey, I'm going to create a privilege that no one's ever heard of before that doesn't exist in the law." Gowdy said the only "dangerous" issue for President Donald Trump is if "credible evidence" is presented.

He said Bannon's credibility has taken a hit, since he once said there was no chance the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. did not meet Trump Sr.

But, after he was fired, Bannon reportedly told author Michael Wolff that there was no chance the meeting hadn't occurred.

"This is the same witness that said that members of the president's family committed acts of treason. So, he's got a credibility issue," Gowdy said. "If they're hinging the entire case on Steve Bannon's credibility, good luck to the prosecution."

Watch more above.

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff's 'Fire and Fury' to Become TV Series (Exclusive) by Lesley Goldberg, Andy Lewis

Notable quotes:
"... Endeavor Content -- the financing and sales arm formed in October between sister companies William Morris Endeavor and IMG -- has purchased film and television rights to the No. 1 best-selling book. The massive deal is said to be in the seven-figure range. ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | www.hollywoodreporter.com

Michael Wolff's controversial Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is coming to television.

Endeavor Content -- the financing and sales arm formed in October between sister companies William Morris Endeavor and IMG -- has purchased film and television rights to the No. 1 best-selling book. The massive deal is said to be in the seven-figure range. Endeavor Content plans to adapt the book as a TV series. A network is not yet attached, as Endeavor will now begin shopping the project.

Wolff will executive produce the series, with veteran Channel 4 and BBC executive Michael Jackson -- now CEO of indie producer Two Cities Television -- also on board to produce.

[Jan 22, 2018] How Michael Wolff duped the White House into giving him access to Trump's aides by Allahpundit

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... According to Bloomberg , Wolff didn't even initiate this project. It fell into his lap when Trump dialed him up out of the blue to compliment him on a CNN appearance in which Wolff bashed the media's coverage of the president. So susceptible is POTUS to flattery and so eager is he to satisfy his eternal grudge with the press that a little bit of cheerleading from Wolff was all it took for him to place his trust, essentially blindly, in a far more devious reporter than the ones he's always complaining about. ..."
"... CNN drives him nuts so he turned to Michael farking Wolff, of all people, to try to balance the scales. The irony is as thick and dense as the brain matter of White House deputies who went along. ..."
"... In fact, for the first six months of Trump's presidency no one in his White House -- including then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer -- stopped Wolff from repeatedly scheduling appointments in the West Wing. He visited about 17 times, according to a person familiar with the matter. Nor did they monitor what Trump's aides were telling the controversial author ..."
"... [An] Obama aide said his communications team kept strict tabs on authors' work -- micromanaging access to the White House, assigning press aides to mind the authors during interviews or asking staff for summaries afterward, closely tracking lines of questioning and making sure writers were escorted off the grounds after their appointments. ..."
"... Some of Bloomberg's sources claim that Kellyanne Conway gave him access more than once and appears to have spoken with him at some length. Conway's a longtime political player. What's her excuse for not knowing Wolff's reputation and intervening to protect Trump from him? ..."
"... Dubke left the job in late May but Trump's fateful phone call to Wolff allegedly happened in early February 2017, with Wolff conducting interviews at the White House not long afterward. Dubke's a right-wing media-relations pro of longstanding. He didn't speak up about Wolff either? ..."
"... In the end, though, it all falls on Hope Hicks, who was Trump's informal communications director before being formally appointed to the job in September at the tender age of 29 after Dubke quit. Although she had no leadership role in the West Wing until the fall, she's an old-school Trump deputy who was with him before the campaign. She's either the unofficial head of the Praetorian Guard or she's a very high-ranking member. Where the hell was she when Wolff came knocking? Did she do any due diligence as to whether he could be trusted to write the sort of book he was proposing to write? If so, how did she miss the high-profile critiques of his methods in magazines like Brill's Content and The New Republic ? It's tempting to accuse Hicks of being too young or simply out of her depth to do her job effectively for Trump -- but then how do you explain the apparent negligence on Conway's and Dubke's parts, too? ..."
"... Wolff's going to end up filthy rich from all this, and not just from book royalties. "Fire & Fury" will soon be a TV show (although, more likely, a TV miniseries) with Wolff himself as executive producer. And given the propensity of Trump staffers to leak, he's probably already hard at work on "Fire & Fury 2: More Fiery, More Furious." Congrats to Hope and everyone else for sharpening a knife and handing it to Wolff before allowing him to stab their boss repeatedly with it. Exit question via a million different people: Isn't there already a "Fire & Fury" TV show on cable news every day? ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | hotair.com

... According to Bloomberg , Wolff didn't even initiate this project. It fell into his lap when Trump dialed him up out of the blue to compliment him on a CNN appearance in which Wolff bashed the media's coverage of the president. So susceptible is POTUS to flattery and so eager is he to satisfy his eternal grudge with the press that a little bit of cheerleading from Wolff was all it took for him to place his trust, essentially blindly, in a far more devious reporter than the ones he's always complaining about.

... ... ...

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff discusses Fire and Fury

British interviewer is heads above US MSM interviewers. He also approach Wolff with kid gloves, but he pins a couple of time his ego ;-)
Of cause BBC is a neoliberal swap and they interviewed Wolff half-dozen times :-)
In his BBC interview and this interview Wolff clearly state that Trump is not fit for the office "mentally unfit for office" ;-). Here Wolff also claims is Trump is like a child.
Also on the question of allegation of "collision with Russia" Wolff state that "emperor has no clothes" while in reality it is Wolff who has no cloth doing this hatcet job without verification of even basic facts. He also pushed Bannon under the bas.
When confronted with that fact that Bannon challenged of Wolff claims, he just start blabbing.
The interviewer suggested that this book is a fascinating gossip taken at the heat of the moment, that this is one dimensional book.
Jan 06, 2018 | bbc.co.uk

Michael Wolff discusses his book Fire and Fury, about US President Donald Trump's first nine months in office, with Nick Robinson. Mr Trump has accused the author of making up stories and has called him a "total loser".

[Jan 22, 2018] EPIC: CNN Host GOES OFF On Anti-Trump Michael Wolff for what he did on Live Tv

Highly recommended!
Nice exposure of duplicitous character Wolff "I certainly said whatever necessary to get the story"
Key question: Did you misrepresent yourself trying to get access to Trump. "I like the person" "I want to humanize the president" "You know that I like him" "Nobody is doing it" "I might be able to change perceptions"
Another interesting question: "Where all those pledges accurate when you made them? " Why you present yourself as a beacon to combat bias against the President.
Jan 21, 2018 | www.youtube.com
Tom S., 3 days ago
Mainstream media turned into political party! Mainstream media professional liars are political assassins for the worst people on this planet. Mainstream media is a political apparatus which is bought and paid off by champagne-socialists, thieves set-up-entirely to serves rich and powerful to extract from small and weak. Mainstream media professional liars will continue to support political scum and their style of cronyism and rampant corruption that is stunting the country's development.

Mainstream media will make sure to siphon off large chunks of targeted electoral subsidies and Lobbying cash which will enable them to preserve their fancy cars, apartments and privileged status as American people suffer!

JD Mott, 1 week ago
Like everything the Left thinks is Nirvana this too is turning against them. Wolfe is well known for injecting fiction into his recollection.

[Jan 22, 2018] CNN's Brian Stelter owned by Michael Wolff: No disrespect, you border on being a ridiculous figure

Notable quotes:
"... CNN, Michael Wolff -- Reliable Sources. HaHaHaHaHaHa! ..."
Feb 01, 2017 | www.youtube.com

Daniel Stetson

CNN, Michael Wolff -- Reliable Sources. HaHaHaHaHaHa! 

