"the president appeared reasonably affable and businesslike."
And then he declared Haiti, El Salvador, and the nations of Africa to be "s---hole countries."
Sorry, but nothing said about Trump in the book comes close to the sabotaging he does to his own reputation every other time he speaks or tweets. In fact, he has finally motivated several mainstream news organizations to declare his thoughts to be decidedly racist rather than dancing around the issue as was done so often last year.
18
And then Trump spoke again about his racist views.
8
Trump filled the dumpster with garbage and poured gasoline over it. Wollf simply lit the match.
11
"We said ... the stock market would never recover from his election. That he would blow up NATO. That the Middle East would erupt in violence when Jerusalem was recognized as Israel’s capital."
Unfortunately, there will continue to be catastrophic errors until something does blow up. And when the excrement hits the fan, it will make us nostalgic for the reactionary judges and the environmental damage he is currently leaving in his wake. It is not a matter of if. It is only a matter of when something will go wildly wrong.
Like a 2-year-old blithely wandering into a busy street he may be lucky, but more likely, the longer he is stumbling around in traffic the more likely he is to cause a multi-car pileup.
15
I cannot yet put a finger on it as to why, but I really don't agree with this commentary. It just seems to smack of illegitimate logic. It flips fake news logic upside down.
It maintains that I (or rather Wolff's book) must be "perfect" (unassailable), to legitimately analytically criticize (with the commentary of 200 White House insiders) the Trump debacle.
Trumpers will not change, but not because of this book's effect. They will not change because that resistance to change, largely, psychologically, is the very definition of a far right conservative.
And change is so uncomfortable, that the ends justify the means (of supporting or not calling out Trump OR permitting a comfort factor with Fake News itself).
15
Most New Yorkers, like me, haven't been surprised by the reports in the book. We know Trump is a narcissist, a publicity hound, a greedy businessman who cheats and borrows and leans on his lawyers when things go wrong. I expected him to be a terrible president, but he's even worse than I anticipated, as he rips apart protections and social safety nets that Obama put together or strengthened, and that I assumed Hillary Clinton would continue. Instead we may well have Russian energy companies drilling and fracking in our national parks, coal dust and poisons in our rivers, and oily dead birds on our beaches. I never thought much of Republican politicians, but I didn't expect them to sit back and allow Putin to call the shots in the Oval Office, shrugging off his influence as long as it enhanced their own power. Trump's gossip-column persona was sometimes amusing when he was a private citizen; now he's a clear and present danger to all of us in America, whether sick kids or immigrants or even media pundits. If you're a healthy white wall architect who speaks Russian, of course, you might be okay.
21
The book will be forgotten very soon. What real lasting damage was done? None. The people who think his performance was acceptable in the televised meeting are not engaging in much critical thinking, are they? They will defend him no matter what he does. Let's face it, we'll be on to the next fifteen minutes of pandemonium any minute. And...with the President's remarks on immigration and Haiti...we are.
10
sums up my opinion; so, nothing to add :)
2
Give me a break. Public expectations were so low as to be practically nonexistent even before the book. Any public appearance in which Trump doesn't fart or have a finger up his nose is considered an unqualified success
17
So what should Wolff's book have said. That Trump is the greatest ever? Of course nothing anyone says and nothing Trump does is going to change the minds of the dirty unwashed masses that voted for him. He will win re-election easily and after that there will be an amendment to allow him to run again. Our experiment in democracy is over. It failed.
7
Perhaps Mr. Stephens knows a bit of what he speaks, having worked for the serial fabulists and GOP sycophants that populate the Editorial Pages of the Wall St. Journal. Before he apparently got tired of waking up with fleas (professionally speaking) and found more sanitary sanctuary at the NYT, Stephens swam in a swamp of propaganda, ideological innuendo, corporate agitprop, and selective reporting that are distinct and separate things from journalism and numbers on other WSJ pages. So let's give Bret a break as it appears that he is still recovering from WSJ-Stockholm Syndrome.
20
Mr. Stephens has a point when he focuses on Wolff's reporting of Trump's moron qualities exclusive of his obvious talents as a performer and manipulator. FIRE AND FURY, however, is deliciously fascinating for many other reasons - for showing that the government is now "a family affair" for the conflicts in the White House during Wolff's tenure there; and showing the manner in which decisions are reached currently.
4
Many people (myself included) need read no gossip book to conclude that, if not a ‘raving idiot’, Donald Trump is a ravingly incompetent and spectacularly unqualified president of the U.S.
13
Yes it IS delicious to hear that everyone around Trump thinks he's a moron, idiot, fool, and dope. I don't understand how a book stating this is somehow helping the president. I don't see how exposing that even his closest advisors think he's an imbecile sets a high bar for Trumpian failure.
8
To hear Stephens tell it, decency can't win.
If you say nothing about the abomination that is this racist, semiliterate thug, you normalize him.
If you expose him, somehow that helps him in that it lowers the bar -- applicable only to him -- further.
Heads he wins, tails you lose.
Deplorable.
12
The smug comments here prove Bret Stephens's point.
I've asked her before: HAVE YOU CONTRIBUTED TO A DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL ORGANIZATION?
Not one commentator here has replied yes or proffered an amount. Not one of you.
But your comments here prove how smart you are.
You will get Trump re-elected in 2020. You deserve it.
5
Yes I have, and No I don't.
9
This marks the complete return of the NYT"s never-Trumpers to the Trump fold.
First, David Brooks' op-ed confessional from earlier this week on recognizing all the achievements of the Trump Administration, such as taking on Iran.
Now, Bret Stephens' attack on Wolff's methods is really his way of stating that if Wolff is anti-Trump then he is anti-Wolff, i.e. pro-Trump.
Time for Ross Douthat to come out fully as well...who, when I think about it, may already have done so.
13
A greedy book full of avarice, fear, and hate. Everyone involved with this book is tainted and only looking out for their own interests. This is a nightmare, and I hope Mueller's investigation will wake us to the truth, hard as it may be.
3
Oh, Mr. Stephens. A nice writer with questionable logic.
"The net result is that “Fire and Fury” has so thoroughly succeeded in lowering public expectations for Trump that it makes it that much easier for him to exceed them."
Literally one paragraph above you praise him for...."Yet to a normal person casually tuning in, the president appeared reasonably affable and businesslike. He listened. He cracked an appropriate joke. He said he was prepared to defer to the wishes of Congress."
You're not lowering expectations by give the Moron points for appearing affable and cracking jokes? WOW.
11
AH , I agree. The column just does not stand to reason.
Very odd analysis. Just odd.
8
"The president isn’t making a fool of himself. He’s having a laugh that’s part self-deprecation, part trolling, and actual wit."
Right, Bret Stephens. Few people seem to recognize the wit in Donald Trump. (Especially Hillary ought to do better recognizing hilarity.) Donald Trump was, like, joking about being, like, really smart and a "very stable genius".
Donald Trump has a sly wit the likes of which we rarely see in politics. Not cerebral but earthy. It drives a lot of people crazy enough for them to call Donald Trump crazy. Or worse. But he's joking.
Like when he said Megyn Kelly had "blood coming out of her . . . wherever." And that "maybe the Second Amendment people" could do something about Hillary Clinton. (That one made Dan Rather blather.) And "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you'll be able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing". And that Kirsten Gillibrand came begging him for campaign contributions and "would do anything for them".
Yes, he meant the insinuations. But no, he wasn't seriously saying that Megyn Kelly was menstruating, that gun advocates should assassinate Hillary Clinton, that Russia should commit espionage, or that Kirsten Gillibrand was a prostitute. He went to the edge, but not over. That takes skill. That takes thinking on your feet.
I don't like that kind of humor. It's too acerbic, too sardonic, too biting for my taste. But the man is not raving. He's joking.
6
He's hateful
10
Cocktail of Wolff's National Inquirer like journalism and Trump administration's Jerry Springer Show like behavior got to stink and got to be poisonous.
The US has a free democratic society keeps sinking to new low every week.
Trump is too easy to demonize. He's self-destructive. One needn't editorialize. Just look at him starting with the very weird do upon his head. That is not a normal person. That says "look at me, I am weak and afraid, but must appear strong and fearless." Look and listen.
On the other hand, Fire and Fury has already hurt Trump and Bannon's populism. Don't think it hasn't. I submit that prison will likely be the next career moves for Donald and his mafia family.
7
Mr Stephens, I disagree with your analysis of the use of the word "like" in Trump's tweet about being "...really, like, smart." I initially found it very puzzling (as well as idiotic). Who would write that construction other than a novelist writing, or reporter covering, dialog? Then I realized that Trump most likely does not actually type out his tweets - has anyone ever observed him doing that? Instead he must be using a voice-to-text application converting his speech to written word. That explanation is the only one that makes sense given the fact that he frequently speaks like an 8-year old, but rarely, if ever, has displayed any evidence of a finely-tuned sense of humor or the capability of expressing subtle irony. You're giving him way too much credit!
17
"This is not a winning strategy"? It is, in substance, the same strategy used by Trump to "win" the election--aggressive character assassination, exaggerations and lies: fight fire with fire?
7
You have a good point, but when you say "The catastrophes haven’t happened, and maybe that’s just a matter of luck." you are wrong. I consider him not signing the Paris Climate Accord and the aftermath of our standing in the world a catastrophe. I consider him paving the way for offshore drilling off our coasts a catastrophe. I consider the handing over of the majority of American's money to the über-wealthy a catastrophe. and more and more and more.
Yes, those Republicans who sold their souls to the devil may not be affected by Wolff's book. On the other hand, I really don't see how it does any harm. It has not lowered the standard of acceptable behavior. Get rid of the bum and the bums who continue to pave his way to destroying our nation.
7
I found this column insightful. We should recall what the writer Michael Kinsley said about political gaffes: "A gaffe is when someone tells the truth." Though the book told us what we already know, it is not without significance that the fact Steve Bannon (Trump campaign "CEO") called the actions of several members of the Trump campaign "treasonous" and "unpatriotic". For the sin of telling the truth, Bannon has been banned from the Trump movement and the conservative movement. That's the most interesting result of the book; it tells us where Trumpism is especially sensitive and, very likely, most vulnerable. It could be that soon we won't be talking about where the Trump bar is set; we may be talking about who's going to jail.
3
I am pretty sure that when Mueller report eventually comes out, with all its indictments, it will be attacked by the right as fantasy and liberal biased attack on conservative world, however most Americans will not be shocked, may actually shrug it off. Donald Trump is so bad that Americans became tired of the situation. In some sense Trump already has been more less normalized and this editorial confirms that.
I don't know how much of the Wolff's book is true but it in general confirms most info that comes out from WH. The book will not change the general understanding of how the WH operates.
4
Not for nothing, Donald trump didn't just walk into the White House one day and announce "here I am," no , he had to go through a grueling election run. State after state, addressing crowds in the tens of thousands, maybe 3 speeches a day. He had to get on a stage in a series of primaries, on stage with several sitting Governors, Senators, some of the top businessmen in the country and a neurosurgeon..and he bested them all. Then he had to go up against the sharpest political operator in the history of this country in Hillary herself, 3 times he went head to head with her. All the time the Press belittled him, they talked about the size of his hands, they questioned why he was sniffing so much during the debates, why he needed so much water, if he was sweating too much...and through all this, day after day, month after month, he still persevered......who's the dummy again?
4
Tabloid nonsense. Trump certainly is in artful in many of his pronouncement. Mr. Stephens may not like him as a person. He even went so far as to have preferred to have Hillary in the White House. Really questions Mr Stephens fitness to know what's best for the country.
This book is so inconsequential but to pad the bank account of its author.
1
Good column.
What Democrats and others who wish to see the end of this cancer need to do is to START LISTENING to the sizeable part of the country who voted for him. LISTEN, LISTEN, LISTEN. (And listening is not just the pause while you wait to resume your lecture -- listening is LISTENING).
If we don't understand why people voted for him and why some still support him, then we cannot counter this trend. LISTEN!
2
I work in Texas.
I have been listening.
I hear resentment.
3
To quote "Donnie Fingers" Trump:
"I call it TRUTHFUL HYPERBOLE"
The book has created and cast Trump's actions into a way of "FRAMING" everything he does
It's a version of the "Chinese Finger Trap"....the more he struggles,
the more he trapped and exposed.
3
Of course.
The writer who insists that 97 percent of the world's climate scientists don't know what they're talking about complains about Michael Wolff's factual errors.
Now, why didn't I think of that?
5
Let's go all out and admit that the catastrophes that haven't happened yet are just a matter of dumb luck. Otherwise, Mr. Stephens seems to be right on target. Nobody should be the least bit surprised by the "tell all" revelations exposed in "Fire and Fury." these have been confirmed daily by the president himself since long before he acceded to the Oval Office.
One minor quibble, however. Mr. Stephens credits the president with mastering "the fine print in the Bill of Rights — all the way from the First to the Third Amendment." This is far too generous.
3
I read this as another attack and attempt to attenuate the impact of Michael Wolff's book. Say what you will, it certainly seemed to upset Trump. And it seems the Mercer family has cut up Bannon's meal ticket. Positive outcomes.
By the way, in the accompanying picture, Trump is wearing a blue tie. Press photographers must have been invited.
I bought two copies of Wolff's book today. He should be rewarded.
6
This is just another one of many editorials that is trying to make the case that Trump is playing three-dimensional chess while the rest of us are playing checkers. It's nonsense. There is no evidence whatsoever that Trump has hidden mercurial talents that no one else in Washington possesses. In fact, the evidence overwhelmingly suggests the opposite, as Bret himself says that he believes in this very same piece.
3
In total agreement with S. Wether of Montana below, I too lay the blame at America's doorsteps of lackadaisical Americans.
It seems the "what we've got" is government by a political class which we've allowed to be relatively inattentive to the nation's needs, our citizens' needs and the responsibility for prudently managing the economy of our once Great Democracy.
Do our schools still teach a "Civics" curriculum? Are our youth knowledgeable of the perils of not participating in the governance of our country and the once formidable power of voting?
"Yet to a normal person casually tuning in, the president appeared reasonably affable and businesslike. He listened. He cracked an appropriate joke. He said he was prepared to defer to the wishes of Congress. Where was the drooling man-child we had been led to expect from Wolff’s book and the nonstop coverage of it?"
One could have said the same of Ronald Reagan, who was observed from the outset of his second term to have been addled by the Alzheimers Disease that eventually killed him. People around him, including his son Ron, saw the severe mental decline. Occasionally the public got a glimpse of it, too, as when he was completely unable to respond to a simple question about the state of arms control negotiations until Nancy rescued him by supplying the line, "We're doing the best we can," which he duly repeated like the actor he once was. Even when Reagan resorted to a defense of his culpability in trading arms to terrorists that, in essence, meant he was not all there (he knew he was innocent in his heart while acknowledging facts that demonstrated he was not), Republicans rallied around a substantially incapacitated president and kept him in control of the country when he could not control his own mind in many instances.
History is repeating itself with Trump. Yet, because he is not at all charming and has no background as an actor, the evidence of his feeble mindedness continues to present itself in tweets and public appearances. That is what the book is about.
6
Democrats are always thinking that if we just take the high road, reason and fairness and sound judgement will prevail. No! No way! It's not working. We already have casualties to the high road. We're losing so much that is right for individual citizens who make this country what it is. It is not corporations; it is not self-interest of the rich. We're losing our future. We're fighting for our lives. You write, "exhibit A of how not to fight". Then do what? I'm going to march next weekend. I hate this administration and I'm angry that my own party tip-toes around this pit. I feel like we do nothing but talk (like how this book won't solve anything). I want to fight!
3
The book, "Fire and Fury" as sensational as it is, will succumb to the same trash heap which created & promoted it. While it has & will last a bit longer than a 24 hour news cycle, it'll find its rightful home along with the rest of the screaming, "news" media we're all subjected to all day long.
What's really troubling is we live in a world & time where we need to have sane & accurate reporting of actual news, but what we get is hype disguised as facts.
We find ourselves chasing diversions which does nothing to elevate the deeply needed discussions on topics that affect our lives in visceral ways.
There is smugness among those who oppose this president & the bumbling Republican dominated rubber stamp Congress. There's smugness among the Republican Congressional leaders as well.
But smugness does nothing to effectively engage in meaningful discussions & debate over issues & policy which will decide the course of our lives over the next decade & further into the future.
While it's now 2018 with mid-term elections looming this November; 2020 isn't so far in the future. We live in a dangerous time. The choices we make can't be limited to making us "feel good" about who we support.
These choices we make will affect our future generations throughout the planet. We don't have the luxury of time to wait for change. We must critically think about & act upon what that change will be & how to bring it about for everyone benefit.
1
Brett Stevens makes an excellent point: when Scripted Trump ( whom Gail Collins has called Sort of Normal Republican Trump) exceeds Homer Simpson in competency, he comes across as almost presidential. However, just in the past twenty-four hours we have seen Unscripted Tweeting Trump come out against the Republican preferred FISA re-authorization plan (before he was told that he was sending the wrong message). While some of his supporters (and some opponents) might see him as less incompetent than the Trump pictured in Fire and Fury, his own party will have to continue to deal with his incompetence. Perhaps the next Trump related book will be called: "Present at the Destruction" in homage to Dean Acheson. Who will write it?
2
Somewhere around the year 2000, when Bush was chosen President, it became obvious that one could only stay sane if you understood what Republicans said as 180 degrees from the truth.
With the election of Trump, however, we no longer have to even "do the math" as almost nothing he says has any content, let alone relationship to the real world. His calls for example, to examine libel law are just so much meaninglessness coming from a man who has spent the last year and more creating what he believes are clever names for his opponents and denigrating the personhood of the previous President and of Hillary Clinton and of Schumer and Pelosi and dozens of others includign those on the political right like Cruz and McCain. Good thing for him that our libel laws are what they are since he needs them to protect him from being sued for libel, as well as sexual harassment. But that's another story.