Daniel Jansen, 1 month ago
The media is totally ignorant of real issues that matter to the American people they are so involved in defending their own opinions that they have forgotten their purpose of keeping the public informed of what's happening they have taken it upon them self to defend the Democrats and their corrupt world order agenda
Keith M, 2 weeks ago

Media=fake news

 Official Jayo, 1 week ago

Pot meet kettle. I now believe Wolff knew exactly what he was doing with the fake book. He knew the media would eat it up and he could ride off into the sunset with one last big payday.

Frankie Dog Turner, 1 week ago

CNN is just very fake news. Brian Stelter is a ridiculous figure and so if Wolfe. Like Uncle Fester and Mini-Me two pitiful idiots on stage together..

Raymond Armatino, 1 week ago

This was staged. Its there to make Wolf seem like he is telling truth in his book and I dont buy it for many reasons.

[Jan 21, 2018] Michael Wolff: Everyone in the liberal media is a Trump enemy

This Jul 12, 2017 interview of Wolff when he took somewhat pro-Trump stance...
Jul 12, 2017 | BBC Newsnight

Explicit statement of Wolff on FBI-contractor organized meeting in Trump tower that definitely suggests malice.

[Jan 21, 2018] Michael Wolff's Book: Trump lawyers threaten ex-aide Bannon - BBC

BBC presstitutes on meeting in Trump tower
Jan 04, 2018 | bbc.co.uk

Tony Blair disclaimed the statement of Wolff in the book

[Jan 20, 2018] Will Steve Bannon s Testimony Bring Down Jared by Abigail Tracy

A more interesting question is how those testimonies might affect Bannon -- he is in a very hot water now. If he thought that the meeting was so incriminating why he did not contact FBI and just decided to feed juicy gossip to Wolff?
Also he was not present at the meeting and was not a member of Trump team until two months later. From who he got all this information ? Was is just a slander by disgruntled employee?
Notable quotes:
"... To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr. ..."
"... Bannon has denied that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the election ..."
"... Wolff also quotes the former White House strategist as saying, "This is all about money laundering. [Robert] Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr., and Jared Kushner . . . It's as plain as a hair on your face." ..."
"... Bannon then zeroed in on Kushner specifically, adding that "[i]t goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They're going to go right through that. They're going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me." ..."
Jan 16, 2018 | www.vanityfair.com

"The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor -- with no lawyers. They didn't have any lawyers," Bannon is quoted as saying in Fire and Fury. "Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it's all of that, you should have called the F.B.I. immediately." Bannon reportedly speculated that the chance the eldest Trump son did not involve his father in the meeting "is zero."

When Bannon's comments became public, Trump excoriated his former strategist, whom he accused of having "lost his mind." But while Bannon has since apologized for the remarks and sought to walk back a number of the quotes, he's stopped short of denying that he viewed the Trump Tower meeting as treasonous. Instead, he's merely shifted the blame away from Trump Jr. and onto Manafort. "My comments were aimed at Paul Manafort, a seasoned campaign professional with experience and knowledge of how the Russians operate. He should have known they are duplicitous, cunning, and not our friends. To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr. ," Bannon said in a statement to Axios. ( Bannon has denied that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the election .)

... ... ...

Though the Trump Tower meeting took place before Bannon joined the Trump campaign, Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House panel, told CNN last week that he plans to question Bannon about "why this meeting at Trump Tower represented his treason and certainly unpatriotic at a minimum."

Jared Kushner's "greasy shit"

Wolff also quotes the former White House strategist as saying, "This is all about money laundering. [Robert] Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr., and Jared Kushner . . . It's as plain as a hair on your face." (Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort have all denied wrongdoing.) Bannon then zeroed in on Kushner specifically, adding that "[i]t goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They're going to go right through that. They're going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me."

He and Trump's son-in-law have never seen eye to eye; their White House feuds were a poorly kept secret, and following his ouster, Bannon has given numerous interviews knocking Kushner, including one to my colleague Gabriel Sherman in which he questioned Kushner's maturity level. If Bannon has dirt on Kushner, he will likely get his chance to reveal it; Schiff also declared his intent to question Bannon on "the basis of his concern over money laundering."

[Jan 20, 2018] Looks like no one edited this book

Jan 20, 2018 | www.amazon.com

C on January 19, 2018

It's like no one edited this book

Badly written. It's like no one edited this book. Really makes me question the author's credibility and journalistic integrity. Doesn't cite sources, even when providing direct quotes. That's not okay.

I'm glad someone had the courage to write about the imbecile in our White House, but this kind of crappy writing that borders on tabloid-level makes our side look just as bad as "the other side".

Wolff is lucky that the Bannon controversy happened, otherwise this book wouldn't have sold more than a handful of copies.

Lisa Popolo on January 19, 2018
Amateur level writing

Gossipy and fun, but a difficult read with such poorly edited, sloppy writing. Such sentences worth only of Trump himself.

joe-maryland on January 19, 2018
Save money, watch the news, Trump nuts in either case

Kind of a waste of money. Just watch the news and read the tweets, you'll figure it out for free.
It would be more interesting if it had some notes on sources, but there is no way to determine 1st hand info, 2nd hand info, and third hand in a mirror info.

Allan on January 19, 2018
Terribly written mess

There was not much here that you didn't already know. But the writing is so terrible that it was difficult to make it to the end of a rather short piece. He repeatedly writes long paragraphs consisting of single sentences. He compulsively inserts long parenthetical expressions everywhere which breaks up the flow and requires reading and reading to try to figure out what he's saying. I would expect a best selling author to be able to construct a comprehensible sentence but he mostly fails.

MTANDIZ on January 19, 2018
#1 for the FAKE BOOKS AWARD.

1st we had FAKE NEWS, now we have FAKE BOOK. Maybe NEXT YEAR, this book will make the FAKE BOOKS AWARD.

Kathleen GAM on January 18, 2018
As much as I wanted to like this book

As much as I wanted to like this book, because I detest Trump, the only thing I can say about this book is it stinks. It's repetitive, poorly written and he could use a proofreader. There's nothing in it that we haven't all read on the internet.

[Jan 19, 2018] Bannon will do interview with special counsel, avoiding grand jury for now

Highly recommended!
They would be definitely able to hook him for lying to FBI. That's really easy with Bannon.
Notable quotes:
"... He is expected to cooperate with the special counsel, the sources said. ..."
"... Bannon's attorney told the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday that Bannon would answer questions when he goes to the special counsel because executive privilege would not apply, according to one of the sources. ..."
"... Last week, the FBI attempted to serve Bannon with a subpoena to appear before the grand jury in the Russia probe. He referred agents to his attorney ..."
Jan 18, 2018 | www.cnn.com

Steve Bannon has struck a deal with special counsel Robert Mueller's team and will be interviewed by prosecutors instead of testifying before the grand jury, two people familiar with the process told CNN. He is expected to cooperate with the special counsel, the sources said.

The sources did not say when the interview will take place or if the subpoena would be withdrawn.

Bannon, the former White House chief strategist for President Donald Trump, is expected to talk openly to Mueller's team. Bannon's attorney told the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday that Bannon would answer questions when he goes to the special counsel because executive privilege would not apply, according to one of the sources.

A spokesman for the special counsel's office declined to comment.

Last week, the FBI attempted to serve Bannon with a subpoena to appear before the grand jury in the Russia probe. He referred agents to his attorney, multiple sources said.

[Jan 19, 2018] Interesting in a voyeuristic sense but stylistically and factually flawed

Notable quotes:
"... The media has done everything to discredit him and are always found to be false. Sure, he is obnoxious but enough already. ..."
"... Fire and fury seemed to be a compilation of the news stories about Trump that had already been worked and reworked in the written media. Other than a little embellishment it was like reruns on cable TV. You had heard the story so many times you could almost say the lines with the characters. ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.amazon.com
shoesarei on January 18, 2018
Interesting in a voyeuristic sense but stylistically and factually flawed.