3
Come on, Brett. Do you really think Trump has ever been self-deprecating?
Maybe I'm suffering from that fatal anti-Trump flaw of smugness, but it wouldn't surprise me if Trump can't define irony much less use it as a winning strategy.
4
Totally missed the point: this book further galvanizes antipathy towards 45 and can help motivate voter turnout in the midterms and in 2020. Mark my words.
5
Public expectation for Trump already low reached a new nadir after the Fire and Fury book. The sweet reasonableness he showed during the televised immigration discussions at the WH was comic relief and many media folks went ecstatic. Now today's another story with his use of foul language about immigrants from Haiti, Africa, etc. decent folks including his "conservative" family value supporters will have to keep TV turned off from children.
1
As of 10 Jan 2018 there are 561 holds on Wolff's book in the Fairfax County Virginia public library system, the most I've ever seen for any book.
For voters, Knowledge = power. 2018 midterms approach.
2
I am halfway through "Fire and Fury" and the scenes Wolff paints appear to be from detailed notes and interviews expressed along a textured narrative designed to make you keep reading. The amount of typos, and maybe a misplaced fact or two, are probably the result of its rush to publication after Trump and his lawyers sent the publisher a threatening letter. (And, needless to say, to sell books.) I have yet to hear any meaningful denials of the author's characterizations regarding people, places, and things, and as they say - you couldn't make this stuff up. And to hold Woodward's work up as a better example of this type of book is silly and wrong.
3
"One of Trump's unappreciated strengths is his sly command of irony, on display last week when he tweeted that his two great assets in life were
"mental stability and being, like, really smart". Note the superfluous "like" which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written."
This assessment is so like stupid that it's almost like unbelievable. This so called like president reveals his total like lack of command of knowledge of policy or the English language in almost every tweet and certainly in the print interviews he has done. His sentences drift off and don't connect to each other. His policy stances change in the space of a few hours. The only irony here is that instead of being "like, really smart" he is, in reality, like really dumb. And it is undeniably like, really obvious.
4
I love the phrase, "But if the anti-Trump movement has a crippling defect, it’s smugness..." The resistance should be thinking and come to realize that "... he's not deficient in cunning." They should also extend that view to the Republican Party which has run rings around the Democrats. The next thing you know he'll have Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi down in San Diego, shovel in hand, for a photo op while they are laying the cornerstone to "The Wall."
3
A surprisingly good assessment by Bret Stephens.
The Democratic Party is dead. Acute Clintonism was the cause of death.
Trump has no effective opposition, and is rampaging.
Salacious books like Wolff's only serve as a safe space for the Faux-sistance, the same people that thought electing a corrupt war criminal and embodiment of nepotism like Hillary Clinton was a good idea.
But, of course, it is all the Russians' fault.
The Dem Party strategy is, in its entirety: Change nothing, do nothing, blame everything on the Russians and hope the Republicans fail so spectacularly that the voters crawl back to the Dems out of sheer desperation.
Not going to work.
4
Trump triumphs when under attack. His bluster replaces rational thought, wise analysis or knowledge. What he knows is fighting all criticism-- it is his his #1 priority.
He is clueless about serving the People or that he is paid by US taxpayers- his actual boss.He has little grasp of the details of domestic or global policy. His reputation protected by chronic belligerence (substituting for strength) overshadows the [public good.
He may well have colluded with Bannon & Wolff to attack him; better to distract from Mueller closing in.
On page 65 so far. Find the book solid, well written and packed with dry humour. Who expected perfection, besides the author of this piece? Not me! Recommended reading.
3
Michael Wolff’s “Fire and Fury” did not lower the expectation bar on Trump. The bar was lowered when he was elected.
1
I felt like I learned a lot from the book. I tried to figure out with the help of the news this unlikely group of people in the White House. How they got there and how the Brietbart faction was there right along with the Dems (Jarvanka faction). They were both influential. Confusing. I figured out a while ago that Donad Trump was irrational but, thanks to Wolff, I got some clarity.
Has Trump ever been self-deprecating? The only self-deprecating remark I could imagine him making is something like, "I'm sorry you haters are so poor and ignorant, but sometimes I'm so busy being a rich, stable, genius, I forget."
1
Anyone listening all this time to Wolff's television interviews, one after the other and day after day, sees exactly the man Wolff described. For a year now, we witnessed the lack of affection he shows his family. The man is purely into himself--and himself alone.
Contrast that to the kindness to, and fondness for each other, in the Obama family -- always easily seen as they traversed the lawns to their transportation, and descended planes.
Obama went upstairs to a quiet office at 2:00 a.m. to study documents and materials. In the morning, he worked out, then went to the oval office.
Trump's in bed at 6:30 p.m. with a cheeseburger, fixated on Fox News, rewinding his DVR on every comment made about him. He manages to get to the oval office near noon, where he eats. Earlier, he's tweeting provocatively. Much of it, fake information, dubious news reports.
He gets Cliff Notes of briefings. Anything they give him to read has his name in each sentence so he reads it. We learned today the intelligence community is mortified with him.
This white house has to actually stage televised events where it looks as if he's working. Then he discusses that event's "ratings."
Nope. This man presents as fully confused, disoriented, inept, unprepared and incompetent, as depicted by Wolffe.
The impact on this nation will be devastating.
4
Trump is not senile. He is not mentally ill. He is the 2cd coming of Otto von Bismarck. Trump graduated military school. He surrounds himself with generals. He gets an idea and doesn't let go---the Far West Side construction projects. Same as Bismarck--Bismarck wanted a wall with France--hence Alsace Lorraine. Bismarck wanted to make Germany great again--ethnic cleansing--deportation of Jews and Poles to the east---despite the fact they had lived in Germany for decades, worked in German sweatshops or agri-business, etc. Trump wants to ethnically cleanse the US of Mexicans, Central Americans, South Americans, and Caribbean Americans--many of whom are Catholics, btw. Bismarck and Trump--ethnic cleansers. The only difference--once Germany was ethnically cleansed, Bismarck worked to give all the rest universal health insurance and guaranteed old-age pensions. And the Germans who weren't Catholics or Jews liked Bismarck. The Kaiser liked Bismarck. Similarly for Trump--the rulers of the GOP have no intention of curbing Trump.
1
You are absolutely right.
1
‘Confirmation Bias for $1000, Alex.’
‘Donald Trump’s numerous detractors read this work of fiction and patted themselves on the back afterwards for their, like, total intellectual superiority.’
‘What is “Fire and Fury.”’
3
"That the stock market would never recover from his election. That he would blow up NATO. That the Middle East would erupt in violence when Jerusalem was recognized as Israel’s capital.
The stock market was going to do well because Trump and Republicans would deregulate. - Great time to own real estate.
About Israel - I hope I am wrong, but I think the plans are being laid for terrible attacks.
Yet another envious writer trashes a runaway best seller that sold a million copies within days. Bret Stephens is like most--a less gifted scribe than Wolff now showing his very sour grapes of wrath towards an author who knows what the public wants to read and then delivers. Deliciously.
1
Best thing about the book is that it exposed Steve Bannon as a total jerk to a degree that even Trump had to recognise. The subsequent demise of this highly dubious character is a welcome result. Given the dependence of Trumpism upon unproven allegation, fabrication, and hearsay, the irony of the mighty Bannon being hoist by his own petard is simply delicious.
4
Until there is a price to be paid by wealthy and working White Americans for electing a man like Trump, we are all just smirking off. That price? People have to die because of Trump inspired or parroted decisions. White people have to die in industrial accidents or be defrauded in major bank schemes or poisoned by drinking water thru deregulation of the protections we citizens formerly enjoyed. Mexicans, Blacks, Asians, don't count. Children don't count. And there is No Deep Government at work. Anyone who has ever worked for the government knows this government couldn't hold together a group of conspirators for longer than 3-4 weeks. Imagine if your secret op in Syria or A-Stan was leaked to Nunez or any of the drones surrounding the President and it all was for sale for a Hotel in Turdistan. Yes, Americans, we will all have to pay a price for electing a man like Trump. No Pain, No Gain. Or as an unknown graffiti meister wrote in gas station restroom off highway 10 in Nowhereville, "We all do it to Ourselves."
1
Yes, the Trump Resistance movement is well advised not to underestimate this bizarre President. Almost no one thought Trump could even be nominated by the Republican Party, mich less actually elected President of the United States. Hillary was so confident of election that she installed a glass ceiling just ready to break.
So, a warning to the wise, don’t assume that because Trump tweets like an idiot and has the thinnest skin in Presidential history, that he will be easy to beat in 2020, or that the Trump referendum will lead to a Democratic Congress in 2018. The Democrats are going to have to come up with a populist and popular agenda this year in order to convince those not in the Resistance movement to vote Democratic. Right now the Democrats don’t stand for much of anything other than unlimited immigration, defense cuts and Medicare for everyone. Don’t forget the Dems social engineering and identity politics. Trump can no longer shock us but he will be beaten only on policy, not personality.
1
To quote "Donnie Fingers" Trump:
"I call it TRUTHFUL HYPERBOLE"
The book has created and cast Trump's actions into a way of "FRAMING" everything he does
It's a version of the "Chinese Finger Trap"....the more he struggles,
the more he is trapped and exposed.
Rarely do I agree with Mr. Stephens. This is one of those times. I am reading the book. Strictly for its entertainment value. Wolff is a lightweight hack. Now a multi-millionaire hack. Mr. Stephens last paragraph sums it all up quite well.
1
The other fact, not found in this incredible analysis, is that while Donald Trump is nearly always half wrong....he is at the same time, and by definition, half correct.
Say...maybe it is time for deadbeat NATO to pony up for some of the burden of Western defense. Maybe a lot of Salvadorians need to go home, especially from Long Island.
2
"smugness" - a.k.a., not being ashamed of speaking the truth about oneself or others
1
Brett,
It is just a book. And actually only the first of its kind. I look forward to redaing it. I read the excerpt published and it was so masterfully written and engaging. Do I believe it? Sure, I do, but its not "news" to me. It is just interesting to put this guy and all of it into context. I saw the look on his face at the inauguration. he looked condemned. The book confirmed this. Melania clearly never wanted to be in the white house. Yes, this is confirmed. So I wonder why you are so disturbed by thsi book? You already knew it was largely true, as true as an account of other people's viewpoints can ever be.
1
- and just reading about Von Clownstick wanting more Norwegians - instead of immigrants form s... hole countries - the only way to deal with such - is to tell him that we don't want a Presidents with such s..tty hair.
Like - America never would have voted for a dude who does with his hair - what Ivanka had described - that he does with his hair.
And reporting everyday at least 24/7 that the dude is actually completely bald would have done at least as much damage to him - as him calling the other Republicans Clowns whatever he called them.
And when will my sister and brothers at the NYT understand that?
I mean this is the 21th century and my fellow Americans NEVER ever would erect a dude with bad - or no hair.
And he knows that.
6
OR as another famous German-American Philosopher - ME - said:
You bring Gossip to a Food-Fight.
-and no knives or guns
4
AND after WE will finally will have brought down Von Clownstick with our "gossip" - writers like Mr. Stephens will write:
Gossip brought him down.
1
Whether the book helps or hurts the president will be borne out in time. I suspect however, that it ultimately hurts him.
For better or worse, humans seemed to be more moved by stories and pictures than dry facts. All of the evidence of subservience to Putin, flouting the emoluments clause, and neglect of duties has done little to move the (admittedly already dismal) approval ratings of this president. But seeing a picture of this incompetence and corruption will, I suspect, give some grounding to all of those dry facts.
It may not always be fair, but Mr. Trump would not be the first victim of a fictional public image. He's certainly been the beneficiary of one, as a 'successful businessman and deft negotiator.'
6
Excellent op-ed. If the situation were reversed and Wolff (or one if his kind) were writing an expose on Hillary the news media would have annihilated the book not venerated it. It's not helping. Liberal Democrats need strong charismatic well funded candidates not more whining about what an idiot Trump is. That only energizes his base.
7
- and
"about Liberal Democrats need... not more whining about what an idiot Trump is"
We need much much more - as it might "energizes his base" but at the same time it shows to EVERYBODY in America what an idiot he is. And don't tell US that showing everybody in our homeland what an idiot he is - doesn't work.
It works wonderfully as I am meeting less and less of my fellow Americans who are willing to defend Von Clownstick - and I promise - in the end when WE -
everybody who tells everybody what an idiot he is - will be finished - He will be finished for good.
Or as a famous American Philosopher - ME - once said:
He who lives by teh gossip will die by teh gossip.
3
"...which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written." You do know that smart phone take dictation...
3
- and what Mr. Stephens wrote - and what is mostly written in the NYT about Von Clownstick always reminds me on my first German schoolteacher who never was ''in on the joke''.
As - IF Jon Stewart would have responded to Von Clownsticks anti-semitic attack by NOT calling him FF Von Clownstick.
Which always makes me think - IF the NYT would have addressed Von Clownstick at the first day with his true name ''Von Clownstick'' and would have written a lot more fitting gossip about him - we wouldn't have to deal with ''the Von Clownstick Situation'' right now?
2
This book will be forgotten in a few weeks. Doubtless the Dems will try to bring it up in the 2018 elections. If they do, I believe they will damage their ability to create a meaningful dialogue about issues.
10
- "a meaningful dialogue about issues."
Good Lord - as I know more than a few of my fellow Americans who erected the "dude" just for the Lulz - and they really think that it was them - and only them - who tipped the scale in favor of Von Clownstick -
And now they are laughing every day somebody tries to do some "meaningful dialogueing according to a... "a cheeseburger eating... another day" -
3
"The net result is that “Fire and Fury” has so thoroughly succeeded in lowering public expectations for Trump that it makes it that much easier for him to exceed them. "
Easier, perhaps. Feasible or likely, no...
5
Since Mr. Stephens still wishes Hillary Clinton was a President and considers Trump morally unfit for his office - could Mr. Stephens please write an article comparing moral qualities of Trump and Hillary Clinton? I'm sure it will be a very instructive and enlightening comparison.
9
"The catastrophes haven’t happened, and maybe that’s just a matter of luck. But by constantly predicting doom and painting the White House in the darkest colors, anti-Trumpers have only helped the president."
This column and this portion in particular really hit home. It reminds my of the portions of my family who support Trump. They spent Obama's term in office predicting dire economic collapse, unemployment, and a more. Not to mention dire predictions if Hillary went into the office.
I don't want to make that mistake wrt the Trump organization.
Wolff's book strikes me as situationally exploitative and not the output
of a credible journalist. While I enjoy being validated on an emotional level, my analytical side prevents me from buying into it or buying it.
Though, some good came of it in that Bannon got bit by some yellow journalism not of his own making.
3
''But by constantly predicting doom and painting the White House in the darkest colors, anti-Trumpers have only helped the president."
That might be a truly silly myth - as Von Clownsticks approval rating shows.
2
Wolff is laughing all the way to the bank. He doesn't care about journalistic standards, and doesn't care if columnists call him a dope. And it is not his fault if people underestimate trump's cunning.
Just because Wolff got some things wrong does not mean he got everything wrong. There is more than sufficient credible information in his book to make anyone of open mind be very worried about trump and his lack of fitness.
10
- Sorry - but ''superficial gossiping'' is the only way to write about Von Clownstick.
Or the way Gail Collins does it - when she gives us the option between ''another day'' and ''cheeseburger''?
6
I found the book very interesting - not for the things that were published in the media, but the less noteworthy events and thoughts that came between. Adding up all the changes of viewpoint by the president and the clear impossibility of counting on him for a consistent view, even if you are Ivanka, I could also see why Ryan and McConnell act like this time is Christmas for them. As long as they praise him and give him some wins, he is happy to let them do what they want. But, should the Dems win big in 2018, it is also likely that the president will become more progressive, because his desire to win big is so much greater than any principle or philosophy. The description of the lead up to firing Comey was worth the entire cost of the book. I also see why the EPA, State, OSTP and other agencies are empty - he loathes expertise and he requires professions of loyalty - so no real scientists need apply. I learned a great deal from the book. Hopefully, the rest of the US can also.
16
Mr. Stephens is too quick to attribute the reason that catastrophes haven't happened on Trump's watch to "maybe that's just a matter of luck." The main reason, I have come to believe, is that the checks-and-balances in Washington that would normally mitigate the damage a president could do have shifted from within Washington to entities external to Washington, i.e. the States, courts and other nations.
For instance, look at South Korea opening talks with the North. Sure, Kim Jong Un may have a reason up his sleeve that is self-serving, but at least South Korea had the sense to take advantage of the opportunity it offered and had the sense to keep the Trump administration out of it.
With respect to immigration reform and climate, the progressive states are forging ahead without Washington and the courts are reigning in Trumps excesses on the former.
European nations have reiterated their commitment to the Paris Accord.
The United Nations stood up to Trump on the Jerusalem as capital of Israel issue in spite of threats from the Trump Administration.
I don't think luck has anything to do with it.
4
That's a good observation about President Trump's immigration round-table session with US Senators. Regardless of my feelings about the man as a leader and his administration's misguided immigration policies, among many others, I found the sight of a real, unscripted back-and-forth between legislators about a vital and complex issue thoroughly refreshing. When was the last time we saw an actual publicized debate? Certainly not on the Senate floor or in committee sessions, or especially during faux election year "debates." I never thought I would find myself saying this, but I thought this public forum was a good idea by the President and that it opened up possibilities for many transparency and public understanding of complex issues. I'd like to see more of it. I'm a liberal, social democrat of longstanding and I support this message.
1
Debate? There was no debate of any kind. There were positions presented, the same we knew about all along, and that's it. Trump initial support for Democratic position was never included in the transcript. He just had no clue about the issue.
It is too bad that neither you or Mr. Stephens ever saw the mastery that Mr. Trump demonstrated as the host, producer, creator, and big boss extraordinaire of "The Apprentice" or "The Celebrity Apprentice". You would have immediately recognized Mr. Trump earnestly imitating somebody who has some idea what he's talking about while not having a clue what was going on.
The man was clearly completely out of his element, which is conning people into signing contracts which make him some money. It is not clear how long he can survive the world looking over his shoulder so intently before he has a massive heart attack or stroke. Poor guy. SAD.
When did you see an actual publicized debate? When President Obama met with congressional leadership to engage in an unscripted, on the record debate about health care reform. I am sure he would have been open to other debates but Republicans shut the door on such "back and forth." Ralph Ellison knew what he was talking about when he wrote Invisible Man.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?292260-1/white-house-health-care-summit-pa...
I agree with this, and am concerned by the frequent casual dismissals of the apparently multiple errors in the book by some people in the media.
Facts matter. Dismissing them reduces critics to the same level as Trump and Kellyanne Conway and their alternative facts.
I do think the book is credible and important in revealing the contempt that virtually all of Trump's own staff, bar possibly some family members, seem to hold him in. I am sure that every administration has staff who disagree with individual decisions, but I can't think of one where apparently the whole West Wing apart from Stephen Miller believes they work for a buffoon.
3
"I believe that Trump is ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office."
And just how did you make these character judgments? Have you ever met the man? Spoken with him? Worked with him?
We humans think we are rational beings, and that we can make judgments about other people based on facts rather than emotions. We can't. We jump to conclusions, and then find facts to support our conclusions. Not the reverse.
Donald Trump in his first year in office has made plenty of mistakes. But he's far from unfit to be president. He's done pretty well. Yes, that is my subjective opinion, but on any objective measure of how the economy is performing or the shape the world, nothing that has gotten worse since Barack Obama flew off to Hawaii as a private citizen last January.
And if you listen to the people who work with him and live with him and (as family) love him, many of them say he is warm and kind-hearted and thoughtful. I mean, the man has two ex-wives who fully support his presidency. Doesn't that say something?
If you think the president should be someone like the queen of England, who must never do anything to dispel the notion that she is more than just an old biddy, well, yes, you won't like Donald Trump. I'd rather have someone real, thank you. And real people aren't like that.
5
Typical double standard where liberals are the ones who must be moderate. I wonder if Stephens wrote a similar critique of the white-hot venom of Ann Coulter or Tom DeLay or any of the dozens of other attacks on President Obama, whose administration was free of scandal, whose very demeanor said "president, father, responsible citizen" (and seemingly nice guy to boot).
I don't buy Stephens's basic point that criticism of trump works into his hands. His fevered supporters may double down but it's time - long past time - to expose republican perfidy for what it is: anti-American, deliberately destructive, and power-mad. If one or two of the febrile see the error of their ways, maybe the next election won't be a Category 5 disaster.
22
If by a normal person casually tuning in you mean a witless innocent who is also hearing impaired. No, Trump's out-of-depth performance was evident to an attentive 7th grader.
As for his command of irony, what you see is what you get. Trump's choice of the word stability is to the more tutored ear, an unsuccessful assertion that the emporer is not naked.
Feel free to set fire to Wolff for overreaching, but as to Trump's unfitness for office, it's impossible to overstate. If Trump still represeents any electoral danger to any candidate who can spell his or her name correctly, our democracy is in free fall.
6
What irks me more than somewhat is, yes, the smugness of the media, the one who secretly feel that that word should be Capitalized.
They fail miserably in being truthful, regardless of their underlying ideology, and for two main reasons. "News" is both a construct and a product. As such it cannot claim to be true (or "True") in a metaphysical sense. Before it reaches anyone it has undergone formulation, interpretation and selection.
Something that needs to be put into words is ALWAYS at the mercy of irrational choices. These reflect the (sub)conscious bias of the interpreter (even the constraints of the very language he / she uses), but also the so-called and supposed "newsworthiness"; meaning the public interest the "report" is expected to generate. In addition, and increasingly it seems, the media are complicit in the miseducation of the public.
They eagerly confirm biases and preconceptions, and deny the complexity of issues, all in the service of Mammon. While they pontificate, they deceive. False prophets all, at once mealymouthed and strident, they would deny reality to please their moneylenders and sell out their readers, viewers or listeners, actively obfuscating their role in the drama that gnaws away at democracy.
That Mr. Stephens appears to begin to recognize this is a tiny mercy at best. More like a false dawn, though, I fear.
2
Wolff and Trump are both creatures of tabloid journalism, the medium that nurtured their rise to prominence. Wolff’s broad access to White House insiders, so baffling in retrospect, was predicated on a casual attitude to the truth that was the defining culture of the new administration. But the sad reality is that in the age of social media and the 24-hr. news cycle we all partake, more or less, of tabloid culture. Who of us can get by without that daily (hourly?) fix of sensational news, especially the kind that reinforces us in our beliefs and underscores our group identity? It’s the universal opioid. Trump knows whereof he crows when he says the mass media would be hard pressed to manage without him, though he omits the other half of that codependency. No question, the Trump presidency has degraded our political culture, but it had to be in pretty sorry shape to begin with for such a man to ascend to the presidency. Mr. Stephens' absurdist fantasy of Trump reading Dean Acheson's "Present at the Creation" (could he ever make it past the blurbs?) gives a sense of how low we've sunk.
1
Fire and Fury is a ecstasy for the anti-Trump, something to feel good and feel vindicated for a while, but ultimately does not advance actual anti-Trump agenda, because it is so poorly written.
In his haste to capitalize on a "scandal" that is Trump, the author missed the opportunity for real contribution to civic discourse that helps our democracy. But I suppose that is just the kind of person he is. Think about it, if he is any better, Trump probably would not have befriended him, he probably would not have gotten the access that he did.
1
i finally caved to the hype and bought the book. While I am happy to read ANYTHING that confirms my firmly held prejudice that Trump is a cretan, this book is not it. Paragraph after paragraph, Wolff describes important conversations, scenes, meetings, and actions without attribution which are throughout the book, thin on the ground. That is a problem. I want to know were all the salacious bits come from so I can enjoy them, knowing my prejudices are justified.
It was my impression that at least some quotes were associated with some guy named Steve Bunion or something like that who used to work at the White House and was a campaign advisor to Mr. Trump during the election. That unfortunately individual has felt the full fury of Trump's anger and has been banished to the deepest, darkest reaches of the right wing universe from where we will probably hear from hear again within the next year. And that will give Mr. Trump the opportunity to forgive and re-embrace Mr. Bunion or whatever his name is. Mr. Trump often doesn't remember people's names - especially people he's "never met" or played golf with.
Dear DEH,
Donald Trump is not from Crete.
From now on, when anyone says, “Trump,” you’ll immediately think, “very stable genius.” The first few times, you’ll chuckle at the thought. Then the two will become identical in your mind.
1
Yes, but the stable I'll think of will have manure on the floor.
I'd say a book that reports (apparently accurately) that the President's campaign manager and chief strategist said that meetings set up/taken by the President's son, son-in-law, and then campaign manager were "treasonous" has paid the price of admission. The book also has ended (for now) the influence of the inventor of "Trumpism" as governing framework and undercut his capacity to push Republicans even further to the right going into the 2018 midterms. This is consequential. Woodward's journalism is not free of some of the problems with Wolfe's, and its judgments of persons and policies have been further "off" and more damaging than "Fire and Fury." A president's supporters tend to hagiography. I think the book makes that harder.
5
I've tried hard to be a good boy all my life so nobody was more disappointed than me that Armageddon didn't come by the end of Trump's first year as promised by the press. I've played Oasis' Waiting For The Rapture in anxious anticipation so many times that now I can't get the song out of my head. Thanks for nothing sage prognosticators.
1
During times of extreme corruption, where greed rules the country and civil rights are are of little concern to the ruling class, a free press and media on the side of truth and justice can be of supreme importance in checking cruel, naked power. But the need to make money and attract advertising and subscriptions can lead to what we saw with 24 hour coverage of a despicable man during the campaign, earlier the creation of a TV show with this grifter as financial "genius", and now unending coverage of a salacious book about Trump. This is the dark side of "news". Just a centimeter above National Enquirer.
Speaking of books, Kurt Andersen's FANTASYLAND is the one that could serve the country better if it were discussed like Wolfe's book constantly. It is the naked truth about how deluded we've always been, the times when reason fought back against delusion, and explains how we ended up, ever since the 1960's deeply affected the whole idea of "belief", in this fantasy world. It's prevalent in all walks of life.
Laws and policies based on fantasies, wish fulfillment, instead of facts, reason, and evidence, and politicians that obstruct reality at every turn do not result in an honorable nation. The marks that vote for specious promises by fantasists hurt our country deeply. Ignorance is not bliss. in a voter or a politician.
Stephens admits he cannot resist talking about Wolfe's book himself. Intellectuals dumbed down too. Twilight of the elites indeed, Mr. Hayes.
1
Me. Stephens reassures is that inspire of Trump, the stock market is doing well, the sky has not fallen and all the nay sayers have been proven wrong, and besides, wolff’s book just reinforces what we already know and suspect. Well, the on-going incremental damage done to the country via executive orders and dismantling of institutional norms and procedures as well as social safety nets, will hit us in the face in the coming years. Trim is the Hamelin pied piper; he is wily alright but a degenerate all the same.
1
The essay above has its merits, but I still don't see highlighting Trump's true color can benefit him. It may not work for those brain dead supporters, but for the majority of Americans it reinforces our belief--Trump is unfit for presidency and he degrades our democracy.
3
Once again Bret Stephens sees the story behind the story. He is so far ahead of his colleagues commenting at the New York Times that he is salvaging the paper's reputation for sagacity.
4
Line by line, the very definition of a Trump apologist's column, all Stephens' negative admissions about the president notwithstanding. Get over it, Bret, Trump is an absolute and total disaster, and we have been fortunate this child-man has not faced a real crisis.
9
It's important for the press to remind the American public that Michael Wolff was invited into this fiasco by Trump officials. Wolff is not in any way related to the opposition. He's filling his pockets by selling this circus.
3
cunning: skill in achieving one's ends by deceit. Maybe more should be said about Trump's "ends". I could recognize Trump's erasure of all things Barrack Hussein Obama. Will that extend to Trump with much Congressional help wiping out the 20th Century, especially the 60s and icon FDR? We cannot go back to the 19th Century. Back to the future in America will not do. As Pat Moynahan of NY accused liberals in our past, we are now once again "redefining deviance down" with Trump in the White House. Worst, the cunning man knows what he is doing. He is the one dropping the bar to the ground. Our only real and most effective choice to RESIST is to get to the poll en masse in November.
1
After all of the mental trauma so many of us suffered the night Trump was elected without a majority of the votes of this country - and since....we need something gossip-y, fun and silly. This book fits the bill with perfect timing.
1
Perhaps. Perhaps Stephens is right that this plays into Trump's hands. Trump does have an undeniable talent for turning outrageousness and outrage into attention, and then monetizing it. But he has no real policy strategy, and his political strategy begins and ends with trolling liberals.
That will enable Trump to keep hold of his deplorable 35%. But the drumbeat of anger, resistance, and calling out Trump's idiocy may help to turn off the better-educated, suburban, casual racist and his wife who handed Trump the election in 2016. And it may help to motivate and turn out the various liberals and independents who bought into the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy's propaganda on Hillary, at least enough to stay home or vote for Jill Stein.
So Stephens wants to tone down the rhetoric, get the left and the media to chill, to normalize Trump and make him seem merely unseemly, not monstrous. Because Stephens is the cunning one. He professes to be a NeverTrumper, but he is actually rooting for the Donald to keep going. Stephens just wants to be able to keep one foot in polite New York society, and he wants to avoid blame and taint when the whole Trumpian enterprise collapses.
6
It would have been great if writers like Bret approached the truth-less accusations that have come from leading conservative voices over the past years against liberals - from Benghazi to Uranium One - with such concern.
6
Wolff's book is the first of a barrage of books that attempt to do the same thing and sell the same numbers. To try and reign in "the resistance" with a "winning strategy" is foolish and impossible. In a hyper-capitalist media environment, if it sells, than that's "winning." And there is no controlling that.
The winning strategy is not focusing on tweets and bumbling mistakes and gossip, but on the rule of law. A president cannot conspire with an enemy, than obstruct justice to cover it up. All the hamburgers in bed, ironic tweets, bullying tactics we gossip about will not change what Mueller finds or does not find. Trump can't be impeached for watching too much TV, but he can be for breaking the law. Everything else is window dressing.
3
Dear Mr. Stephens: As you and every American knows and every poll shows, Democrats detest and Republicans adore Donald Trump. So, Democrats be advised: The electoral balance beam has not tilted much because your nonstop whinging is as annoying to Republicans as Donald Trump is to Democrats. Is it too much of a leap to say that many Republicans would vote again for Donald Trump simply because it annoys so many Democrats. Or, perhaps it is as simple as every Republican saying, 'I will not be associated with a such a strident group of people'. Donald Trump's cunning won him the far right without loosing the middle. The Democrats must convince the middle that Democrats have much more to offer than do the Republicans. Whinging is not a strategy that will convince.
1
Except, the catastrophes have indeed happened; only, not to anyone Stephens cares about. But ask the inhabitants of Puerto Rico (American citizens, believe it or not). Ask the people of Yemen. Ask the DREAMers and Salvadorans. Ask the Palestinians and the pro-peace Israelis. For them, and many more, and really for all of us, the catastrophes have happened, are happening, and will continue to happen.
5
It surely is an awful book but every president gets one or more of these. And even though it is fast and loose with facts and full of malicious intent it is delightfully juicy. And you can't say he didn't have it coming.
Cunning does not equate to intelligence or should even stand as a verification that Trump's mental health fits into any acceptable or recognizable psychological norms. I agree that Wolff is more like a Jackie Collins wannabe than a Bob Woodward wannabe, but you are insulting the intelligence of Americans if you think we do not understand its superficiality as well as the fact it is WH backstairs gossip.
It does no harm that many Americans are using the book as a release valve from Trump. In fact it brought on that public appearance of Trump Tuesday which illustrated that his lion tamers had him temporarily under control but still ignorant and deliberately uninformed about his job duties and the consequences of his decision-making.
3
You make several points of value in a symmetrical setting for dialogue and debate. If you find such a place in this country's politics, please let us know.
I don't know Bret Stephen's political bent but sounds like one of radical right wing extremism. The Wolffe book confirms what people saw that did not vote for him: a self absorbed, bombastic liar who knows nothing about governing. How could he - he is a TV host and a con artist. We knew he didn't read and knew he hadn't a clue what was in the Constitution. The only really new thing Wolffe revealed is that he doesn't work.
But Trump is doing such great harm to our democracy we may never recover.
He insults every group of Americans except white males and totally denigrates the Presidency. Trump approves of Putin showing he is somehow beholden to him, while Russia is our mortal enemy. Trump is putting in far right idealogues in judiciary who do not follow laws, does away with net neutrality rule, undoes laws protecting the environment, withdraws from Paris Accord and ripped up the TPP that was much to favor of U.S. He passes a tax cut scamp that saves him billions in taxes while doing away with the few deductions the middle class had left after Reagen. Just this week, he puts attorney in AG spot in NY that did work for Deutsche Bank, source of Trump loans so will favor Trump if evidence from Mueller probe would show state law violations. The list of harms to this country by the far right wing President goes on and on so again, Bret Stephens must be one himself.
4
You might add that Trump is not only cunning, he's a brilliant salesman. If I owned a fleet of defective used cars and a warehouse of rancid snake oil, I'd hire him to sell the lot. He'd do it in a week. Satisfied buyers would send him effusive thanks from their hospital beds.
1
Wolff is low-rent because Trump is low-rent. They deserve each other. Much like the racist Bannon deserved the racist Trump. Woodward and Bernstein were real journalists revealing truths about a real President in Nixon - a deeply flawed President but a highly capable one also. Trump as President, Bannon as chief strategist and Wolff as journalist are clear signs of just how low our standards have become as a nation. We are a nation addicted to fast food, reality TV, social media, fake news, constant outrage and emotional overreaction but no discipline to address the outrage du jour (or minute) - that’s how a Trump, a Bannon and a Wolff, who all belong in the margin of society, disregarding rules and any sense of decency for their success, become the people who run the country. As Trump would say: Sad!
4
Mr. Trump is laughing all the way to the bank while providing cover for the real miscreants in the Republican party: The House and the Senate. Just look at today's front page for a refresher on all the underhanded shenanigans these evil men are up to. The art of prestidigitation relies on directing the mark's attention elsewhere. The left and the virulent anti-Trumpists are drinking the incessant kool aid provided by a money-grubbing media class. And the country suffers for it. Think it's Trump voters who are being taken advantage of? Think again.
Actually, provoking a war on the Korean Peninsula is exactly the strategy that Trump and his Republican allies in Congress will most likely deploy to solidify the support of his ignorant and jingoistic base, should that support ever truly start to falter...
All these attacks on Wolff's style and substance are misplace. Sure, if Trump grant access to more respected journalists, there would be a more mainstream style expose of the White House. But Trump does not do that. He is an enemy of journalism and the truth itself. He doesn't let 'respected' journalists park themselves on the West Wing couch. He does not grant them interviews. He does not honestly address their questions at press conferences.
We are left with people like Wolff, because they re the only people let in the door. Yet absent from criticism of Wolff is any specific reference to a falsehood in his article or a particular crime. All of the critiques seem to be based on his reputation alone. Yet it is that reputation that got him in the door.
I'd love to have some other journalists' take on the White House, perhaps some more 'respectable' ones. But Trump still guards the door to the White House. He won't let anyone in who failed the test of not calling him out for what he is. I'm glad we have someone like Wolff, who comes from outside the mainstream and was thus able to sneak past the censors. This horror must be exposed one way or another.