The inaccuracies are off-putting. How credible is the rest of this book if he calls Stephen Miller Jason? I am far from being a Trump fan, but I am also far from being a Bannon fan. Wolff clearly likes Bannon and admires the daily chaos and "war footing" tactics he engendered. I would love to read a book like this but one that is edited and vetted before going to print.

Angela M. Hey VINE VOICE on January 18, 2018
Bannon's White House legacy

This chronicle of life in the White House is more about Steve Bannon and his buddies versus Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner's more liberal views. Highlights of President Trump's first nine months provide material for the book's chapters.

There are almost no good words for Trump. The reader gets tired of hearing he's confused, stupid or uninformed. The writing is tedious and relies on Yiddish and journalistic jargon to add gravitas. If you want to know more about Trump, this is not the book.

One reads about White House chaos and the book explains the political infighting that contributes to it. The communications professionals' comings and goings are explained. The chief of staff gyrations and Air Force One trip insights provide interest.

If you keep up with the news you won't learn much about Trump, but as a partial biography of Bannon this is worth reading.

adam j schlaff on January 18, 2018
Not a Trumpet but come on.

Seriously this book has been debunked by so many. I don't always agree with Trump but this is pure slander. I hope he sues and wins.

The media has done everything to discredit him and are always found to be false. Sure, he is obnoxious but enough already.

teamleade on January 18, 2018
Full of fire and fury but signifying nothing.

The hype on this book got my attention but it was a book "I could put down". Fire and fury seemed to be a compilation of the news stories about Trump that had already been worked and reworked in the written media. Other than a little embellishment it was like reruns on cable TV. You had heard the story so many times you could almost say the lines with the characters.

[Jan 18, 2018] His great gift is the appearance of intimate access by Kyle Swenson

How you spell "hypocrisy" Mr. Wolff...
Notable quotes:
"... "a portraitist who has mastered the art of the suck-up putdown." ..."
"... "And by repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility." ..."
"... "hit piece (plural hit pieces) (idiomatic) a published article or post aiming to sway public opinion by presenting false or biased information in a way that appears objective and truthful." ..."
"... I've seen Wolff on television several times and he comes across very badly. He is pretty full of himself. ..."
Jan 04, 2018 | www.washingtonpost.com

Originally from: Michael Wolff's Trump book The latest in a career of controversy - The Washington Post

Wolff had taken shots in a recent Newsweek column at the media's "apoplexy" over the 45th president, specifically calling out Stelter for delivering on his show each week, in the writer's words, a "pious sermon about Trump's perfidiousness."

"I hope I pronounced that right," Stelter joked for a gawky transition. "Do you feel my style is wrong or my substance is wrong, trying to fact check the president?"

Wolff, snazzy in a dandy banker's navy suit, pocket square, and trademark thick framed glasses, didn't flinch. "I mean this with truly no disrespect, but I think you can border on being quite a ridiculous figure," he told the host. "It's not a good look to repeatedly and self-righteously defend your own self-interest. The media should not be the story."

The television moment -- an acerbic jab at a media heavyweight on his own show -- was classic Wolff. But it was also a bit of foreshadowing. Nearly a year later, Michael Wolff himself is very much the story this week.

...He has also, as The Washington Post's Paul Farhi wrote on Wednesday, been accused by critics of "pushing the facts as far as they'll go, and sometimes further than they can tolerate."

...Critics have blasted the writer in the past for filling his column inches with insight and imaginative recreation rather than actual reporting.

..."His great gift is the appearance of intimate access," an editor told Cottle in 2004. "He is adroit at making the reader think that he has spent hours and days with his subject, when in fact he may have spent no time at all." Another former colleague said: "He did get a lot of things majorly wrong, but he never was just pedestrian . . . You have to admire his balls."

Chicken and tuna sandwich 1 week ago Why would you even mention Jones? He is in no way a legitimate source for anything, not even the entertainment he has admitted in court he engages in. That's like referencing Manson for midwifery. "a portraitist who has mastered the art of the suck-up putdown." "And by repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility."

Two of the best lines I've read in a while. I haven't read his books but I like what I'm hearing about this one. Now the real question is not whether or not it is true, it's how will Trump spin this into a whirlwind he can reap unearned profits from?

the cavalier, 1 week ago

Sounds like the perfect supercilious self absorbed twit to cover a supercilious self absorbed twit.

crown scientist, 1 week ago

Based on what I've as yet read in the excerpts published by NewYork Magazine I would suggest Michael Wolff has introduced our distressed democracy to alt-journalism, the Access Hollywoodification of presenedtial history. What drips with irony is that the Stupid Orange Clown essentially fathered this freak of literature.

b everdene 1 week ago

You can see what happened here. Wolff set the stage for gaining Trump's trust (and access) by publically criticizing Trump critics, but then he turned the tables on Trump and wrote an unflattering profile. How fun.

Call it Presidential Pornology.

scchan.2009, 1 week ago

So if I understood what Wolff does: if you - assuming you are famous enough - give Wolff a chance or a hole to write BS about you, he will do it.

The thing about many similar "journalism", the tall tales are not even remotely unbelievable. It is totally consistent with the character even if it is false. It is playing the anti-hero of the Daily Mail or NY Post. People enjoy reading gossip, be that be rubbish on Fox News or BS come out from Wolff's or Stephen Colbert's mouth.

For now, have a good laugh without suspension of belief!

Greatful Deadline , 1 week ago

"hit piece (plural hit pieces) (idiomatic) a published article or post aiming to sway public opinion by presenting false or biased information in a way that appears objective and truthful." https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hit_piece

In other words, if it's true (as in "he has tapes"), then it's NOT a "hit piece."

jim380691910 , 1 week ago

I've seen Wolff on television several times and he comes across very badly. He is pretty full of himself. Trump and Wolff, two unlikeable people, truly deserve each other. I'm so disgusted with Trump that I'm fine with anyone flushing him down the toilet.

mr.natural, 1 week ago
"But Wolff has also been taken to task for blurring the lines between hot take and hatchet job. "Wolff exploits the human tendency to confuse frankness and cruelty with truth-telling," media critic Jack Shafer wrote in Slate in 1998. "And by repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility.""

This book will be a must read for all those who need to have their biases reinforced, to be reminded that they are better than the rest, that anyone not agreeing with them is indeed a knuckle dragging Troglodyte.

[Jan 17, 2018] Mediocre book

Notable quotes:
"... A journalist friend recently observed that good journalism leaves you understanding something you never even thought you cared about. This book did the opposite - left me pretty much not caring about something I was really curious about. I found the transcript of Glenn Simpson's testimony at the Senate hearings on the Steele dossier more riveting ..."
"... Wolff had an opportunity to put this disaster in writing -- a writing that any serious observer would want to add to their "reference" library. Wolff failed -- poor editing, overuse of a thesaurus, convoluted sentence structure and frequently leaving the reader wondering if statements made are Wolff's opinions or simply his ideas of what were thoughts of a person or group he has written about. There are some interesting bits in this book but it took work getting through Wolff's poor writing to get to the bits. ..."
"... unless you've been reclusive over the past several weeks, you know about most of the juicy bits. ..."
"... If you're thinking of reading a book, why not try something about a president of accomplishment Lincoln, (there's an entire that lists books about Lincoln)Teddy Roosevelt ( David McCullough's "Morning on Horseback is fantastic and Edmund Morris' trilogy about Roosevelt is not to be missed), Franklin Roosevelt? (Again there's a shelf full of books: I'm partial to Doris Kearns Goodwin's "No Ordinary Time" and Geoffrey C Ward's "Before the Trumpets" and "A First Class Temperament." If you want to read about a shady president try John Farrell's "Richard Nixon: A Life." Nixon is a whole lot more interesting than Trump. ..."
"... Disappointed. Full of innuendo and gossip. Editors should be flogged for all the errors they let by. Also someone needs to tell the author that he doesn't need to use ten dollar words to try and make the book seem credible. ..."
"... After the best parts were revealed in the media, the rest of the book reads as a dry attempt at juicy gossip. ..."
"... I'd like to read a more straight forward plain speaking account with sources to set the record straight. Guess we'll get this from Bannon's testimony quite soon! ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.amazon.com

Uppsala on January 17, 2018

Mediocre book about a crappy president.