4
Gee, Mr. Stephens, it seems that your cool, rational anti-trumpism is superior to my disgusted, outraged anti-trumpism. Yet, not only do you not offer a "winning strategy" stemming from the crystal clarity of your outlook, you don't even provide historical evidence that an average joe's lack of self control when confronted by a moral horror show is NOT a "winning strategy". At least David Brooks has admitted his ignorance of human behavior and ceased making predictions as viewed through the prism of his conservative "philosophy", and, of course, Mr. Wolff's book seems to be simple reportage of events/statements he personally observed, and his takeaway from those observations.
4
Bret Stephens is simply wrong. Not "everyone" knows Trump is an undisciplined narcissist whose acumen and intelligence are doubted by everyone who makes a living propping up the charade that he is competent. They might be excused from having that understanding when so many major media outlets are unwilling to actually come out and say that the emperor has no clothes. Wolff was willing to say it and now, people like Maggie Haberman et al., whose own book deals just became less interesting, are on their heels trying to pretend that this is nothing new. That's the point: it's nothing new to YOU, and yet, somehow, you have failed to report that truth to your readers. Wolff may only be a stenographer, but at least he is willing to transcribe the awful truth without putting the gloss of decorum on it that so taints the honesty of way too much reporting on Trump, including that of the NYT.
3
This is the kind of opinion piece that a "wolf" in sheep's clothing writes. For the uninitiated Mr. Stephens was until recently a Wall Street Journal opinion writer. What you're witnessing in this piece is an "intellectual" Republican feeling the anguish by the unmitigated lack of intellectual bent of his own party.
4
You say "the catastrophes haven't happened." What you mean is, they haven't happened...to YOU. All across this country, there are people suffering plenty, already, thanks to the evil dunce in the White House and his henchmen: people suffering without power, STILL, in Puerto Rico; people who suffered from flooding, in Houston, and fires, in California, that would probably not have been so severe if we had taken climate change seriously instead of pompously "leaving" the Paris accord. There are good people afraid to leave their own homes, terrified of a knock on the door, even unwilling to go to legal appointments or court proceedings, for fear of being snatched by ICE. There are all their children, even more terrified at the prospect of coming home from school to a parentless future. And all around the world, there are dictators emboldened by the would-be-DIctator in Chief, in Washington. None of this is acceptable; all of it, and more, is catastrophe. The fact it hasn't happened to YOU only proves your obliviousness to your own fortunate position.
4
Stephens eats his cake. A nice niche in the NYT: admit that Trump is right here, and here, and here, and here - and still give the Times' readers their needed catnip of "Trump is wrong, Trump is bad." And still attribute Trump's proven correct moves to luck. Is there a limit of how much a person can pretend to be blind and still think of himself as honest?
3
I have read "Fire and Fury" from cover to cover. I would disagree with Stephens. The meeting on Tuesday (which I did watch, end to end) proves what Wolff points to in the book: Trump is not fit for the job, doesn't care about policy, has a low-intellectual capacity, and just wants to be loved/to 'win.' Despite the stakes after this book has become a best-seller in having a public meeting, Trump couldn't be bothered (or is incapable) of understanding DACA or sadly, much about negotiation. So much for 'The Art of the Deal'' or the 'stable genius' who pretends to lead our nation. Oh yeah, and the book is salacious and disgusting because the people in it are...salacious and disgusting. There's nothing new in the book. It is just restating what evident to anyone paying attention to the actions and words of Trump and his substandard crew.
5
The gossip is a relief from the reality of this Trump presidency.
Unfortunately, Trump has made a killing conning investors because his partners and backers have underestimated his thirst for personal grandeur, money and adulation. He is the best when it comes to taking any immoral and unethical action to fulfill his needs.
Unfortunately, those who are taken in by his posturing and marketing overestimate his talent and business success.
Will he be caught in the arms of blind Lady Justice? Is it Trump's cunning that will save him or his skill at generating distracting gossip, misdirection and self delusion. Does it matter if he gets his comeuppance because cunning or not, he is still a buffoon and can't function without his enablers in the Republican party. They are the real devils in this story. Let them suffer for underestimating him, not the rest of us. The public needs a tell all book that reveals the gossipy, self serving truth behind McConnell, Ryan, Miller, Conway, Cohn, the billionaire donors and the rest.
2
I find it hard to believe that the president, with his extremely thin skin, knows what irony is or how to project it.
What upsets Trump about the book is that the author is getting rich! That is why he wants to change the libel laws How a man can be so unaware is incredible that he is our president is tragic
2
Oh I don't know, does Dinesh D'Souza do much damage to the anti-Hillary crowd? The stack of slavering lunatic conspiratorial hit-jobs aimed at centrist and liberal politics would fill a football stadium, and yet the GOP seems to be doing just fine...
Any book that causes Steve Bannon finally to slink away into the well-deserved and long-awaited end of his fifteen minutes of fame is a book that has achieved a purpose.
4
I strongly believe Trump is the most dangerous thing to happen to American democracy in my lifetime. I am not a fan of Bret Stephens. Yet here, Stephens is absolutely right. Unfortunately the majority of comments demonstrate yet again the inability of the left to collectively quit our pathetic reactionary handwringing in order to see the forest through trees.
The reaction to this book IS representative of a dangerous and underlying problem. Stephens is not defending Trump - as many here seem to knee-jerkingly contend - but rather issuing a necessary warning that by celebrating it's salacious content as factual evidence of Trump's unfitness for office we are in fact HARMING our ability to combat Trumpism itself.
F&F was not written to change hearts and minds - It was written to profit from the base desires of those of us already fervently anti-Trump. Call it "FoxNews for liberals." Make no mistake: For a President and Party who's very existence depends on the ability to destroy the concept of TRUTH itself, this is a victory.
For an administration already with no credibility, this book is a gift: Even if the majority of quotes and suppositions are true, all Trump/Hannity/et al must do is to highlight a small handful of exaggerations and they not only discredit the book, but they further their ultimate goal to discredit the entirety of the democracy-saving-fact-based-criticisms that papers like the NYT report daily.
1
The Trumpster is the Bialystock of politics!
In that 55 minute disaster flick, Trump wanted to show him in charge of the situation, in command of the issues, basically, someone who is not nuts. He failed miserably. We who know Trump do not 55 minutes to be told the obvious, Trump is an ignoramus. And he went about proving it. When Senator Feinstein proposed a solution, Trump jumped on it, agreeing to it in slapdash fashion. He needed all of a few minutes to be informed by fellow Republican Kevin McCarthy the error of his ways, how misinformed Trump was to the wily Feinstein. Trump said no, he understood completely what she said. Of course, as par for the course, Trump did not understand. In the end, Trump simple unfolded his defensive arm posturing and told those gathered that he "trusted" their judgement to do the right thing. He cemented that belief by adding that he placed so much trust in them reaching a solution he would sign "anything" they put forth and laid upon his desk. What a deal maker, eh? More like what a complete dunce.
DD
Manhattan
3
Bret, you have the strange notion that being Democrats is bad for Democrats.
3
How ironic that trump and Republicans had no problem with the even trashier and mendacious “Clinton Cash”. And trump supporters still ate it up during the campaign too. Bret, did you write a column warning them of their mistake then too?
1
Michael Wolff is the perfect fourth estate envoy to deconstruct Donald Trump. He utilizes the same rapacious communication instruments used by Trump against his opponents.
The Fire and Fury is the equivalent of the short tale " The Emperor’s New Clothes" written by Hans Christian Andersen.
It is a tale of two weavers who promise an emperor a new suit of clothes that they say is invisible to those who are unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent. Life goes on until a child cries out, "But he isn't wearing anything at all!"
After Fire and Fury, the world knows President Donald Trump wears no clothes.
3
For someone to be "ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit" AND BE PRESIDENT of the United States... that is the problem. I agree that we should not be blowing it out of proportion. The Donald can do that all by himself.
1
He has a point. Wolff's book is the kind of tabloidism that most of us deplore when it's used by Trump and his supporters. (No, Ted Cruz's father had nothing to do with the assassination of John F. Kennedy.)
Wolff has made a big media splash by telling us what we already know or can reasonably assume. People who know Trump, know Trump.
And Wolff himself lends his report no credibility by pimping it on every news show that will accept him as a guest, nor by using superlatives like "one hundred percent" of the president's associates think he's stupid. That rhetorical technique doesn't work in debates.
The minor inaccuracies like reporting someone had lunch at the wrong restaurant or ordered raw oysters instead of oysters Rockefeller, will be pounced on by zealous fans as evidence that the book is just another example of Fake News.
1
Well argued. This Democrat will not be reading Mr. Wolff’s gossipy bestseller. Surely we should have all learned by now that a cunning man or woman, (regardless of purported I.Q.)—in Washington, D.C. or anywhere else—should never be underestimated.
As Obama so succinctly put it, "Don't boo, VOTE."
Trump reminds me of Mussolini. A guy everybody considered early as a clown, a traitor to his country who brought them war and shame. Yet More than 70 years after his brutal death he is still remembered by some as the last great leader of Italy and a visionary. Only serious and constant teaching of History and the underlying democtratic values can help ensure Trump is Not the future hero of American New Fascism.
3
i would put this column in just exactly the same place Stephens insists Wolff belongs: biased, half researched but wholly propaganda, qand really back-handed support for his champion, the republican savior, Donald Trump.
Sorry, Bret, I could care less about Wolff gossip, although it is laughable. It is the republicans policies that Trump is enabling that are making us shed tears for the helpless and the poor, the defiled environment and the endangered species Trump wants to see gone. Trump/republican policies really have made me wince, then just start to shed tears - do we really need to defile AnWR? Do we need Bear Ears to be fracked? Whale travel lanes to be slashed from the map so our children will never SEE a right whale.. Who cares about Wolff and your niggling parsing of motives and consequences. There have been too many deaths already, too many more to come, because of Trump and the Republicans, cunning, or disgusting, or whatever they are.
"Note the superfluous “like,” which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written. The president isn’t making a fool of himself. He’s having a laugh that’s part self-deprecation, part trolling, and actual wit."
No, Seth Stephens, it was not intended. Self-depreciation and wit require intelligence, both Trump is devoid of.
The man who announced,“I know more about ISIS than the generals do. Believe me," believes in his superiority.
It is widely believed that Trump's animosity toward Obama started with the latter's roast of Donald at the WH Correspondents Association dinner. Where was that wit that you, Seth Stephen's, claim Trump has?
"Note the superfluous “like,” which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written. The president isn’t making a fool of himself. He’s having a laugh that’s part self-deprecation, part trolling, and actual wit."
I sincerely doubt that Trump can make fun of himself in that manner.
Is there another example of him being self-depreciating? I can't think of one....
Oh Please put out a photo of Trump reading some difficult to read book. I can see the meme captions now "Hmmm, look, words. I wonder what they they say."
1
The Hillary partisans couldn't grasp how their smugness was wrecking their candidate in the primaries, and that was against a serious and seasoned politician. They continue to dance to Trump's tune, still apparently unaware that there's any music playing at all.
They and the media are setting expectations for a Democratic wave in 2018 so high that one has to wonder what will happen when it doesn't materialize. Sneering know-it-alls are still more annoying than drooling ignoramuses.
Of course someone like Wolff wrote a book like this about Trump. More "chow" for the media profit making machine. Wolff knows the media, and Trump knows the media. The media knows only one thing, ratings, eyes, hits, clicks = profit. Gossip is good. Facts bad for the bottom line.
But the author does make a good point - about the smugness of those who are so sure of their own righteousness, in their criticism of Trump and all those who support him. It is that smugness that lets Trump stay in office, with the help of our so-called media, and the Oligarchs who put him into the Presidency.
Smugness and $5 will get the smug a coffee at their favorite Starbucks. And it will do nothing to get rid of Trump. Note to The Smug - shove your smugness and get out in the streets and march. Protest. Everywhere, all the time. Remember? That's how you got rid of Nixon. Not with smugness, with hard work, passion, commitment, truth, the law, protest, and putting aside your own best interests for the good of the country.
Forget about convincing Trump supporters that there's anything negative about this president. Their minds are closed. They will rationalize and make excuses for whatever crazy statement or action he makes. Anderson Cooper had it right when he said to a Trump apologist he was interviewing: "You'd defend him if he took a dump on his desk." I've had conversations with people who worship him, and they can put a positive spin on guilty pleas by his top aides.
The key to 2018 and 2020 is the turnout. What happened in Alabama with the election of Doug Jones has to be repeated around the country. Democratic voters, especially women and black people, have to show up at the polls and vote for the candidate who's been nominated, even if he or she is not their favorite. The new Democratic mantra should be "It's the turnout, stupid."
You just did an intellectual backward double somersault with a one and a half twist. Wolff helped Trump. Right.
1
What say you of Trumps attitude toward others? He has already stated he hates everyone in the WH. More or less trashed it as a dump to live in. Yet it was good enough for men of lesser wealth. Sadly it is us who pay the burden of his total disconnect not only to the Middle Class but to our nations heritage and Constitution. Would it surprise any of you if we all rose up in another bloody Revolution to unseat this boy who would be King?
1
Mr Stephens must think he is the smartest guy in America. That we drooling dumb Dems are taken in by this gossip!
No one here thought this book was “factual!”
We have great observational skills and intelligence.
We recognized Trump to be a hollow bigoted idiot 30 years ago. Irony? He can’t pronounce the word much less understand the meaning!
Mark Singer of the New Yorker wrote a long essay about Trump back in 1997 saying he had no soul, no mind, and incapable of any introspection!
He’s a heartless empty Brioni suit and you have been played,
Sad!
1
That's exactly what I thought about the book: Although it builds a damning portrait of an out-of-control president enabled by the sycophants he has surrounded himself with, it's so over-the-top relentless that it ends up convincing no one. As an inveterate Trump hater, I didn't see anything new here; and Trump's supporters dismiss it out of hand as irrelevant, scurrilous gossip.
Trump is temperamentally, intellectually, and morally unfit to be president. Wolff's book helps to make that clear - as Trump's reaction to it is demonstrating.
Trump deserves and needs to be attacked and disabled by every civil means possible. Wolff's book is part of that. It paints a picture of a truly disgusting human grotesque.
2
If ridiculing and denigrating Trump is not a winning strategy, then what is? Learned analyses of his policies is absurd because he doesnt have any and because he mocks learned analyses and those who produce and consume them as members of the establishment hated by his supporters. An attack on him and the establishment, that pictures him as a dupe/tool/partner of the establishment, might carry some weight but would not please those who are comfortable with the establishment.
2
Reading most of the comments to this excellent article, one can’t help remembering that the ancient Greeks used to say that the gods first blind those that they wish to destroy.
Mr. Stephens fully agrees with the most damning things that can be said about Trump, but he warns that the man’s cunning should not be underestimated - after all he did get himself elected ! Cunning is not wisdom; it’s what most dictators are.
And yet, the liberal crowd just can’t hear that this underestimation might get Trump re-elected. All what they get is that a word that might have some positive connotations has been used to describe Trump, and they furiously shout “Blasphemy” !
4
I don't know if he is unhinged or suffering from dementia or just plain no good. I don't know how much Wolfe wrote is true. But Trump lies all the time. Multiple times a day. He cannot be trusted except to want a wall and to insult. Trump has no honor or ethics or any recognized virtues. Maybe presidents are not required to have these characteristics. Under the Constitution, just being born in the US and getting most of the electoral votes is all it takes to be president. Most of us knew what Trump was. He was elected anyway. He is our monster. We made him president. Its on us.
2
While Mr. Stephens claims that he is anti-Trump, his scolding, scornful dismissal of "Fire and Fury" is not unbiased--we need to remember that Bret Stephens is a neo-conservative, and is thus, susceptible to bias.
2
The thing is, the diehard Trump fan is never - NEVER - going to desert him, whether the Wolff book was written or not. They are unreachable. Publishing it doesn't move them one way or the other.
But maybe some on-the-fence, reasonable moderate Republicans will. That's why it's important to continually point out his deficiencies, mental and otherwise.
1
While this is book consists of truth, half truth, fantasy , like the Presidency, it cannot be discounted for its entertainment value and exactly the treatment that this Presidency deserves.
1
The NY Times ran a great column in November 2016 called "The Right Way to Resist Trump", written by an Italian about his country's experience dealing with Berlusconi. It should be required reading for anyone who wants to resist Trump and what he stands for.
A quote from the piece that rings very true:
"Mr. Berlusconi was able to govern Italy for as long as he did mostly thanks to the incompetence of his opposition. It was so rabidly obsessed with his personality that any substantive political debate disappeared; it focused only on personal attacks, the effect of which was to increase Mr. Berlusconi’s popularity. His secret was an ability to set off a Pavlovian reaction among his leftist opponents, which engendered instantaneous sympathy in most moderate voters. Mr. Trump is no different."
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/opinion/the-right-way-to-resist-trump...
5
Trump's "sly command of irony"? I doubt he could even define the word.
1
"Will anything less than provoking a nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula suffice to convince Trump loyalists that he’s an unfit commander in chief?" ---- fallacy. if there's anything we know about trump loyalists, it's that they will go right over the cliff with him, not caring how unfit he is for the job. that tells you more about his loyalists than about him. there's no convincing them to vote against him, so why try? thankfully, these lemmings are in the minority. we don't need them to get rid of trump. we only need a solid progressive and independent voter turnout against him and the republicans who support him. that's where 2018/2020 comes in.
Brett, I am a Californian so it is probably not lost on you that I don't agree with your policy opinions very often, but in this article, you zeroed in on exactly the misunderstanding of Trump which I fear. He is cunning. He is haunted by Mueller, but not so much that he will try desperately to get rid of him as he gets closer and closer. You penned this precisely and beautifully. Thank you. Follow the money!!!!