To begin with, I was very irritated by all the editing mistakes that appeared in the Kindle edition. Writers lose some credibility when their "finished" product is riddled with grammatical errors. This book is just not well-written. At first the account was galvanizing, especially seeing in print one of Trump's speeches--which I would assign a D-minus at best. Incoherent, highly repetitive writing (or in this case Trump's speaking) indicates incoherent thinking; the president does not argue, he asserts. He has anecdotes but no evidence. Facts are clearly anathema to him; logic escapes him. But all this is really no surprise because he has shown himself over and over to be a vain, emotionally needy idiot, who is a compulsive liar being propped up by immoral toadies (in his staff and in congress). That said, after the first 90 or so pages, I became really bored. And why not? Trump (the subject of the book, after all) has nothing to say. He has no plans to solve the country's many problems and seems dangerously susceptible to repeating what the last person he talked to said.

James Garrett on January 17, 2018
Gossip

See the subject line. This book is TMZ material. If you like it, go for it. It is going for s laugh. However, you would be better off reading the summaries online.

David on January 17, 2018
Unsettling and not a lot of new information

I pre-ordered this book primarily because Trump was opposed vehemently to its publication. (The same reason, years ago, that I saw "The Last Temptation of Christ." Local religious extremists were picketing the theater.)

I cannot say that reading the book was enjoyable. It reflects the troubling times we are in now and the likelihood of difficult times ahead. And I am asked to trust this author regarding the details. It would be easier for me if Wolff had been a journalist with the discipline imposed by a news editor. As it is, the quotes and attributions stand as gossip (though I am inclined to believe most or all of them, since they appear to fit logically with information already public).

The broad brush (e.g., "All of the senior staff...") may be true, but could a careful investigator not find a true believer among them? I am certain that I could not work in this administration, but there must be one who is as devoted to Trump as I have been to other elected officials for whom I have worked.

Did I learn anything? Some details, perhaps, but not the big picture. I had known that this president is a dangerously ignorant narcissist from his public statements. Is his public persona (a childish, insecure man who holds grudges, lashes out at real or perceived opposition, and evidences no maturity) likely to be similar to his behavior in the White House? It seems probable.

complexanimal on January 17, 2018
A Tabloid-esque Exposé Befitting our Time

This is a poorly sourced, hearsay laden book that would get ripped to shreds and given a C- if presented as a final project in any top 500 journalism graduate school in the country. However, I very much doubt the author intended it to adhere to The Rulebook of Journalistic Ethics and Integrity. In short, it revels in being a salacious story about gossip and innuendo -- fitting quite well in our age of social media, aggregated and questionable sources, and our own attention span lacking president. In effect, it reads like an extremely long, multi-part post in Reddit's /r/bestof section.

Regarding the "truthiness" and authenticity of the facts that lies within: yeah, I generally believe most of it is probably true. There is not much secrecy in the bumbling ineptitude of the Trump administration and the in-fighting that is hidden in plain sight. Rake stepping seems a constant favorite past time of our Dear Leader and his cohorts. Bear in mind, 'Fire and Fury' seems clearly on the side of Bannon, so I would certainly take any of his character opinions -- particularly, of those he clearly despises (Jarvanka) -- with a boulder sized grain of salt. Also, there are some factual errors that are troubling to say the least. For example, Wolff suggests that Trump's father was definitely a member of the KKK. From my cursory research on the topic, this claim seems circumstantial at best. There are also errors in poll numbers sprinkled throughout the text.

Should you read it? Perhaps, but don't expect anything terribly enlightening. If you're like me: a mainstream liberal who reads the failing New York Times and the Bezos Washington Post, I doubt any of this will be much of a surprise to you. What the book mainly does is sum up the top 50 forehead slapping headlines of this disastrous presidency in the past year, so if you've been paying attention, you've already read a version of this. I suppose it is useful to have a story arc within a single book that covers the first year of the Trump presidency. Had it been better written, properly sourced, and factually correct, it might have really been something.

Plimoth Rock on January 17, 2018
Sound and fury signifying nothing.

This work to me seemed like more than a timeline of events covering the period within which Wolff had been given West Wing access. That the timeline was extruded with often sourceless hearsay makes it a bedfellow with a 14 year old's diary. I learned little that was new, except for the seedier alleged "conversations" with the major and minor players. Reading it made me depressed with the realization that the majority party and its henchmen in DC right now wouldn't know the truth or respect it if it pushed them down the stairs.

Philly Lawyer on January 17, 2018
Disappointing

I am mad that I rushed to buy this book because of the hype and my intense dislike of Trump. A journalist friend recently observed that good journalism leaves you understanding something you never even thought you cared about. This book did the opposite - left me pretty much not caring about something I was really curious about. I found the transcript of Glenn Simpson's testimony at the Senate hearings on the Steele dossier more riveting .

Do yourselves and favor and read that, or read the March 2017 New Yorker piece on Robert Mercer, or any of the many excellent pieces on Trump and his administration in the New York Times or Washington Post. I gave the book 3 stars anyway because - well - it is a only book about the dysfunctional Trump White House.

Cou on January 17, 2018
Important story poorly told

The history of Trump's first year in office has been followed by most Americans who have any level of interest in politics. Wolff had an opportunity to put this disaster in writing -- a writing that any serious observer would want to add to their "reference" library. Wolff failed -- poor editing, overuse of a thesaurus, convoluted sentence structure and frequently leaving the reader wondering if statements made are Wolff's opinions or simply his ideas of what were thoughts of a person or group he has written about. There are some interesting bits in this book but it took work getting through Wolff's poor writing to get to the bits.

Stephanie Patterson on January 17, 2018
Donald Trump is a bore

Donald Trump is a bore.

This book is very readable though unless you've been reclusive over the past several weeks, you know about most of the juicy bits.

On Sunday, the historian Niall Ferguson, was the interviewee in the "By the Book" feature in the New York Times Book Review. He was asked the standard question for this interview: "If you could require the American president to read one book, what would it be? And the prime minister? His answer was priceless: "I agree with you that it would be wonderful if both Mr. Trump and Mrs May read one book. I don't much mind which one it is."

If you're thinking of reading a book, why not try something about a president of accomplishment Lincoln, (there's an entire that lists books about Lincoln)Teddy Roosevelt ( David McCullough's "Morning on Horseback is fantastic and Edmund Morris' trilogy about Roosevelt is not to be missed), Franklin Roosevelt? (Again there's a shelf full of books: I'm partial to Doris Kearns Goodwin's "No Ordinary Time" and Geoffrey C Ward's "Before the Trumpets" and "A First Class Temperament." If you want to read about a shady president try John Farrell's "Richard Nixon: A Life." Nixon is a whole lot more interesting than Trump.

You already know more about Trump than he knows or realizes about himself. Skip this and read about a real president.