3
His mind is not there or not right. Plenty of evidence for that besides the Wolfe book.
Mr, Stephens, Letting him slide, will only encourage more madness.
3
This column by ultra-right-wing commentator Bret Stephens confirms that conservatives are in a complete panic over the coming demise of their larcenous rule of the US.
3
If any Republican had been elected president, the shift in the tax burden from the rich to the middle class that Warren Buffett describes as having been "a rout" would have likely become the outright massacre that the new tax bill represents. This will not be great for the Congressional Republicans politically. Their prospects would have been much better if no tax bill had been passed, and then they could have run on the issue of "elect us and we will enact a middle class tax cut". Many Congressional Republicans are probably aware that massively shifting the tax burden from the rich to the middle class is not necessarily a political winner. However, they wanted to pass legislation that does exactly that with the knowledge that as long as Trump is president, there is no way that their tax legislation can be repealed, even if Republicans lose control of Congress. Furthermore, as Obamacare and the Bush tax cuts have demonstrated, it is very difficult to change existing laws once they are passed. This is true even if the other party gains control of both Congress and the presidency.
While Trump would have no hesitancy in stating something to the effect that: "The middle class got a giant tax cut and the rich did not, don't believe anyone who is telling you otherwise, especially the fake mainstream media, your accountant or H&R Block (HRB)", other Republicans may be reticent to take that approach..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4134453
2
I have no interest in this book and the many errors of fact make it less than credible although the negative impact on sleezeball Bannon has been a good result. 45 and the rest of his minions, including the Congressional Republicans, do a fine job of inflicting damage on themselves every single day. They do not need third-party help.
I don't need to read Wolff's book to understand that the president has something very wrong with him. Just yesterday-- when I watched the bi-partisan meeting he was holding-- I was alarmed that Trump did not comprehend what Senator Feinstein was saying (to the frustration of the Republicans at the table). He wasn't even embarrassed which made me think that Trump really might have dementia. And just looking at those uneasy faces around the man made me realize that everyone felt the same.
1
Oh for heaven’s sakes, Bret, lighten up. Yes, the book is everything we already knew about Trump, but it is a great summary and focal point. If right wing news wants to pick at the few mistakes in locations and timelines, that will be like trying to stop a California mud slide with a hoe and a rake. Anyhow, even if there was not a single mistake, the right would make some up and they would be just as effective with their credulous followers. Personally, as a usual stickler for accuracy and detail, I am thankful this book has the power to deeply roil the waters. Just what we needed in our quest to rid the country of Trump and his coconspirators.
3
So Wolff is unwise for writing the book because he doesn't respect Trump's cunning. Yet, Stephens agrees with all of the other qualities that Trump's critics like Wolff ascribe to him including ignorance and lying, qualities that in Trump are sufficient to make him unfit for the office he holds.
Mr. Stephens appears to be mightily confused as to the purpose behind writing this column, much more so than Wolff's purpose in writing his book.
2
The Tuesday meeting showed Trump has a future as a wind sock at a local airport, and not a very "stable genius" wind sock at that.
2
Trump is right here, and here, and here, and here, and here. But it could be luck. How long can a person pretend to be blind and still think of self as honest?
1
Wolff's book does not characterize Trump as "drooling," but rather as utterly ignorant, impulsive, repetitive, and childlike. Trump's performance at the immigration meeting and his tweets just confirm that description. I get the feeling that the professional press corps resents Wolff for writing and profiting handsomely from a book that revealed to the public the inside reports and anecdotes that journalists have kept to themselves as part of their insider knowledge.
1
The only like really smart way to oppose Mr. Trump is to do the hard, boring
work of winning elections, the rest of the noise is distraction.
Perhaps Mr Stephens' command of irony is more sly than mine, but I fail to see how President Trump tweeting "mental stability and being, like, really smart" are his two greatest assets in life, reveals that he is similarly endowed - unless Mr Stephens is suggesting that President Trump was communicating that he knows the opposite of what he tweeted is true. As that's very unlikely, I disagree with Mr Stephens and don't think President Trump is intelligent and wise enough to play the fool but instead was being sincere: so WAS making a fool of himself or revealing himself to be a truly foolish person.
And in my opinion mismisunderestimation has already been the political stock in trade of one two-term Republican president. Unfortunately being unfit to be the POTUS does not mean one cannot be elected the POTUS. Twice. That's a great argument for moving away from a political system with an elected executive president with so much power. It's lucky great arguments are, like, "more popular than populists" and the US political system is, like, so easy to "bigly" reform.
The essential truth and accuracy of Wolff's book was more than confirmed by the fate of Steve Bannon, DJT's reputed eminence grise. Bannon could not deny, and eventually apologized for, his quoted comments. And was still excommunicated. The results, and the current state of panicked denial in the White House, speak for themselves.
Sloppy reporting doesn't always allow readers to distinguish between occasional carelessness and conscious fabrications intended to embroider or falsify the truth. Actions, such as Trump's clownish attempt at a cabinet meeting to show how reasonable and bipartisan he can be, often speak more clearly.
1
In a college philosophy class 45 years ago the professor explained to us the difference between intelligence and cunning.
Cunning, he said, is an animal quality not originating in the part of the brain responsible for higher mental functions. Humans who are cunning act without consideration of any group social alliance, loyalty, or consequences. Actions that are cunning, rather than rationally deliberated, are acts of pure survival most likely based in the the fight, flight, or freeze instincts.
I've thought about that a lot watching the trump. Cunning is a succinct description of this person.
9
Single-handedly Trump has successfully and perhaps cunningly brought out the very worst in Democrats, especially their pundits, with their vicious personal attacks of him and shown them to be just as mean-spirited and vindictive as Republicans.
Finally something in the Times I could agree with.
I called the book gossip last week.
Let me say I do not support Trump.
I voted for Hillary Clinton.
But like Cohen I believe Trump should not be opposed on every issue just because he is for them.
I supported moving the embassy.
Most of the Democrats had that position before Trump made the decision to move it.
Senator Charles Schumer the Democrat's minority leader in the Senate has that position.
I will never read the book not because I believe Trump is good or because I disagree with the claims made but because the book is not confirmation of anything just like the dossier does not do as neither have been proven to be factual.
Until that is done the only results these two sources of information will have is to justify to some who already feel Trump should be impeached that they are right.
In the long run Trump will not be impeached but what he has done can be undone.
If you do not like what Trump has done then stop complaining and do what it takes to vote him and the Republicans who support him out of office and replace them with people you like.
5
"I supported moving the embassy. Most of the Democrats had that position before Trump made the decision to move it."
Of course there's a difference between rhetoric and action.
Trump won the Republican nomination by forcing every other candidate, one-by-one, to come down to his level, so he could beat them at his own game. (Marco Rubio's "small hands".) Now he's got Michael Wolff throwing hearsay, rumors and errors around as facts. And in getting an antagonist press to buy into it, they're now playing a game that Trump seems to know how to win. Kudos to Bret Stephens for calling this out.
3
Not sure I would be so charitable with the interpretation of the word "like" as used by Trump. Didn't he say in an interview that he was "like a really smart person?" I don't think he was being humorous at all.
5
About the only thing I agree with in this piece is that Wolff's work has opened the door for Trump to exceed the abysmal expectations fostered by the book by simply putting on an act when necessary. As far as the complaints about sourcing and inaccuracies, etc. we don't see a lot of credible protests from the affected subjects. See also Bannon's too little, too late, not-really-denials.
4
Stephens thinks Michael Wolff fails to appreciate Trump's cunning. But one of the most important aspects of Fire and Fury is showing us how little any of those closest to Trump respect his cunning (or anything else about him). Wolff capture this beautifully, and at length. That's the theme introduced in the very first pages, at the dinner party where Bannon and Ailes take turns acknowledging Trump's deficits, and a major theme throughout.
8
You confuse the anti-Trump movement with anti-Trump folks in the media. You are the folks that got it wrong in 2016 and continue to get it wrong. The Resistance understands this man much better than you realize. We are mobilizing and the complacency that the media brought us in 2016 will not be repeated.
Best example, the television media continues to bring us the same talking heads and consultants who were so tragically wrong the last time. The media has changed little, continues to abrogate its role and fails to be relevant.
7
One of the little changes in the media is taking place on Fox News. Shepherd Smith has debunked some of his network's own myths about Hillary Clinton and Russia meddling being a hoax.
He's been rising to the occasion for months. Fox viewers have attacked him savagely and his tenure is problematic.
1
Brett is correct in pointing out that “Fire and Fury” is simply a distraction, and diverts from the real problem of fencing Trump in. Unfortunately, the GOP Congress whose job is to do just that, has no desire to.
That is the big problem. Dissing Trump is a way to vent, but organizing the replacement of the GOP Congress is the solution.
3
Mr. Stephens: Don't confuse luck and hate with cunning. Trump got lucky once, when enough people living in the right places hated strongly enough to vote for him. It is not difficult to keep the loyalty of this base by reassuring them that their hate is felt (though only occasionally acted upon) at the highest level. Your fellow columnist Charles Blow has a much clearer view of this dynamic, and how it is impervious to any notion of competence or changes in competence. I know you care about competence. But Trump's support does not.
2
The real value of this book is it's words firm up the images in our minds of the situations we know to be true.
3
Again, I absolutely agree with Mr. Stephens. With a conservative like him, who needs liberals. I have not and do not plan to buy or read this book. I don't need to make Mr. Wolff richer. I already know what Trump is like. I base everything I believe about him on actual videos of him speaking. That is all that is needed to gain an accurate picture of this man in the White House.
I'm sorry - we can appreciate the utter contemptibility and depravity of Trump the Man, as justly illustrated by Wolff's gossipy view of the man and his personal foibles, and still recognize the danger that Trump the Commander in Chief and Trump the Politician poses to the safety and security of our Nation and the domestic tranquility and social fabric of our myriad racial, ethnic, sexual, national origin, class, and other communities. Only in the world of political commentary is the world binary.
2
The Wolff book won't necessarily change minds. That was probably not the intent. Obviously it will make the author even wealthier than he already is.
No, the book sheds a further light on the darkest man ever to be in power in this country.
Who doesn't believe this book? Only those 35% who think this incompetent is doing a fine job, and is a stable genius. We are in deep trouble, and truth (or gossip) to power is fine by me.
3
If you look at the comments here and at other liberal news outlets, you see the same thing over and over. As Mr. Stephens points out, this has become an echo chamber. The same echo chamber that prompted the NYT to predict Hillary's win in 2016. They were shocked when the rest of the country did not agree with their obvious wisdom.
Until the average person away from the liberal bastions on the coasts, thinks there is a problem with Trump, this whole thing is a waste of time and probably damaging to your credibility.
The facts are, the stock market is up significantly since Trump took office. North Korea is now at the bargaining table with South Korea.
The nation's largest employer, Walmart is giving its people a raise and crediting the tax bill as making it possible.
Others will point out that there are many reasons for the above not connected to Trump, but to the average person on the street the President acted, and their life got better. Until Trump does something that destroys that perception, he is going to be our President.
I took the "like, really smart" statement differently than Stephens. It brought to mind like, valley girl humor, like that. It could also fit with the idea that like I'm not a real president but I play one on TV. Trump isn't the President but he is like one--an actor playing one and looking the part like Reagan did, even if as Margaret Thatcher said of Reagan, he doesn't know his book or doesn't have his book down. He has no grasp of his own party's positions. But he is still almost like a real President.
6
Such a truly terrific piece. So well written. Thank you. This is my favorite line: “Fire and Fury” has so thoroughly succeeded in lowering public expectations for Trump that it makes it that much easier for him to exceed them."
8
I have not read the book and do not intend to do so - but I generally agree with Mr. Stephens' point about lowering the bar for Trump to the point where "at least he didn't start a nuclear war" will seem a viable argument for re-election. I think books (and media coverage) in the style of "Fire and Fury" distract Americans from attending to the understanding of how Trump's policies (and those of congressional Republicans) may harm the most vulnerable Americans and the nation as a whole. I fear they are also preventing Democrats from developing a thoughtful, coherent, and engaging vision of America that respects the economic concerns of American workers, developing a constructive argument for maintaining America's political, moral, and economic engagement in the world, as well as countering the popular belief that government is the problem with a vision that presents government as an institution that can act effectively to enrich lives, preserve our ideals, and appeal to the better angels of our natures. It will not be enough for Democrats to sit back and hope the Republican Party will split, wither, and self-destruct under Trump and his cronies. Democrats have to develop a vision of what they are for, and a practical, achievable plan for making that vision a reality. I say Democrats and liberals need to stop the shadenfreude (which these books, social media, and many news outlets encourage and so make their fortunes) and become positive, progressive, and proactive.
3
"And Wolff's book is Exhibit A in how NOT to damage Trump's presidency, much less his chances of re-election."
If one believes the polls, ten days ago - the day before the book was leaked and according to Nate Silver - the president's approval rating was 37.9% and that of disapproval was 57.9%; today, those numbers are, respectively, 39.3% and 54.5%.
Methinks Mr. Stephens has hit on something here.
1
I hope Mr. Stephens is “Crying Wolff” and he is correct about “who’s the biggest dope in ‘Fire and Fury’” because I am skeptical about the cunning of President Trump. Even though “the press used to think Reagan and Eisenhower were boobs, too” – it never doubted them as being smart, like, really smart on the inside. I still recall an SNL episode from the 1980s where Phil Hartman, playing President Reagan, appears as a congenial fool to families visiting the White House but every time he ducks back behind the curtains into a meeting with his national security staff, he turns into a sharp-eyed hawk!
Mr. Stephens wonders about the Trump presidency with facts such as, “That the stock market would never recover from his election. That he would blow up NATO. That the Middle East would erupt in violence when Jerusalem was recognized as Israel’s capital. The catastrophes haven’t happened, and maybe that’s just a matter of luck.”
No it’s not a matter of luck but a matter of great concern that these events did not happen because generally people, allies, markets and even enemies around the world have stopped taking Trump seriously. They know he is prone to hyperbole and speaks from both sides of his mouth. It is a rather tragic situation for the United States, that its president is now being discounted because his words don’t matter anymore. The “lowering public expectations for Trump” is a worldwide phenomenon and started long before Wolff’s “Fire and Fury” came long.
24
Donald Trump is playing the "liberal" media like a Yo-Yo Ma cello concerto at Carnegie Hall. They hate this guy for showing daily how powerless and hypocritical they truly are. Cunning is the operative word here, and Trump is the master.
It's difficult to see how the "liberal" media changes its ways. They're making a ton of money by hating on Trump. Wolff, too. And the Capitalism saga continues...
10
Examples of the hypocrisy please. Without backing, your statement, is just another tired, empty talking point
True enough. And by equating money with speech, the judiciary has provided our President with a group of enablers, willing to sing for their dinners from the plutocracy, rather than the citizens of this country.
7
No, Mr. Trump is not engaging in "self deprecating humor" when he calls himself a "genius." One wishes that were the case. This unfortunate President needs praise like normal people need oxygen. And when his sycophants tire, he loves to praise himself.
20
Mr Stephens states that Trump is not deficient in cunning. Exactly. Roaches and rats are cunning and will probably outlast humanity, but that does not mean they are intelligent or should be allowed to govern.
23
To add a bit of science to your roaches & rats analogy, many years ago I attended a press conference on "nuclear winter" featuring Carl Sagan & Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich. One statement Mr. Ehrlich made about the aftermath of a nuclear holocaust was striking, and I paraphrase: 'the aftermath would be the perfect environment for the survival of two species, rats and cockroaches. They would have plenty of food to feast on, meaning human remains, and not be overly affected by the cold weather.'
My point is these vermin have evolved in an environment that is favorable to them and would do even better in a more toxic environment. Like Trump in modern America.
1
"Where was the drooling man-child we had been led to expect from Wolff’s book and the nonstop coverage of it?" Don't worry. Bret. You can read him most mornings at 4AM on Twitter.
12
"Misunderestimation?"
1
It's a clever joke, referring, I believe, to either Reagan or Bush's use of the term, which at the time provoked howls of arrogant snarky glee from the liberal press about how "stupid" this conservative was. Then a lot of people realised what a clever, descriptive term it was, and the liberals looked stupid.
1
You missed the George W. presidency and Will Ferrel's parody of W. with the "misunderestimation" and the "strategery?"
Dubya reference.
You completely missed the point of this book. Trevor Noah accurately pointed out that Trump has created a world where facts, figures and sources don't matter--just your gut. This book is simply a representation of what that world looks like when it's written against him. Furthermore, you cannot honestly think that this book has actually lowered people's expectations of him more than he's already done for himself. This book simply brings to life, exaggerated or not, what we already knew was taking place in the White House. I found it incredibly entertaining. Lastly, Trump's reaction to the book gives it all the credibility needed to know that there's some truth to it.
23
Didn't I just read this written by another conservative , David Brooke. Did Bret just steal the words and thoughts from his buddy? Is this the new "thing" for conservatives, you know, just leave Trump alone.
8
"Donald Trump is a raving idiot. Every sentient person knows this, "
Hmm! Yet the only one who says so explicitly and plainly in public is Wolff. All the real reporters tiptoe around this, all the major news sources hint at it coyly, yet only a 'gossip' writer says it. You attack Wolff for peddling gossip and pick at nits, but never refute his central thesis.
The President of the United States is a raving idiot. Shouldn't this be news? Why isn't it?
27
The key take-away from this Op-Ed is Mr. Stephens’ correct observation that the fatal flaw of the anti-Trump movement is smugness.
I am as distressed as anyone that Mr. Trump occupies the Presidency, and that many millions of our citizens still support him. But unless we honestly consider why that is so - and no, it’s not simply racism, xenophobia, mysogeny, etc. - and find areas of common ground with them, we will experience a backlash of reactive Trumpism for years to come.