Becca on January 17, 2018
Disappointed. Full of innuendo and gossip

Disappointed. Full of innuendo and gossip. Editors should be flogged for all the errors they let by. Also someone needs to tell the author that he doesn't need to use ten dollar words to try and make the book seem credible.

Ricksterf on January 17, 2018
Poorly Written Book

I teetered between 2 and 3 stars, which means I'm somewhere between "don't like the book" and "it's okay. Here's why. The book was poorly written. Mechanically, there were way too many breaks (commas everywhere) throughout the flow of reading. Combine this with there were too many sophisticated words throughout the whole book, and there were typos and grammatical errors along with that. All these things distracted my attention away from what Mr. Wolff was trying to convey. I ultimately lose interest thus stopped reading the book.

To Mr. Wolff: If a reader is spending more time looking up the meaning of words or is constantly re-orientating because there are so many parenthetical notations, they will probably lose interest. I'm sure the material that surrounds the disaster our country is in right now is quite complicated. The task of explaining all this should not involve additional layers of confusion and arcane language.

Johanna Moscoso on January 17, 2018
All the best parts were publicized.

After the best parts were revealed in the media, the rest of the book reads as a dry attempt at juicy gossip.

John Crossland on January 17, 2018
Illuminating reading but a bit pompously worded for a wide audience

I learnt a lot about the nuttiness with the staff and the family, but I was glad I got the Kindle edition to look up some fairly obscure wording with the built in dictionary. I'd like to read a more straight forward plain speaking account with sources to set the record straight. Guess we'll get this from Bannon's testimony quite soon!

[Jan 17, 2018] Is There Life After Liberalism

Notable quotes:
"... As exciting as the 1930s ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Fourteen months ago, in the first flush of power, Steve Bannon gave an interview to Michael Wolff -- beginning a relationship that would prove his undoing -- in which he boasted about his plan to realign our politics. His nationalist-populist movement, he argued, would transform the G.O.P. into something truly new: a right-wing worker's party that spent freely, "jacked up" infrastructure all over the country, and won "60 percent of the white vote" and "40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote" on its way to a 50-year majority.

"We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks," Bannon said. "It will be as exciting as the 1930s."

As exciting as the 1930s is not a line you hear every day, but rather than an alt-right dog whistle, what I heard in Bannon's formulation was the idea that in the Trump era, as in the crisis years that gave us both F.D.R. and Hitler, everything might be up for grabs: not just electoral coalitions, but the nature and destiny of the liberal order. Which would be a terrifying prospect but also an exciting one, since it would mean that the long "end of history" that followed the Cold War had irrevocably ended, and that it was time to imagine radical revisions to a stagnant-seeming liberal West.

Flash forward a year and a couple months, though, and Bannon's vision seems pretty much dead: its rumpled leader sacked and ritually denounced, its bold populism subsumed into the same old, same old Republican agenda. Trump remains temperamentally authoritarian and personally vile, but the idea of Trump_vs_deep_state as an ideological revolution, whether akin to Roosevelt's or Mussolini's, has mostly evaporated.

Recent Comments

Candlewick 2 days ago

No. There isn't *life* after liberalism; just a bunch of dead men (GOP) wondering the earth with black hooded robes and scythes.

SP 2 days ago

It does not matter what we call these philosophies, whether Liberalism, Capitalism, Libertarianism etc. Good, ethical moral, wise,...

Michael Kubara 2 days ago

This suffers from the journalist disease-- "ism-ism": castigating "liberalism" without defining it." the crisis years that gave us both F.D...

[Jan 17, 2018] Inside the link between the Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr. and the Trump dossier

Jan 17, 2018 | www.washingtonpost.com

Emails released Tuesday by Trump Jr. reveal that his friend Rob Goldstone pitched the meeting based on the promise of damning information on Hillary Clinton that supposedly was being offered by senior Russian government officials. On Monday, Mark Corallo , a spokesman for President Trump's outside counsel, alleged that the meeting had been set up under false pretenses and implied that Veselnitskaya's association with Fusion GPS was relevant to the alleged deception.

[Jan 17, 2018] Journalist Bannon's 'Treason' Charge Against Trump, Jr. 'Is Ridiculous'

Notable quotes:
"... "Bannon is gone, but he's now become fodder for the book by Michael Wolff which is now being mined by both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee. We don't know what Bannon told the intelligence committee, since it was behind closed doors. But the New York Times, who broke the story, speculate that the subpoena is a way to get Bannon to agree to an interview rather than stand before the grand jury." ..."
"... Lauria also discussed Wolff's "Fire and Fury," which paints a highly negative image of the first year of the Trump White House -- including a quote from Bannon describing Donald Trump, Jr. and former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort as "treasonous." ..."
"... The conversation then turned to the specifics of Bannon's claim of treason, the meeting between Manafort, Trump, Jr. and several Russian lobbyists in Trump Tower, and its connection with the famous "dodgy dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele. ..."
"... "The difference is that intelligence reports are vetted by the intelligence agent and then by his superiors and usually by other agencies in his country's intelligence community. It's also a taxpayer-funded operation, supposedly to protect society, although that's not always what intelligence agencies do. Opposition research is a completely different thing: getting dirt on a political opponent, which is what Steele did," Lauria explained. ..."
"... "The idea that Trump, Jr. had gotten this opposition research from the Russian government, as apparently Bannon said, is completely incorrect because there was no one from the Russian government, there was a former KGB agent. The lawyer was not a member of the government and no dirt was ever turned over. [There's] only been one campaign that received opposition research from foreigners during the 2016 campaign: the Clinton campaign that paid for it via a British former intelligence agent and his supposed Russian sources. But foreign opposition research [has] never been established as a crime." ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | sputniknews.com

Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon has been subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury, supposedly on alleged ties between the presidential campaign of Donald Trump and Russian actors. Brian Becker on Radio Sputnik's Loud & Clear was joined by Joe Lauria, a veteran journalist who has also worked for major newspapers in four countries, perhaps most notably as the Wall Street Journal's correspondent to the United Nations.

​"Mr. Bannon has fallen and I think he was the ideological force behind Trump, particularly in relations with Russia," said Lauria. "It's interesting to know why did Trump call for detente, and still seems to be pursuing detente, with Russia. Many people who believe in Russiagate believe it's because he's somehow beholden to them or has been blackmailed or whatever. But professor Jeffrey Summers with the University of Wisconsin wrote an interesting piece where he said Bannon was the one who had impressed upon Trump that he should improve relations with Russia so they can team up against Islamic extremism."

"Bannon is gone, but he's now become fodder for the book by Michael Wolff which is now being mined by both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee. We don't know what Bannon told the intelligence committee, since it was behind closed doors. But the New York Times, who broke the story, speculate that the subpoena is a way to get Bannon to agree to an interview rather than stand before the grand jury."

© REUTERS/ Carlos Barria 'Fit For Duty': White House Physician Sees No Concerns About Trump's Health

Lauria also discussed Wolff's "Fire and Fury," which paints a highly negative image of the first year of the Trump White House -- including a quote from Bannon describing Donald Trump, Jr. and former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort as "treasonous."

"If you read the key quote in that book, the House Intelligence Committee wants to question him about an allegation against Paul Manafort and Donald Trump, Jr. for treason. I find this very curious. If Bannon wanted Trump to have better relations with Russia, it's curious that he would roll out an accusation of treason. He's far from the only one to bring the charge against Trump in this entire Russiagate fiasco, but if you look at treason, it's the only crime defined in the US Constitution. It says clearly treason against the US consists only of assisting an enemy of the US in a state of open hostility with us."

© REUTERS/ Jonathan Ernst Trump Jr.: Bannon Turned His White House Career Opportunity Into Nightmare

"Russia is not in open hostilities with the United States, no one would argue that. The idea that Trump, Jr. has committed treason is ridiculous. I don't know why Bannon used [the term]. Clearly he was angry at Trump for being fired, I don't know if he was begging for his job back as Trump tweeted," Lauria said.

The conversation then turned to the specifics of Bannon's claim of treason, the meeting between Manafort, Trump, Jr. and several Russian lobbyists in Trump Tower, and its connection with the famous "dodgy dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele.

"If I could talk a second about that Don Jr meeting, there's a core issue in it over the difference in opposition research and intelligence," Lauria said. "While Christopher Steele was an MI-6 intelligence agent for Britain, he was working for a private company at the time. He was hired by the Clinton campaign and the [Democratic National Committee] through Fusion GPS. Glenn Simpson, of Fusion, who hired Steele directly, wrote in a New York Times editorial that Steele produced intelligence memos. He was either lying or misleading the readers -- he has to know the difference between them."

© REUTERS/ Jonathan Ernst 'Enough is Enough': Trump Lawyer Sues BuzzFeed, Fusion GPS Over Trump Dossier

"The difference is that intelligence reports are vetted by the intelligence agent and then by his superiors and usually by other agencies in his country's intelligence community. It's also a taxpayer-funded operation, supposedly to protect society, although that's not always what intelligence agencies do. Opposition research is a completely different thing: getting dirt on a political opponent, which is what Steele did," Lauria explained.

"The idea that Trump, Jr. had gotten this opposition research from the Russian government, as apparently Bannon said, is completely incorrect because there was no one from the Russian government, there was a former KGB agent. The lawyer was not a member of the government and no dirt was ever turned over. [There's] only been one campaign that received opposition research from foreigners during the 2016 campaign: the Clinton campaign that paid for it via a British former intelligence agent and his supposed Russian sources. But foreign opposition research [has] never been established as a crime."

[Jan 16, 2018] The Donald Trump Conversation Politics' Dark Heart Is Having the Best Time Anyone's Ever Had

Initial article about Trump by Michael Wolff which allowed him to put a feet into WH door later, in February 2017 when he decided to milk the Trump administration.
That's was probably the only major interaction of Wolff with Trump. Wolff claimed that Trump liked it ("for some reason"), but I do not see what can be liked in this article. It is very mediocre.
It is alarming to see that Trump did not understand whom he is dealing with: "This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media."
You see all Wolff's typical tricks, innuendo, and his infatuation with the celebrities here "a pint of vanilla Haagen-Dazs ice cream"... "a 5,395-square-foot Colonial mansion" ...""There had to be over a thousand policeman. They had a neighborhood roped off, four or five blocks away from this beautiful house. Machine guns all over the place.". Nothing of substance. You will never guess from the article whom Trump represents and how he channels the anger of ordinary Americans against neoliberalism and globalization.
You can also can see Wolff's flattery in action (just in case; he decided to write the book much later, in Feb of 2017). Later Woff did the same trick with Bannon and actually got the access to WH via him.
It looks like among readers of Hollywood reporter there here some Trump supporters. Comments to this article are really interesting to read now, two years later and they are more informative that Wolff's article by leap and bounds.
Notable quotes:
"... One thing to understand about Trump is that, rather unexpectedly, he's neither angry nor combative. He may be the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern life, and yet, in person he's almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubs off. He's a New Yorker who actually might be more at home in California (in fact, he says he usually comes to his home here -- two buildings on Rodeo Drive -- only once a year). Life is sunny. Trump is an optimist -- at least about himself. He's in easy and relaxed form campaigning here in these final days before the June 7 California primary, even with Hillary Clinton's biggest backers and a city that is about half Latino surrounding him. ..."
"... If onstage he calls people names, more privately he has only good, embracing things to say about almost everybody. (For most public people I know, it is the opposite.) He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't). Expressing love for everybody, for most of us, would clearly seem to be an act. But with Trump, it's the name-calling and bluster that might be the act. ..."
"... What a self serving article once again, can't you fools write without trying to demean your next president, in every paragraph? ..."
"... Another sleeze. Nuff said. ..."
"... This wasn't an "interview", Mr. Wolff. It read like a terribly biased libturd desperately attempting to 'bait' a Presidential candidate with childish, unimportant questions. We get it...you don't approve of Trump. Now go home and cry in your pillow. ..."
"... Let's get this straight, Trump exists because the leadership of both parties declared an undeclared war on the American people. Their disdain towards ordinary Americans makes them willing to lie to get theirs and screw everybody else. The Republican leadership? Losers. That's why he exists. ..."
"... Totally biased flake article, the author is clearly a Clinton shill. The give away is labeling Clinton Cash a "hatchet job", considering a huge portion of the MSM on the left have validated the book as 100% accurate and true. ..."
"... Surprised Trump bothered giving the antagonistic Michael Wolff the interview, but it does show Trump is fearless. Hillary won't go within 5 miles of Fox News. ..."
"... The arrogance of the writer, Michael Wolff is breathtaking. We get it Mr. Wolff. Your story included the small talk and you articulated YOUR pre-conceived opinions and impressions of Mr. Trump. ..."
"... Like or hate 'em there is one thing that Trump and Sanders have both accomplished: They have thoroughly exposed the corruption and the contempt for the American People that is "mainstream" politics for both sides. ..."
"... For that reason alone, it's been great to have these guys in the race. ..."
"... This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media. ..."
"... Here in "liberal" Boston the Trump signs are everywhere. Bad sign for Madame Mao. Trump may not take Massachusetts but he is closing the gap with that hideous woman. ..."
"... Like Trump said: "The press are very, very dishonest. Some of them are downright sleazy".Thank God for the internet, otherwise the MSM would have us believe Madame Mao is the Virgin Mary. ..."
"... I wouldn't be surprised to see the 'Hollywood Reporter' shut off comments early. ..."
"... They delete all non-liberal comments, usually later in the morning... the millennial lib's arrive late to work in the morning because they're out partying all night... ..."
Jan 16, 2018 | www.hollywoodreporter.com

The long day is ending for Donald Trump with a pint of vanilla Haagen-Dazs ice cream. We're settling in for a late-night chat at his Beverly Hills house, a 5,395-square-foot Colonial mansion directly across from the Beverly Hills Hotel. He's here for the final presidential primary, a California coronation of sorts, after rallies in Orange County (where violence broke out and seven people were arrested). He is, as he has been for much of our conversation - and perhaps much of the last year - marveling at his own campaign. "You looked outside before, you see what's going on," he boasts about the police surrounding his house, and the Secret Service detail cramming his garage and snaking around the pool at the center of the front drive. And he's just returned from a big donor fundraiser in Brentwood for the Republican Party at the home of Tom Barrack, the investor and former Miramax co-owner. "There had to be over a thousand policeman. They had a neighborhood roped off, four or five blocks away from this beautiful house. Machine guns all over the place."

One thing to understand about Trump is that, rather unexpectedly, he's neither angry nor combative. He may be the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern life, and yet, in person he's almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubs off. He's a New Yorker who actually might be more at home in California (in fact, he says he usually comes to his home here -- two buildings on Rodeo Drive -- only once a year). Life is sunny. Trump is an optimist -- at least about himself. He's in easy and relaxed form campaigning here in these final days before the June 7 California primary, even with Hillary Clinton's biggest backers and a city that is about half Latino surrounding him.

... ... ...

If onstage he calls people names, more privately he has only good, embracing things to say about almost everybody. (For most public people I know, it is the opposite.) He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't). Expressing love for everybody, for most of us, would clearly seem to be an act. But with Trump, it's the name-calling and bluster that might be the act.