9
Yes, it is.
Misunderestimation? Is this a blending together of misunderstood and underestimation?
2
This is a reference to President George W. Bush.
Yes, a direct quote of the neologism used by Bush Junior. Humor, folks- let’s not lose our sense of it!
We could just ask him to repeat the first verse of the national anthem. Give him a week to study it. See if he gets it right.
As the bar lowers.
6
Gossip is to be avoided. Who knows, Bannon might have negotiated a portion of the profit from the Fire and Fury book. To win the midterm elections, we have to stand on principles. Instead of gossiping about the mental fitness of Trump, we must lay out the PROBLEMS his policies have created and will create for the average citizens. For myself, the biggest problem is DIVISION, his policies are causing divisions between the rich and the poor, the red and blue States, the white and the colored, the urban and the rural...., We have to stop him before his policies fulfill Putin’s wildest dream of breaking up the United States.
3
I won't buy or read the book because it doesn't have anything new in it, really. I know what Trump is.
If the "normal person" could look at Trumps performance in the immigration meeting and think it was "reasonably affable and businesslike" then we have identified our problem. "Normal people" are idiots. The people then deserve the punishment that is coming. Maybe Oprah will save us (eye roll).
11
Let's have some pity for Trump. He never thought he'd be elected president. He just wanted to have some fun, play to some cheering crowds, hear the sound of his own voice and expand the reach of his name-brand. Unfortunately for him -- and us -- there were just enough voters who lacked the information and good sense to separate a performance from the real thing, and now all of us, including Trump himself, are stuck with a crook and a fool as president.
17
I wish people like Mr. Stephens would not always interpret the dumb tweets that Pres Trump makes as clear signs of his intelligence. You are clearly putting words in the man's mouth when you claim that his superfluous "like" was self-deprecating humor. It doesn't make the much sense given his extreme narcissism. Why can't we just consider for once, that the nation elected a shallow person, and stop manipulating his speech to pretend that we aren't all also shallow and naive - sometimes a cigar is just a cigar!
17
He probably dictates his tweets. No patience for typing. Sad.
CONNING. Fixed it for you.
20
No sale. Let me point out just two items: First, everything in the book ascribed to Bannon was true. Second, think about who has not leaped to Trump's defense: not a word from Reince Priebus. He may have been a major source for the book, too. He certainly hasn't had anything negative to say about it. Think about that, for a minute.
6
I hate to agree with this but one of the things that we seem to be learning is that except for major emergencies we don't really need a good president. Life continues more or less the same for most people. It's not as if trump campaigned as a serious person. He had fun, was affable and used hatred as a stimulant.We watched cable news that waited for his plane to arrive on the tarmac. This is uncommon in politics but is recognizable in everyday life. Eating cheeseburgers in bed is not recommendable behavior but it's also not locking up people in concentration camps.My hope is that we get through without anything too bad happening. History is funny though. Jewish people considered Germany a good place to live from the mid 19th century until hitler. Einstein moved there from Austria because Germany was progressive in Science. There was anti-semetism but it was dormant.We have a similar problem now here. We know that we are facetious and ugly but the USA is still a great place to live. If the president is not presidential and accuses the previous president of being born in Kenya and being a secret Muslim with zero evidence and eats cheeseburgers and swills Diet Cokes in bed while watching tv, so best. Rome is not burning [yet].
5
You give our Fake President way too much "strategic" credit, Mr. Stephens. Our Fake President is an accomplished master of "conning", New York real estate mogul style, with a lifetime of sordid experiences and human wreckage left in his wake. He is not "cunning", bereft of the high degree of intellectual ingenuity that such a skilled practitioner requires. His approach is direct, bold, confrontational, clumsy, outrageous, "in your face" and, of course, permeated with lies, lies, and more lies.
13
Your discussion of the book--and most I've read--overlook the many flattering descriptions of Trump. He is given credit for his cunning, shrewdness, instinctive understanding of the electorate, etc. Wolff even describes a meeting with industry leaders in which Trump was very much engaged and in command as he appeared to be in this week's immigration discussion.
The book is stunning not because it casts such a disparaging light on Trump. It actually confirms what everyone who has paid any attention to Trump already knew about him. These truths were obvious long before he decided to run for office. Donald has been Donald, and in the public eye, for decades. He is described in this book just as you described him in your closing paragraph, and just as everyone who has paid attention knew him to be already. One might even make the case that the book is what will finally "shame" Trump into a "Presidential pivot" which we may have seen this week.
The book is devastating because it confirms what we already knew about Trump. It will be the definitive narrative of who Trump was in the oval office, whether he survives one or two terms, or leaves early. It's too late for conservative/republican spin to accomplish any real damage control.
3
Among the many reasons Hillary Clinton lost the election was Schweitzer's book: Clinton Cash. Cleverly released for maximum media impact, it "raised questions" even though it was noted that it was filled with distortions and outright lies.
Will Wolff's book have a similar effect on Trump's career? It is unlikely to change any minds among Trump supporters. Responsible journalists have expressed doubts about some of what was in the book. Wolff himself had suggested that his intent was not to express truth, but truthiness.
2
Bret last I checked you are not part of the trump administration, you don't' have an office in the West wing and you don't have a pipeline to the Oval Office. There has to be a modicum of truth to the revelations of the idiocy in this WH. All one has to do is review trump's tweets for confirmation. This president continues to do damage to our country and no we on the left will not give him a fee ride.
3
"self-deprecation"?????
Can you cite one example of this? Just one. djt, in his eyes, it the peak of human evolution -- the perfect man. He has never, even in humor, suggested that he has any flaws.
May the Creator help us.
11
@LGBrown,
He said his tee shot is getting shorter with age. You asked for just one.
It is possible a President express views by Twitter. It is possible a short form limits the depth of the expression. Is it too much to ask those views be expressed in something other than the venacular of a Valley girl?
1
you left out the damning part of the televised speech. Trump shows his lack of understanding and no idea what his position entails. To paraphrase, I will let these people send me a bill. they will put a good bill together and I will sign whatever they send me".
This is the example of the out of touch, not in command, not leading and certainly not dealing from the Dotard in Chief, The Bone Spur Genius at work. Just waiting to sign something, anything, regardless of what it does, his definition of winning
4
There's quite a degree of condescension and disrespect for the citizenry in Mr. Stephens's analysis, isn't there? He acknowledges his own belief that Trump is "ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office" -- all the things on display in Mr. Wolff's book. He even points out that Trump's televised meeting with Congressional leaders was not a good performance. Yet, in his view, a "normal person casually tuning in" would not have recognized all these flaws, because "the president appeared reasonably affable and businesslike."
Well, maybe Stephens is right that most Americans don't see all the character flaws that are so obvious to him (and to you and me). But I'm hopeful that he's wrong -- that the "gossip" in Wolff's book reinforces and solidifies the impressions that a growing majority of Americans already have of their utterly unfit president. I'd like to think that this majority includes a lot of "normal" people in addition to highly (self-)regarded columnists.
8
It's strange how this attack has gotten under the administration's skin the way it has. Wolf is in his own way fighting fire with fire. I agree this ultimately lowers the standards of the anti-Trump movement but it's hard to avoid noticing how using the right's own tactics against them seems to work in a strange way. The televised DACA meeting was the first time I have ever seen Trump try to act presidential.
1
The book seems like a surrealistic nightmare, too unbelievable to be taken seriously. Such a man like Trump could never occupy the Oval Office.
Too bad the book is completely TRUE.
4
Fire and Fury is directionally correct. Most Americans think that Trump is pathologicaly stupid.
11
"And Wolff’s book is Exhibit A in how not to damage Trump’s presidency, much less his chances of re-election."
I disagree. The book resulted in Bannon losing his platform at Breitbart and his backing by the Mercer money, and it widened the breach between Bannon and Trump.
It also put Trump further on the defensive, and wounded him personally and politically, with the result that we had that laughable "televised meeting" in the White House "studio" on Tuesday.
The way to handle a bully like Trump is to make him a laughingstock. Wolfe's book helped in that process.
17
Bret, I think it is to the point where no believes the news media or anyone else for that matter. As in Isaiah, "Truth has fallen....... it displeased our Lord......no judgment........and his arm brought salvation, the righteousness sustained him." I'm just not sure, we have one like our Good Lord? Lies are rampant even in families, where many are destroyed. And deception - it's a sin too, setting up another family member with a prostitute....? Or planting a seed? (My little niece just told me, "Don't tell my mother, I told you.") And I swear outside forces use one family member to get at another. The whole place is going to hell in a hand-basket!
"Trump is ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office. But he’s not deficient in cunning".
Or, at least the type of cunning that enables his base to continue to characterized his opposition as hysterical snowflakes--precisely the sort of people they've always been suspicious of. And whatever else Trump says or does, giving the perception that's he's with "the real Americans", and against the effete "libtards", has been enough to keep that base up to now.
True, it's very hard to see what words or actions would dissuade that base from supporting him, especially as Bret notes, the conception of Trump is such that competency had been defined down, and most are just happy when Trump wakes up without drool on his face.
For an effective opposition, there will have to be a lot more emphasis on what the alternatives are to Trump. Democrats really should be tying him to the rest of the Republican oligarchy, pointing out that he hasn't "drained the swap", hasn't represented "real Americans" interests, but just continue the sucking up of resources into the one percent maw--which, after all, Trump is a card carrying member of, whatever stylistic differences there are between him and his fellow oligarchs.
1
Sometimes I feel like we in the opposition have been like a bunch of avid football fans watching a game. Do you ever notice that whenever their team executes a spectacular play, fans will leap up and scream “Did you see that, did you see that?!” to each other even though every one of them had their eyes glued to the TV the whole time?
Wolff’s book finally answers the question about Trump’s spectacularly erratic and deceitful behavior for those of us forced to watch his bizarre surreality show: Yes, I saw that.
As any physician (or witch doctor for that matter) will tell you, naming the disease is half the battle in in coming up with the cure. Now that we know that we can, like, believe our eyes and ears, we can work on the cure. Vote.
3
"But he’s not deficient in cunning, and that cunning deserves healthy respect from his political opponents."
Indeed! And thank you Bret Stephens for hammering home this point.
If Trump is crazy, he's as crazy as a fox, as the saying goes. And he has outfoxed us all. In this sense, he is a genius of a sort, though a malevolent and potentially destructive one. It is clear that he will do whatever he can in order to achieve his goals, the consequences and harm done to others be damned. We should take Trump's presidency as a sobering lesson of how our democracy is currently vulnerable to being derailed.
1
Perhaps Brett should re-read his exchange with Gail Collins about the book and then either rewrite this column or pull it altogether.
3
There's not much original thought in this. It's the received opinion of moderate and liberal Republicans -- what people can overhear in academic clubs near Grand Central Station.-- David Brooks lite.
Bret Stephens has the imprimatur of the Times. He could do actual reporting. His calls would be returned.
3
My impression is that Mr. Wolff has basically turned a political cartoon into something like a novel. I prefer real fiction that attempts to represent reality to a purported reality that, in reality, is akin to fiction, perhaps a comic book.
Clearly, someone abnormal is sitting in the Oval Office, behind the desk. His supporters lauded his political abnormality; his lack of political correctness helped get him elected. His detractors, myself included, find his behavior occasionally bizarre and frequently reminiscent of the playground bully who stole their lunch money in grammar school. He himself frequently emphasizes his abnormality. He is the billionaire genius who is wildly successful at anything he puts his mind to, like, a really smart guy.
As a number of columnists have suggested recently, we the people of the United States of America will be blessed, or cursed depending on your take on the President's exceptional abnormality, with his presence behind the desk in the Oval Office for another 3 years. We will need to deal with the homages and the ad hominem's that swirl in the wake of our Chief Executive as he wears and tacks like a rookie sailor on his first outing.
Today's political landscape looks like a battlefield, an armed conflict. Although our journalists necessarily have sympathies with one side or the other, I would prefer their reporting to be object and accurate. I would prefer that their pens are not turned into weapons for one side, even my own.
2
I have often thought during the past 18 months that a paraphrase of the saying, "old age and cunning will always beat youth and enthusiasm" applies to President 45's campaign, election, and first year. I'm hopeful, but cautious that Democrats can reverse the terms of this saying beginning with the 2018 mid-term elections, then beyond.
"hysterical and condescending ninnies" are obviously the anti-Trump deplorables. Both Sides-vana at last!
right on
Someone publishes a pack of lies about Obama and the conservatives eat it up. Someone else publishes a pack of lies about Trump and the liberals eat it up. P. T. Barnum was right, there truly is a sucker born every minute.
A pack of lies about Trump? All of it? Not a scintilla of truth in the 300+ pages? Earth to Dave .....
Oh jeez, give it a rest, Bret. The majority of people in this country do not need Michael Wolff to tell them what they already know: Trump is unfit for the Presidency and his Republican Congress are his enablers.
Thus far we have escaped major national or international problems that would require a cool, well informed person to make decisions. However, behind the scenes all of Trump’s appointments in government are eating away at our functioning governmental agencies. After requiring federal attorneys to resign, Trump interviewed the “special ones” in NY, you know, the ones who are likely to have jurisdiction over any cases arising from the Mueller investigation. Think he might be interfering or putting his hand on the scales of justice to proactively protect himself? He’s wiley, not stupid, but that doesn't mean he’s actually wise enough to make responsible national decisions.
We are losing years and years of institutional knowledge and wisdom through the loss of federal employees, and in their effort to shrink government none of these people are being replaced. Your governmental “home” is being eaten by ideological termites. You are an idiot if you think “change” is always for the better or that when they spit in your eye it’s really raining.
As for his “meeting” the other day, he was calm and executive looking but this dimwit agreed with both Dems and Reps even when the proposals were 180degrees in opposition. Some executive!
13
Gossip? Why was the WH so eager to block publication? And why is it now threatening to take a strong [sic] look at our libel laws?
5
You do know we can all see the orange stain on your mouth, Brett...
3
In the span of a few lines of virtual ink, Bret Stephens goes from "Guess what? Donald Trump is a raving idiot. Every sentient person knows this...." to "That Michael Wolff fails to appreciate it only shows who’s the biggest dope...."
So many choices, so little space. Thank goodness, or not, that we have Mr. Stephens to keep it all straight, or not.
1
What is in F&F , the small details etc ,is not that important. It is that Mr Wolff got access to the WH and time with many of the principals. Trump and his WH are not hard working detail people which is something that is important to a well functioning WH. So they let this happen in the name of money and publicity. It backfired in their faces. What is next to backfire?
3
You are such an overweening hypocrite, Bret. You so-called "Never Trumpers" supported the use of race and immigration as a cultural wedge for years, favored policies leading to the huge inequality we have now. Now you're mad? Look in the mirror. You own this.
3
The reason why Mr. Stephens along with Mr. Brooks and other Republican conoscenti are castigating the book as "gossip" and "tabloid" journalism and Mr. Wolff as a "phony" is precisely because it's such a powerful indictment of the Republican Party. The book really isn't about Trump. It's about his enablers. That's the odd thing when reading it - Trump has only a supporting role in the narrative which otherwise is focused on how Republican officialdom has debased itself by colluding with him. It gives the lie to every value and principle sanctimonious conservatives Mandarins like Mr. Stephens lay claim to. In 'Fire and Fury', we see the conservative movement for what it truly is.
10
Wow, Bret Stevens is really doing himself a great service by including himself in with the many righteous, dedicated resisters and commentators, in both social and mainstream media, who righteously worry about and deride Trump, while doing them a great deservice in his description of them. These authenic anti Trump commentators aren't "smug", they are informed and genuinely angry, alarmed and concerned. They aren't "moral scolds", they are experts, informers and protestors, the informed and affected presenting facts, not opinion, unless Mr. Stevens who seems to do alot of moral scolding of his own here. And berating Liberals for their losses is hardly a point.
And protraying Trump as a king of irony shows a decided lack of understanding of the man and his media. Trump has no such intellectualism, humility, humanity or depth in his soul and approach, and in this article, this seems to be matched by Mr. Steven's vision and rendering of him.
4
Instead of being so defensive, you should take Steven's essay as an attempt to be helpful to your cause. Has anything Trump's critics have said or done to date worked? If you would back off and let Trump cook his own goose, you'd get better results.
1
It's all just a vast left wing conspiracy that started the day after the election.
Ah, I was sort of with you until the superfluous "like" claim. Intended as humor when written? The president has no sense of humor or irony or . . . any sense at all. He couldn't spell "self-deprecation" and has never exhibited actual wit, only halfwit.
8
Fire and Fury is clearly entertainment rather than rigorous journalism, much like the Fox News Network and Bret Stephens' own opinion column. And it works because it actually is believable, even if not strictly verifiable.
Where this column falls down is with the boringly predictable use of a low brow straw man argument to deflect from the credibility of Wolff's colorful prose. Guess what Bret, even if you don't have the ambition of being factual in what is an opinion column, your piece isn't even entertaining.
And even if he's no Watergate hero, Wolff has at least that one over you, Bret.
4
Mr. Stephens' jealousy is as transparent as his uninformed opinion is biased. Sorry to see you lower yourself so far. Thank you Michael Wolff! I get your book from Amazon tomorrow.
3
The author, Wolff, has not done damage to the president. The president has.
And as of reading this I am now totally sick of this kind of senseless argument.
And The New York Times has best move on from this level of countering. It's a waste of your reader's time.
5
OK, so F&F isn't the final historical record of Donnie's Administration. It can be part of the background of the grander tapestry. Has anyone seriously proposed it is anything else, expect those like Mr Stephens who want to dismiss it?
Rather than poke holes in F&F, why not accept it for what it is and turn the analysis on those who are saying "it's the news sensation of the decade?" Perhaps it's because Mr. Stephens is alone in that characterization.
2
Guess what? Bret believes in many Trump policies. So agreeing that Trump is an idiot doesn't make Bret any less of a collaborator.
2
I t appears Wolff took a page from the Fox News playbook and turned it on trump.
Despicable "journalism"?
Yes.
But it does capture the ambiance of this dysfunctional presidency.
1
Great, you don't like it. But be specific. Otherwise, it looks like journalistic jealousy. Similar to David Brooks recent column. Wah.
1
“Guess what? Donald Trump is a raving idiot. Every sentient person knows this, and if Michael Wolff is to be believed, so does most everyone in the White House. So why are we talking about Wolff’s book “Fire and Fury” as if it’s the news sensation of the decade?”
And then Bret Stephens fills the rest of his column yakking about “Fire and Fury”, just like every other member of the chattering class. Anything that polarizes is catnip for the Clicks-R-Us club and its readers.
Wolff plays by the rules first established in the Trump White House: where anyone and an
1
I doubt anyone confuses F&F with great journalism. But if it gets under Trump's skin, and gets Bannon excommunicated, it can't be all bad, right? I bought a copy as a souvenir. Not sure I'll even bother reading it, but I know I'll get a chuckle everything I see the cover of the book.
3
I think this columnist has, like, totally whiffed with this effort.
2
Fire and Fury is pseudo-journalism.
Really Bret? I consider myself sentient. And while I consider Mr. Trump a bit eccentric and over the top, I do NOT consider him a raving idiot. The more I read of you "Never Trumpers" however, I'm convinced I'm seeing raving idiots in action.
2
The resistance is not Wolff. The resistance is Emily's list, times up, Black PAC and the many grass roots political organizations gaining traction and running candidates. Calling us hysterical ninnies is very stupid Mr. Stephens, very stupid.
1
Hilarious to watch the racists Stephens and brooks declare themselves anti trump, and then write lengthy articles in his defense. More evidence of trump enablement at the NYT.
1
I think the author reads too much into Trump's tweets. Trump is an idiot. Yes, we should not underestimate his cruelty & callousness. But that doesn't change the fact that he's an idiot who is deteriorating before our eyes.
3
Bottom line trump is a Putin puppet, unfit for office!
The last resort of scoundrels (Trump critics) is when exposed as completely clueless they say, well, he looked pretty good, not by real standards but because we've lowered our expectations so much we made him look good.
Horse hockey. Trump looked in control. He looked completely engaged, completely conversant on the topic. He made 2 brilliant moves that Obama nor any of his predecessors were able to make: 1) he was truly transparent in showing how our government works through live TV; 2) he put the onus of solving immigration where it belongs -- on congress. And he pushed for a bipartisan solution. Despite the pleading $ whining of dems in the room, he said essentially -- you guys fix this. Get it done.
That's leadership, in case Mr. Stephens missed it. Leaders don't have to be policy wonks (remember HRC, a huge wonk, when charged with fixing health care in the 90's, simply flow charted that effort into oblivion).
For details, you have experts. A CEO doesn't need to know JAVA to order a system built. Leaders set agendas and push those they lead to achieve. For all the squawking on left and right, if Trump fixes Korea, immigration, taxes, removes regs that strangled the economy, creates jobs and goes on to more -- I don't give a hoot if he reads a lot or eats burgers. Most issues don't require reading massive tomes. With N. Korea, you know your goal and the levers to obtain that goal. You don't have to know how the bomb works to leverage it.
2
Ralphie, c'mon, fess up. You're really Trump's alt-right whisperer Stephen Miller posting under a pseudonym. Right?
wouldn't pay enough
I agree that Wolff's book has not been useful, nor does it have any more staying power than a cream puff. People who wanted to hear Trump is an idiot hear themselves validated and people who don't turn the sound down. The only good thing to come of it is the displacement of Steve Bannon from Breitbart. His fans will have to spend some time finding a new prophet.
Pick up today's paper, Bret, and read your friend Gail Collins' piece.
1
"Civic Samurai" points out below that an effect of this book is that Steve Bannon is no longer the presidential confidant (Svengali?) and has lost his perch at Breitbart. Discord among the enemy is not to be minimized as a valuable development in a war, and we are in a war: reason and science, versus emotion and disinformation. For that alone, the book has justified its existence. The people supporting Trump, for the most part, don't read this paper. But they might read this book.
1
Hey Bret,
Would you be whining about the accuracy or completeness of the book if it were flattering of the President?
"One of Trump’s underappreciated strengths is his sly command of irony, on display again last week when he tweeted that his two great assets in life were “mental stability and being, like, really smart.” Note the superfluous “like,” which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written. The president isn’t making a fool of himself. He’s having a laugh that’s part self-deprecation, part trolling, and actual wit."
LOL. No.
The only thing Trump "commands" is a boundless, avaricious, infantile demand for attention. Irony and wit require some capacity for self-reflection and an ability to judge differences between appearances and reality. Trump has no such capacity and recognizes no such distinctions. Everything he approves is "the greatest." Everything he dislikes is "fake news."
This isn't "actual wit." It isn't even, like, wit.
The only thing funny here is Stephens accusing others of being smug. Now, that is genuinely funny, though for reasons I suspect S. won't appreciate.
3
And, now that the president has declared his intentions to shuffle off to Davos - that hotbed of Globalist Elitism - the resistance that he will get from the international talking ninnies will only enhance his credentials as president of the real people. That's his real intention. He's much more a seaside resort type of guy.
Well, no matter his journalistic sins, after this book Wolff will never have to work again.
2
"Fire and Fury.” Number "1" seller on Amazon. Kind of says it all.
One can rant about all the inaccuracies in the book, but we all know the "biggest " inaccuracy sits in the Oval Office.
And Michael Wolff is laughing all the way to the bank.
2
I believe Wolff’s book exposes NYT reporters, those who have observed Trump up close for many years, and get exclusive interviews with him. Haberman, Schmitt et al. Not one has even hinted at the dementia apparent in F and F. Bad reporting or not wanting to lose access?
1
It is not enough to claim that the book is replete with casual errors of fact. if you have read the book Mr. Stephens, why not name a few. It might help explain just why you use the term "casual error of fact" instead of just "errors." Are we to believe that you know the facts that would prove the errors? Your seeing the book as an ill advised tactic is overly clever. The whole world runs on gossip. If Trump can repeat lies until the truth melts away, why shouldn't Mr. Wolff turn gossip into a weapon against the known lies and liar. Gossip is the exchange of information, it can be wrong, deliberately or unintentionally, but it just as often is the truth that's uncomfortable enough to be titillating . Instead of looking for errors to discredit the book, why not look for lies, then get back to us.
4
I hope the phrase the “superfluous ‘like'” becomes a meme. The put-down from someone who makes his living crafting language thoughtfully is understandable. Even the misundercharacterization of a whole generation as “stupid” is forgivable.
Trump is abnormal. He does not look normal, he does not act normal, he does not speak normal and he does not think normal. Every time he appears on TV I cringe that this ignorant, uncouth, unread old dotard occupies the highest office in our land and represents us abroad. The Wolff book may have got some details wrong but it was bang-on in painting a picture of this "stable genius" and how he is regarded by those closest to him.
5
Are we reading the same book? Doesn’t appear so. Did you even bother to read the book? I don’t believe you did.
1
Mr. Stephens has succeeded in being another Michael Wolff with this empty column devoted to parsing and piercing the psyche of Trump.
If I read Gail Collins today I'll just get the same content i a different form.
It's really time that all of you with the platform of the NYT start writing solid pieces about this creature's actions, about how he and Miller are taking the nation apart piece by piece by piece.
While you waste time filing this piece and the Times wastes column inches printing it, this man is busy rolling back climate regulations, worker safety protections, appointing unqualified judges to the federal bench, forbidding the use of certain words like fetus, insulting our Allies, depleting our State Dept., pulling us out of important international agreements, doing nothing to secure our electoral process from hacking, picking a lawyer who represented Deutsche Bank, to whom Trump owes billions of dollars, as head of the most important federal district court (stop him, Sen. Gellibrand!), is in violation of the Emoluments clause of the constitution, threatens freedom of the press on which you rely, and is now ranting about our libel laws....he's never heard of Near v. Minnesota, and doesn't even know our laws say you can't libel a public official.
I could go on, but the point is clear.
You fiddle about Wolff while the constitution burns.
Please use this platform wisely, or you'll be writing for Pravda or TASS, so to speak, if you are writing at all.
3
Wolff has always seen himself as more of a commentator than a premier journalist of the Woodward-Bernstein school. This book is not a biographical profile, where Trump's cunning would have to be acknowledged. It is a compendium of Wolff's unsupervised experiences in the White House, presented as entertainment and, yes, gossipy entertainment. It is so successful because it reflects exactly what we all suspected, and the many punchlines are fun to read and share. If there are some inaccuracies, so what? At least Wolff is providing a little comic relief from the daily downpour of lies and tragic incompetence.
Spend your considerable intellect going into detail about off-shore drilling
and the environment.
Tell us about the loss of healthcare for children whose parents need help providing it. Tell us about targeting "Blue States" in the tax bill.
Tell us about ferreting out non-believers of trumpism in departments of Government. Tell us about the really cunning ones...the Republicans in
the Congress. Tell us about how Pruitt is benefitting financially from his connection to the energy industry. Tell us about US Senators
and their votes lining up with their finances.
You like ...excuse me.. still like, trickle down Milton Friedman economics?
After all this time make your case......but all I needed was trump's attack on a journalist with a disability in such a cruel way to never think he's fit for office....least of all the Presidency of the United States. Smug? Get a grip
4
i'm a pretty good judge of character and Trump has a lot of qualities that are helpful to a guy who is trying to lead, and get an agenda accomplished. I think the day in day out hatred directed to trump is juvenile. Columnists seem to literally fall all over themselves to find novel ways to wreck him. It is strange, tiresome, and makes columnists seem borderline psychologically damaged. Don't do it, Brett. Your gut tells you otherwise - it has to.
1
Mr. Stephens' column couldn't be more timely for me. I am reading "the book." Just yesterday, I took a break from reading it to take in my daily read of the NYT, and I was jolted back to hard reality by headlines about immigration agents targeting 7-11s, gerrymandering, and the Trump administration making more noise about libel laws. I'd been deeply immersed in (and enjoying) Wolff's tale of story-book White House inhabited by a Troll whose minders tossed him cheeseburgers when he got restless and wanted to break things. I'll finish the book, but now I'll know that the feeling I experience when I turn my attention back full-time to real journalism is the equivalent of a false-comfort hangover.
1
Trump's overreaction to this book is the real story. Plenty of books were written critical of Obama and there was no reaction from Obama or his surrogates.
1
I’m reading the book and it’s entertaining, horrifying, gossipy, and sloppy. I’m a reader of good biographies, my favorite aurthor, Robert Caro, so this is like reading Kitty Kelley’s stuff, too much fluff but it’s a must read for everyone. Trump comes to the job totally unprepared to be president, he has put his family members in positions they have no understanding of, he loves chaos and pits his people against each other, that’s his management style. I hope some Trump supporters have the courage to read the book and think about their decision to vote for a reality TV star with no experience and ask, was this the right way to go?
2
“Yet to a normal person casually tuning in, the president appeared reasonably affable and businesslike.”
Took a poll did you Bret?
1
I think Mr. Stevens makes a good point here. You don't defeat a bear by poking it or feeding it. As a teacher, I deal with problem behavior all of the time. If I react with fire and fury to fire and fury the fire and the fury only intensifies. I need to deescalate the situation. Hilary's great mistake was calling Trump supporters "Incorrigibles". People of conscience need to show the public that another choice would benefit them more than this one. Not tell, show. That's true path out of this nightmare.
All that being said, I think this book still serves a purpose. Mr. Wolff laid it bare. That's his job as a muckraking journalist. Lord knows there's been enough fake news on the other side. Most people are seeing that it's an accurate picture on the whole, if a flawed one, and not necessarily a winning strategy on it's own.
So, let Oprah help us find consensus on an ethical way going forward. Let the mantra be, "They go low, we go higher". But let's not let the truth of our current disfunction get lost either.
Wolff's tell-all further marginalized Bannon and (hopefully) has greatly reduced his influence. That alone makes the book a success.
3
I think Bret Stephens is going out on a limb when he attributes some of Trump's mind-numbing comments to a "sly command of irony". Wishing doesn't make it so. I do agree that Trump is cunning--the cunning of the conman.
1
Humbug. I've read the same words as this piece's author, and I get Trump's cunning represented loud and clear. This author seems to think he's the only one who can hurl criticism effectively ("I believe that Trump is ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office"? Mr. Wolff's book reads as far more editorially restrained than I've seen it most often represented. Not that the material isn't salacious. But it is represented without a tremendous amount of authorial commentary. This author seems to feel Wolff should hold his tongue. I disagree.
1
"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. "
Nixon's supporters during Watergate said similar words about
Woodward/ Bernstein. Their books too were criticized.
And they were never proven wrong.
1
The biggest dopes in "Fire and Fury" are those who supported and voted for Mr. Trump.
2
Whatever.
The fact is this bunch of “geniuses” let the Wolfe in the hen house- for a year.
They freely talked smack about their boss who set the tone with conspiracy garbage and gossip and talking smack himself. They could not tell a toxic presence because this guy fit right in.
It is our White House demeaned by all of them. Brett thinking the public is too dumb to assess competence is tiring.
3
It is SO obvious to us “news junkies” that Mr. Stephens is spouting the approved talking point(s) about Michael Wolff’s book.
A similar editorial (by a Christopher Buskirk) appeared last night in the Washington Post. This “spin” on the book is not only “counter-intuitive”...it is counter-intelligent. It is wishful and dumb.
But I FEEL for these Republican hacks. What else can they do? What else can they say?
I ask: is there any evidence that Trump IS competent? Is there any evidence that Trump is NOT a Russian stooge?
Wolff’s book only underscores what was already clear to ‘normal’ people.
1
Bravo, Mr. Stephens! You've hit the issue beautifully with Wolff's overkill-yellower-than-yellow attempt at gossip journalism. I know teenage girls who could do it better with more reliable sources.
The stock market is strong, the Middle East is leaning toward negotiations, and Europe is rethinking the illogic of mindless immigration.
Even if subsequent WH defector copycats continue chants of "crazy, mental, stupid",.. my growing fatigue to this strategy, is rapidly shuttering. (Are you listening Dems?)
I like the results of Trump's presidency so far. They can only cry "Wolff" so long without appearing crazy asslike themselves.
1
It's tough when someone writes the book you always wanted to write. Just sayin........
Yet another trashing of "Fire and Fury" by a jealous journalist who isn't making the money Wolff will. Ascribing the highest journalistic standards to the lowest of presidential standards is not germane to this conversation. NYTimes reporters brilliant, Wolff, bad is a puerile slam.
1
Cunning. Such a nice, polite term for Conning. There's the real word. A lifetime of scamming, scheming, lying and cheating. A " businessman " that nevertheless is a multiple bankrupt, made a sport of cheating and ruining Contractors, ran a CASINO into the ground. And Trump Properties, oh, my. An orgasmic explosion of Tacky. Alabama meets Moscow, by way of Las Vegas. This entire Regime is like a grade "C" Mob Movie, complete with the literal DON. And we are all the marks, and paying outrageously, for everything. Thanks, GOP. NOVEMBER.
3
love you Brett. keep writing!!!!!!
Nice try Bret, but you still come across as a thinly disguised Trump enabler. Try again.
2
Fire and Fury is not the shining rapier that will slay the Trump administration, and such a thing probably will not exist. This beast will be brought down only by a thousand blows from blunt instruments, and no one should expect a clean kill.
1
Melania gets served snacks by a Secret Service guy.
He delivers.
1
Stephens must have read a different book. Trump comes across in it as a vain, stupid, incompetent, corrupt, treasonous, fool. This is consistent with what all “sentient” Americans know. Trump’s behavior in any meeting or speech where he can temporarily pretend to he normal fool no one other than his idiot followers.
Trump’s followers people aren’t reachable by facts or reason. They are beyond hope. These strange beings like Trump and his words and actions don’t matter. And they never will.
1
And what if this were Obama?
Has anyone said Wolff's book wasn't gossip, and raised it to the level of "journalism?" Frankly, it's partly on journalists at his very paper ("but her emails") who got us here. They may be jealous of the attention Wolff is getting. Chose another profession, or keep slugging away at that journalism thing.
1
The writer does protest too much, methinks
1
The remaining "missing piece" is the Kardashian/Trump love child. Otherwise, a pretty full garbage bin.
regardless of stephens' past or present political beliefs, he is spot on with his comments. by now every fifth grader knows trump is a deceitful, spiteful, vindictive narcissist. wolff is just preaching to the choir, while the trump government is steadily pushing through his agenda. stop the gossiping and whining!!! it's already early 2018 and i still dont see any comprehensive strategy put forth by the dems. roll up your sleeves and get to work, or we all will be crying in our drinks until 2024.
Good grief! The photo looks like a detail from a satirical "Last Supper"!
If Wolfe's book feeds misunderestimation of Trump.
Let's by all means dismisunderestimate Trump.
1
Watch, Trump‘s going to start wearing Rick Perry‘s nerd glasses to look smart.
2
OK, let me get this straight: A guy who is "ignorant, bigoted... and morally unfit for office"; nevertheless, his "cunning deserves healthy respect", otherwise you're a "dope". In what way is respect for ignorance, bigotry, ... *and* cunning healthy? If I don't think that's healthy, I guess I must be a dope, right?
3
Lest we forget the frenzy on the right's frenzy over birth certificates, Benghazi!!!!, an economy busting health care bill, Obama "bowing" to the King of Saudi Arabia........and on and on......we have this. Real crisis. We should be outraged.