... ... ...

Trump will turn 70 on June 14, but he shows no sign of fatigue even as our conversation drifts toward 11 p.m. He's been at this since either 4 a.m. or 6 a.m. (he offers different times at different moments).

...Then I came back and did more meetings, then I did a fundraiser tonight, then I did Kimmel. And now you. You're not a two-minute interview guy."

V. M. Varga > HelloTommy • 2 years ago

Bernie has no chance and Hillary is a neocon. What war next.

Ranger_Ric > Political Hostage • 2 years ago

Neocon or neoliberal, they are the same animals and there is no difference between George Bush and Hillary Clinton. They all answer to the same NWO masters.

There is a difference in Hillary's case... She is a habitual liar, a fake, a criminal and a lesbian. Other than that, there is one uniparty, the Washington Criminal Mafia.

Penny • 2 years ago

I love the smell of radical establishment media's hysteria this early in the morning. Naturally, the media elite who have not gone after Obama for not having a press conference since 2009 and Clinton, who has not had one in over a year, doesn't make a bean's hill of difference. ROT is the name of the "mainstream" media, especially when they see their D.C. lifestyle of corruption and cover-ups threatened by a straight-shooting, take-no-prisoners man like Trump.

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN--TRUMP/SESSIONS 2016

YesMeansNOMeansYES • 2 years ago

What a self serving article once again, can't you fools write without trying to demean your next president, in every paragraph?

Walter White > YesMeansNOMeansYES • 2 years ago

Another sleeze. Nuff said.

mredward > Political Hostage • 2 years ago

As you read the anti Trump posts, remember the Hillary pacs have purchased over a million dollars worth of bogus posters here.

SmartDoctor • 2 years ago

Hmm. The real news is NOT that the competition is in a statistical dead heat during the first week of June. The real news is that Hillary's polls have been steadily plummeting, and with her level of charisma, charm, and message, it is totally illogical to assume that they are going to improve anytime soon. They won't. And Trump, the "clown", the totally undetectable candidate, the spoiler, the guy with no Republican backing what so ever, keeps going up and up and up. Of course the left never, ever shows the size of the crowds he attracts to his rallies. The left is completely out of touch with the American mainstream (you know, the folks Mr. Nixon once called "the silent majority".) Trump has the momentum nationwide, and no one except Southern black ladies likes Hillary. There is your story! Next paragraph, "how did this happen?" And keep in mind, the FBI hasn't spoken yet, Bernie ain't through yet, the left wing, Soros financed riots haven't begun yet, 2 weeks in politics is a lifetime, and we haven't gotten to the convention boost yet. Yeah, I'm biased. In America's favor, sorry if that offends anyone. TRUMP 2016

Political Hostage > SmartDoctor • 2 years ago

I live in the South, with a ton of black folks, and have yet to see any HRC bumper stickers on their cars. It's mostly Coopers, Beetles, and Cubes that have the HRC swag on them. Not many though.

Our building has about 6,000 people working in it and there maybe a handful of Bernie stickers too. Most working people aren't looking in the direction of democrats.

Bill Strang • 2 years ago

And you don't think the media is too easy on Hillary? Every time she opens her mouth, she lies and the media just ignores it. But lets just hold Trump to a much higher standard then a standard democrat.

Penny > Bill Strang • 2 years ago

That is the job description of the elitists (a/k/a "mainstream" media). A recent survey revealed that 85 percent-plus media are demRATS

Wilkins Micawber • 2 years ago

A vote for Clinton is a vote for the leftist, moonbat, felon, gay, generational welfare leech, gov union, drug addicted, pervert, lgtqxyz, pedophile, academic, stupid college kid, white guilt ridden, illiterate third world invading trash, in other words the Democrat base, that supports her.

Angry black woman > Wilkins Micawber • 2 years ago

10000 up votes

TroyGale • 2 years ago

I like confident people who are confident because they have struggled and won in the arena. Trump is no different, he wins...Why?
Here is a quote from General George Patton, I think it explains it perfectly....

"All men are timid on entering any fight. Whether it is the first or the last fight, all of us are timid. Cowards are those who let their timidity get the better
of their manhood."

Trump doesn't let his timidity get involved, AT ALL.

Brian washere • 2 years ago

Here's an inconvenient truth liberals (media) don't want to face. All those blue collar dems that have always been brainwashed into thinking the Bolsheviks (D) were for the "working man" are finally opening their dim eyes and realizing they have been sold down the river.

The regulations puked out by government that chases their workplaces out of the country and the illegals they have to compete with for replacement jobs, all trademarks of the progressives, have f--ked them hard. They are going to go Trump in huge numbers.

All the dems voter fraud and manipulation won't save Shrillary from that fact. This is going to be so lopsided it will make Reagan/Carter look like a nail-biter.

Bill Thompson • 2 years ago

I'll vote for him because I want to control our border, enforce our immigration laws, cut the H-1B visas, keep our troops home, eliminate free trade, protect the 2nd amendment.

phosgene • 2 years ago

is trump ever going to have to answer a single challenging question about how he is full of sheet? this is an "interview" where he eats ice cream and talks about himself. we already know he can do that. the only policy or current events based questions i saw he was completely oblivious. there is no room for anything in trump's world but trump.

hillary volunteered for the goldwater campaign when she was younger. her credentials as a republican and a conservative are stronger than trump's. the guy has conned millions into completely selling out their party and beliefs. sad.

nonuser > phosgene • 2 years ago

Congratulations, you've made Michael Wolff very happy.

dudefromdixie • 2 years ago

Trump is going to unite the right like none before him. He is also going to conquer the left, like none before him.

HelloTommy • 2 years ago

Donald Trump's new finance guru: once a Clinton donor, Soros employee. Steven Mnuchin also contributed to Obama, Kerry and Gore. You Trumpets are so gullible. He is also an ex-Goldman-Sachs employee and PAC donor. We're suppose to hate that right? Tell me how that is okay?

MICHAELNLA > HelloTommy • 2 years ago

"gullible?"

You Liberals voted for a guy who you thought was Black, not once but twice...guess you forgot to ask him who his mother was.

Meanwhile, Hussein has DOUBLED the National Debt in 8 years!

We have 95 MILLION Americans out of the work force.
50 MILLION Americans on Food Stamps.
Half of college grads unemployed.

And you expect Americans to give the "D" party another
four years in the White House...KEEP DREAMING, LEFTY!

OWilson • 2 years ago

The arrogant left, and their pals in the Media, are not used to being questioned. Hillary hasn't had a press conference in 2016. She lets CNN do all the Trump bashing, all the time. They see a change coming, and it scares the hell out of them all.

jj333 • 2 years ago

This wasn't an "interview", Mr. Wolff. It read like a terribly biased libturd desperately attempting to 'bait' a Presidential candidate with childish, unimportant questions. We get it...you don't approve of Trump. Now go home and cry in your pillow.

SamVaughn • 2 years ago

Let's get this straight, Trump exists because the leadership of both parties declared an undeclared war on the American people. Their disdain towards ordinary Americans makes them willing to lie to get theirs and screw everybody else. The Republican leadership? Losers. That's why he exists.


ObiterDictum • 2 years ago

Menacing who? If he financially runs the country like his campaign, expect some of those non-essential government employees to be out on the street. For years our Government has not been afraid of the governed, but now they fear our proxy.

Bluto Redneck ✓Shithole Appr. > ObiterDictum • 2 years ago

Exactly. I predict a 15-20% real cut in our federal bureaucracy. And God help any of those fools that go out on strike. Air traffic controllers anyone?

phosgene > ObiterDictum • 2 years ago

he's not going to cut a damn thing. do you even listen to what he says? build a wall, kick out 11 million people, massive military increases, massive increase for veterans, massive infrastructure rebuilding, replacing obamacare with something "better".

none of this is small government stuff, kids. he hasn't mentioned cutting a single thing on the stump. oh yeah, and the age old republican idea of reforming entitlements? OUT THE WINDOW!

well, that only costs a few TRILLION.

Reaganite✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ • 2 years ago

One of the more obvious reasons Trump has been viewed by so many as the GOP´s best hope of defeating Our Empress of the Seven Genders is precisely because he - and he alone among the candidates - doesn´t give a flying flip about the "civility" speech code Democrats impose upon Republicans (or the New Tone muzzle Republicans impose upon themselves) that prohibit the Left from ever having to face the mocking, the insults, the scathing satire, and the verbal abuse they themselves vomit upon the Right on a daily basis. The establishment still doesn´t seem to understand just how refreshing this is.

Reaganite✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ • 2 years ago

Donald Trump and his people are upending the Political Media/Progressive Establishment industrial complex narrative. These " media cretins of PC conformity" are staring into the abyss of their own personal irrelevancy. Trump's celebrity and unapologetic surrogates allow his campaign to fight them with devastating effect. The professionally offended are blinded to their own hypocrisy.

Weezy -Stable Genius • 2 years ago

Totally biased flake article, the author is clearly a Clinton shill. The give away is labeling Clinton Cash a "hatchet job", considering a huge portion of the MSM on the left have validated the book as 100% accurate and true.

What kills many is these reporters really believe the public is incapable of discerning their real intentions when producing articles like this.

In the meantime, Trump continues to roll on and gain further momentum.

notimportant > phosgene • 2 years ago

Completely different situation. Make the media responsible for what they tout! They can say what they want, but they better make sure it's correct. Of course, liberals don't believe in personal responsibility. By the way, Putin has an 80% approval rating in his country and many people respect the man outside the country. That's because he's a man and stands up for what he believes. He doesn't allow bullying or ugliness by those who disagree with him to effect him. Time we had that in our country and we will when Trump is president. Neither Putin nor Trump are one world order supporters. Neither am I

ScottPM • 2 years ago

Nothing would be worse than having a President that has shown that they are utterly reckless, arrogant, and shows a total disregard for American lives by INTENTIONALLY mishandling classified information. Information is classified because people die if it gets out. hillary has shown she can NOT be trusted as President.

phosgene > ScottPM • 2 years ago

you are completely ignorant. half the paperwork the government generates is classified. they completely misuse it ON PURPOSE. it is meant to control information. lives have nothing to do with it. it is about protecting their butts

strongisland • 2 years ago

Amazing how a mere journalist for the Hollyweird Reporter repeatedly attempts to elevate himself intellectually above a man who is light years more successful than himself. The mocking doesn't work here. In fact, it belies what the author is all about. The typical Gen Y, millennial liberal snark that is never to be taken seriously...because, well, these fools think no issues are actually serious. As long as the progressive playbook is being fulfilled...these fools are happy in their rapidly deteriorating paradise.

For someone who is seemingly so in tune with the important issues...he sure skirted them as conveniently as possible when it came to this interview. Sometimes...a worthy opponent brings out the best in an individual. Sadly, for Donald Trump...he was tangling with a total lightweight here.

cageysea • 2 years ago

"... He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't)..."

Uh.... Yeah, I got nothin'.

Mitch Alan > Bad Will Hunting • 2 years ago

...Surprised Trump bothered giving the antagonistic Michael Wolff the interview, but it does show Trump is fearless. Hillary won't go within 5 miles of Fox News.

Deplorable- jean Lee • 2 years ago

The arrogance of the writer, Michael Wolff is breathtaking. We get it Mr. Wolff. Your story included the small talk and you articulated YOUR pre-conceived opinions and impressions of Mr. Trump. You are the one with the black heart! Trump 2016

Stormrdr • 2 years ago

Like or hate 'em there is one thing that Trump and Sanders have both accomplished: They have thoroughly exposed the corruption and the contempt for the American People that is "mainstream" politics for both sides. The mechanizations and back-room dealings have been fully revealed with each attempt to derail these "outsiders". For that reason alone, it's been great to have these guys in the race.

I can't say I'm a big fan of either one of them, but I do admire what they've accomplished for America's political future (whether or not it was intentional).

Rocky • 2 years ago

This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media.

jack4949 • 2 years ago

Here in "liberal" Boston the Trump signs are everywhere. Bad sign for Madame Mao. Trump may not take Massachusetts but he is closing the gap with that hideous woman.

jack4949 • 2 years ago

Like Trump said: "The press are very, very dishonest. Some of them are downright sleazy".Thank God for the internet, otherwise the MSM would have us believe Madame Mao is the Virgin Mary.

Yip Yap • 2 years ago

I wouldn't be surprised to see the 'Hollywood Reporter' shut off comments early. It has been doing that lately when comments don't go it's way. THAT WALL'S GOIN' TA BE HUUUGE!!!

barney59 > Yip Yap • 2 years ago

They delete all non-liberal comments, usually later in the morning... the millennial lib's arrive late to work in the morning because they're out partying all night...

[Jan 16, 2018] In the emails, Goldstone said he made contact with Trump Jr at the behest of the Russian-Azeri businessman Aras Agalarov and Aglaravov's pop-star son, Emin. On Wednesday, Aras Agalarov claimed the story was invented.

Jan 16, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said it was "wild" that Trump's son was being blamed for speaking with a Russian attorney. Lavrov – who met Trump last week at the G20 summit in Hamburg, together with Vladimir Putin – said he knew nothing of the meeting with the lawyer. Serious people were trying to "make a mountain out of a molehill", Lavrov said.

In the emails, Goldstone said he made contact with Trump Jr at the behest of the Russian-Azeri businessman Aras Agalarov and Aglaravov's pop-star son, Emin. The Agalarovs hosted Trump when he visited Moscow in 2013 for the Miss Universe beauty pageant.

On Wednesday, Aras Agalarov claimed the story was invented. "I think this is some sort of fiction. I don't know who is making it up," he told Russia's Business FM radio station, adding: "What has Hillary Clinton got to do with anything? I don't know."

[Jan 16, 2018] Is There Life After Liberalism - The New York Times

Notable quotes:
"... As exciting as the 1930s ..."
Jan 16, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Fourteen months ago, in the first flush of power, Steve Bannon gave an interview to Michael Wolff -- beginning a relationship that would prove his undoing -- in which he boasted about his plan to realign our politics. His nationalist-populist movement, he argued, would transform the G.O.P. into something truly new: a right-wing worker's party that spent freely, "jacked up" infrastructure all over the country, and won "60 percent of the white vote" and "40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote" on its way to a 50-year majority.

"We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks," Bannon said. "It will be as exciting as the 1930s."

As exciting as the 1930s is not a line you hear every day, but rather than an alt-right dog whistle, what I heard in Bannon's formulation was the idea that in the Trump era, as in the crisis years that gave us both F.D.R. and Hitler, everything might be up for grabs: not just electoral coalitions, but the nature and destiny of the liberal order. Which would be a terrifying prospect but also an exciting one, since it would mean that the long "end of history" that followed the Cold War had irrevocably ended, and that it was time to imagine radical revisions to a stagnant-seeming liberal West.

Flash forward a year and a couple months, though, and Bannon's vision seems pretty much dead: its rumpled leader sacked and ritually denounced, its bold populism subsumed into the same old, same old Republican agenda. Trump remains temperamentally authoritarian and personally vile, but the idea of Trump_vs_deep_state as an ideological revolution, whether akin to Roosevelt's or Mussolini's, has mostly evaporated.

Continue reading the main story