2
Mr. Stephens, surely you jest when you say that Trump has a "sly command of irony." If the use of the word "like" differs depending on whether it is spoken (stupid) or written (humorous), then I guess we can agree that Trump is stupid. He has said he is "like, really smart" on several occasions during his campaign and when he tweets it, he is only writing the way he speaks and the way his "very good brain" works. I suspect the only thing Trump knows about "irony" is that it describes some of the golf clubs he uses in his frequent golf outings.
2
He's cunning? It's the dumb electorate that's to blame.
2
Your opinion, in a normal world, is valid. But seeing how you and every writer for the Times has produced inaccurate predictions about this thing in the White House, I will look at your latest piece with a jaundiced eye. Sad!
Any of us who have lived on Planet Earth for the last two years (less if you’re a New Yorker) didn’t need to touch Wolf’s book to understand what a vile person our President is. Has Stephens been on the international space station the whole time? And whether he is cunning or not (questionable), that would be a trait he shares with some of the worst dictators in history. Why Stephens thinks this is admirable is beyond comprehension.
Note to NY Times: I know you’re always looking to save money by trimming staff, where possible. Get rid of Stephens and these useless columns, and you’ll reduce your budget without downgrading content one bit.
Liberal cable, which can sometimes offer solace, has gotten cloying. I agree with this analysis, and I've worried myself that the president's critics are deluding themselves as they grope for his Achilles heel.
To Bret Stephens:
What are we to understand or infer from the title of your column. "The Wolff Eats Its Own"?!?! Talk about tabloid! If that isn't a tabloid-style come on, I don't know one when I read it. Mr. Wolff hasn't eaten anything, much less his "own". How silly, Mr. Stephens. How Wall Street Journal-ish. Know what I think? I think you're jealous that Mr. Wolff simply walked through the door, pulled up a chair, and ended up with the best selling book, perhaps of all time. To Mr. Wolff, chapeau!
I think Stephens got bit on the neck by a Trumpette, and is now spouting zombie nonsense.
5
Maybe a Trumpire?
You really believe that Donald Trump is capable of self-deprecation? He is not so capable.
The relevant take home from this book is that Trump is emotionally a spoiled child; he lashes out at the whiff of critique and requires praise and adoration like an addict requires his drug.
Life for Trump is a zero sum game and thus he favors any idea that is contrary to those of his perceived opposition, chiefly President Obama.
Trump is not demented. He is a sociopath and Republicans are his enablers.
3
In the '70s we learned about non-denial denials and again 15 yrs ago going to war. Two "Neo-Con" "anti-Trump" columns this week (no..maybe its the messenger/author?) fit that bill. Mr. Trump is now the Neo-Con cover, their beard, for (Ryan/McConnell/Cruz) policies they love. So its: "But I hate Trump"..... " with the refrain of "It aint me babe, I aint the (ultra Trump lovin) right winger you're looking for" (apologies to Bob Dylan). Every magician needs an assistant to distract, and Stephens and Brooks are...so reasonable.
1
In his interview with Stephen Colbert Mr. Wolff actually expressed much of this sentiment. He said he did not anticipate the level of sales, interest, or sales, because while there is the inside access in this book there is essentially nothing that most people do not already know.
Putin's Choice is a simpleton. An obese impulsive and vindictive child who never ever ever is going to do his homework, and nobody is going to make him, and he is going to get an extra scoop and a cheeseburger too!
He lies constantly, his entire syndicate lies constantly, there is no organization, no vision, no anything except lies and spin and impulse.
Some may find these characteristics entertaining on lousy "reality" game shows. But they are completely unsuited for any adult policy discussions.
4
Could we please remove "obese" from the list of insults we throw at the man?
Would his behavior be somehow more acceptable if he were thin? Or is it that you believe that only thin people have the capacity to be anything but "simpletons" and "impulsive and vindicative"? That doing homework is something that can only be accomplished by the slim?
If you're calling someone "fat" as an insult, you are engaging in the same level of elementary schoolyard taunts that Putin's Choice (love that) traffics in.
1
Wolff’s book helps Trump by lowering expectations to the point where Trump can exceed them?
If that were how it works, then Trump’s cries of “fake news” would boost trust in major news outlets by lowering expectations to the point where the MSM can easily exceed them.
But it hasn’t. That’s just not how it works.
Even if Wolff’s whole book were proven to be just as fictional as the gorilla channel story, this would have no impact on the anti-Trump Resistance. That’s because our opposition to Trump never depended on cues from Washington’s chattering class. We’ve opposed Trump’s policy proposals, his character, and the bigotry he represents from Day 1 because they threaten our fundamental rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Gossip or cluck your tongue all you want; we’re focused on real issues here.
5
Sorry. I disagree with your take on Wolff’s book. Wolff nailed trump to the wall (no pun intended). trump’s performance on Tuesday was just that a performance. He knew nor did he understand nothing about the DACA or immigration crisis. He just sat there and agreed with whomever was speaking. He is ignorant, unread, and semiliterate just as Wolff indicated in his book.
Apparently, you were mesmerized by trump’s performance on Tuesday, the whole point of trotting him outsurrounded by twenty-two lawmakers. How was Wednesday for ya? He backtracked on everything from Tuesday meeting and degraded Senator Feinstein in a vicious tweet. trump is everything Wolff alluded too and more. Nice try though.
3
The "cunning" is shared by both Wolff and Trump. It is fueled by ego and the pursuit of money, absent any need to serve others or a sense of duty. Wolff is not a journalist and Trump is not a leader. "What a fool believes, he sees."
1
Well, no one could ever accuse you of smugness. Now, could you offer up your both sides argument on climate change again? Or how great you think this tax cut is?
5
The the truth shall set you free.
"I believe that Trump is ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office."
— How does the writer REALLY feel about Trump?
At times, I almost feel sorry for Trump. Perhaps embarrassed is a better word. He has become a character in his own bad movie.
Funny how many of these take-downs of Wolff are replete with the same sorts of unverified accusations and gratuitous insults that they accuse Wolff of deploying.
5
The House republicans, fearful of the midterms, are whipping up their base with their hateful immigration proposal. This shows Bret's hypocritical distancing from the creature he helped make, i.e. trump. trump is the quintessential republican (see the derogatory description of trump in Bret's op-ed for elucidation). Bret fears trump's critics help trump by kicking the poor guy when he's down. Bret ignores the treason trump is perpetrating. When the facts are out trump, et. al., will need more than his 32% base to stay out of prison.
Agreed that Trump is a shrewd and cunning person who understands almost nothing about government and governing but is adept at promoting and protecting his self interest. He is also supremely talented at personality combat, which he uses adeptly to undermine his enemies and critics. Finally, he has mastered the Tweet as a way of communicating over the forth estate. This person, who also harbors authoritarian impulses, sits at the head of our government. He is being enabled by the Republican Party which controls the other two branches. Do not underestimate him because, as the man said, we are in deep doo doo!
1
There is one possible value to Wolff's book. It fires all of the ugliness of Trump-ism back upon the entire west wing. It does the sort of "fire with fire" that is so utterly improper when offered forth by persons who should act above such (i.e., persons who represent the American people). One cannot but suspect that Trump is where he is because "doing Trump" against Trump is such a "loser" game. While I agree that Trump's behaviors and our criticisms of him have lowered his bar to "utterly, un-thinkably-inhumane" (assuming that he hasn't already slipped below this bar). But watching the pack snarl and snip at each other does seems to be an appropriate "medium" of revealing Trump-as-Trump.
rjf
The cynic in me thinks this:
1. Michael Wolff is a Hollywood writer.....meaning he is professional script wirter....taking a few basic facts and events, and distorting them into a ripping good tale.
2. So far, Mr. Wolff, and his enablers, have managed to leverage their media advantage to monumental FREE publicity.
3. Most political books are sold in order for PACs to buy them all up, launder the donation money to make it look legit.
4. PT Barnum's famous quote...."There's a sucker born every minute."
2
Mr. Wolfe's "enablers" were Bannon and the White House staff who (apparently) gave him free rein in the White House and who (again apparently) showed little judgement or restraint in what they disclosed to him.
58
I agree with tomjoad about the book's enablers.
The interesting part of the book is not Trump's deficiencies, but that his staff, in jockeying for position, were so open about those deficiencies and each other's.
5
I would say that it's more than "a few basic facts and events". There is a whole lot there, and the truth is bad enough without "distorting". Free publicity? Trump knows all about it. It's part of what got him appointed president.
Hugo, your #4 seems to apply to you. Look in the mirror, Trumpster.
4
When a "gossip column" campaign, full of over simplification, pitched to a gullible public can get this boob elected, maybe a gossipy book that's a little careless with facts can resonate with that same audience. As King Henry said, "Paris is worth a Mass."
2
I'm fairly sure Stephens is now your second columnist to write about Fire and Fury without having read it. As with Brooks' column, everything quoted here is from the excerpts, chosen for maximum juiciness and digestibility and not characteristic of the book overall. I don't see how someone who's actually read it could come to the conclusion it's searching for sensationalism, because the number of salacious bombshells are actually fairly few. Overall F&F is most useful and spends by far the most time on connecting the dots between the warring factions within the administration, and how they've led to the outward chaos we've witnessed. This has been far more of a revelation to me than the assertion the president is a kook, which as Stephens acknowledges, anyone who's been paying even casual attention would know by now. Another clue is that Stephens outsources the factual errors he claims, which include getting someone's name wrong in an aside about who eats dinner in a certain DC restaurant and a couple of misspellings. This is in line with similar books I've read by, yes, Bob Woodward, as well as the Halperin-Heinemann 2008 and 2012 election books. F&F is smug, no doubt, and comes at the subject with an agenda, and I believe that's what Stephens (like Brooks) objects too. That's fine (both men are paid for their opinions, after all) but to make these assertions without properly addressing the source is as sloppy as a Trump cheeseburger in bed.
3
Stephens uses a common schoolyard technique when he discusses people he disagrees with. He characterizes us. Without evidence, indeed without a sliver of knowledge, he chooses to stick us into categories of his choosing. In this case, he chooses to label me and millions of others "...everyone who detests Trump."
I don't detest Trump. I fear for America, and am hopeful and relieved that Trump's incompetence may reduce the damage of which he is capable.
Trump himself? I pity the fool.
3
Well said! It seems to me that the media is simply trying to sell more newspapers with its constant focus on Trump's incompetence and his inane tweets. Trump is playing us like fiddles by distracting us from the real work his administration is doing for the 1%. He's a limelight junkie hogging bandwidth. We're wasting our attention dotting over his every imbecilic comment. He is not the news. The conniving going on behind closed doors in the Republican controlled House and Senate is the news but it's not getting adequate coverage.
1
No, Trump has no sense of humor about himself. His 'like'. is just a figure of speech that he has used when speaking also. Mr. Stephens is wrong about Trump's idea of himself. He is narcissistic because he knows there is absolutely nothing to him besides an empty suit. I think he will self-destruct in the next six months. Just read Breach of Faith The Fall of Richard Nixon. The investigation into something that you know you did will eventually derail you. Nixon turned to drink. Trump will turn to sex. He will fall for a pretty woman who will praise him. How would he not?
2
Bret Stephens is always a writer who really thinks for himself and prevents an interesting and original view of the question at hand. There is a lot more negative however he could say about the knee-jerk Trump haters without being a Trump supporter.
Your assessment is frightening and true. Regrettably, it will be the background noise to the sensationalism of the book. This book is Michael Wolff's summer home in Sag Harbor and it is so superficial that the anti trump movement will love it for its simplicity and easy hatred. You hate Trump? Me too..... Oops never mind...that's another movement
too serious and you miss the point. he is there for the next eight years and we will and are no longer the leader of the west.
for me, the point of Michael Wolff's book can be found in the low-level depression I and most of my aquaintances, of course in NYC, have felt the last year...the result of the mind control and sensual bombardment that has made Trump the brain worm of this decade.
The ability to laugh again, to roar over him is such a relief. The knowledge that it's not just me, as a democrat, that thinks he is "ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office."
This book....and as a matter of fact...nothing, will dislodge him...and with Pence waiting in the wings...thank God. There he was certainly cunning. But for the first time in a year, i have been able to think of normal things and I can now recognize what that horrible cloud was that has enveloped me so long.
Listen, lossen up. Don't take everything so seriously. He's here to stay.
BUT......."a girl/boy/neither just likes to have fun"...finally!!!
1
Overlooking the obvious, but every move Trump makes enriches everyone. CNN, NY TIMES Wolff book, Buzzfeed etc. What with the media do when he is gone?
"White hot venom" is not a metaphor that makes sense.
Trump's "fake news" pronouncements are not limited to errors in coverage. He invokes that phrase about every story he dislikes or, as with CNN, organizations he dislikes.
Smugness may be a problem in the halls of the New York Times. It seems to be a theme among anti-Trump conservative commentators. But it's not real. The 100,000 applicants to Angie's List to become candidates aren't smug. The black Alabamians who showed up at the polls in larger numbers than they did for Obama aren't smug. New groups like Indivisible aren't smug. The states suing the administration for its regulatory recklessness and the 100% of congressional Democrats who voted against Obamacare repeal and the tax bill aren't smug.
Trump has always been able to appear briefly reasonable. Over the past year, we've seen its an act, one he can't keep up for 24 hours at a time. The only thing the new book shows is that those inside the White House are just as acutely aware of Trump's intellectual shortcomings as many of us were before he got there. No real surprise. But every cause for worry.
"One of Trump’s underappreciated strengths is his sly command of irony, on display again last week when he tweeted that his two great assets in life were “mental stability and being, like, really smart.” Note the superfluous “like,” which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written."
Really? "Like" when written is intended as humor. What planet are you from? It's not "sly" command of anything. It's juvenile when used in a sentence in this way.
2
"If the White House were smart ...". And therein lies the rub.
1
Stephens concludes: "But he’s not deficient in cunning, and that cunning deserves healthy respect from his political opponents."
Not so fast.
Merriam-Webster defines "cunning" as:
1 : dexterous or crafty in the use of special resources (such as skill or knowledge) or in attaining an end (e.g., a cunning plotter)
2 : characterized by wiliness and trickery (e.g., cunning schemes)
3 : prettily appealing : cute (e.g., a cunning little kitten)
4 : displaying keen insight (e.g., a cunning observation)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cunning
Donald Trump is none of these things.
But he is a "celebrity," a 'YUGE' celebrity.
And in American politics celebrity now trumps intelligence, experience, and civic-mindedness. This is how we ended up with Gopher from "The Love Boat" and Cooter from "Dukes of Hazzard" in the House of Representatives, Arnold Schwarzenegger from "Predator" (etc.) in the California governorship, and Donald Trump from "The Celebrity Apprentice" in the White House.
As for Stephens' claim that Trump displayed "irony" when he tweeted that he is "like, really smart" because "the superfluous 'like,' which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written," remember that Trump TOLD Chris Wallace in a sit-down interview: "you know, I'm, like, a smart person"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/12/donald-trump-d...
2
"...we have turned the “Resistance” into a byword for the hysterical and condescending ninnies of American politics" I had to laugh.
Disagree with the characterization of Trump as, incurious. Would posit the opposite be true (in the extreme, exceedingly curious). Do you remember as a child being curious about something (a radio, a tv, a toaster, etc.) and taking to to pieces to learn more about it, then you put it back together... eh, sometimes.
Childlike learning is oft the sign of genius. Has anyone considered the possibility that Trump may actually be genius? Just askin'
I agree in principle with the thrust of your article, but we diverge in your belief of Trump's "sly command" of irony.
The employment of "like" by Trump as some sort of self aware ironic trolling of us on his part gives him vastly too much credit.
His humor chops were pretty much arrested by the second grade, as the sophisticated hilarity of "Crooked Hillary, Lyin' Ted, and Little Marco" would indicate. A big part of his appeal to the base is his convention busting, repetitive use of sophomoric, crass insults, not irony, which would be lost on most of the idiots that voted for him anyway.
I'd have to see more proof that the one time use of "like" as an ironic tool to make me believe he's actually capable of it's effective use.
However, the man is as cunning as anybody alive or dead, that is not debatable.
2
On the other hand, 25 years of never-ending investigations into Bill and Hillary Clinton, plus so many hysterical anti-Clinton books they have become their own genre, doesn't make the Right look ridiculous at all. No sirree.
5
Nothing will convince Trump loyalists he is incompetent. Nor will many of them read the Wolff book, let alone be moved by it. Nor do they know what Davos is.
And surely they could not tell you much about the Russian investigation, other than it is a Democrat witch hunt.
What are you so agitated about?
Nothing he does, nothing the press writes, nothing Mueller and his team report
will take the shine off their penny.
Mr. Stephens should read his colleague's column by Mr. Kristof. He quotes, “This is how democracies now die,” Levitsky and Ziblatt write. “Democratic backsliding today begins at the ballot box.” It's not anti-Trumpers' smugness that's the problem, put pro-Trumpers' poor judgment, cynicism, or willingness to be duped. Vote like your life depends on it, because now it does!
1
Poppycock Mr. Stephens. The cunning we see in the feckless leader is the cunning of a thug- albeit a thug raised in privilege. To call this “street smart” is inaccurate but remember his deceased and disgraced mentor he has pined for, Roy Cohen? The Leader’s sense of entitlement and disregard for laws is something not mentioned in your column.
Would you call that “cunning”? I’d call it another term that is used to describe someone who believes that legal rules and norms do not apply to them. The word for this type of behavior is “criminal” and those who exhibit amoral behavior without conscience are called “sociopaths.”
1
"And we have turned the “Resistance” into a byword for the hysterical and condescending ninnies of American politics." Remember Bret when a certain Vice-President in the 1970s said something very similar? What happened to him? Of course, as a conservative columnist Stephens won't be gone, but what will he say after the 2018 elections?
I'm not sure what is most off-putting about this screed- that it's author assigns singular blame on Wolff for "lowering expectations" of trump (as if that were possible), or his insufferable condescension and elitist, ad hominem sneers about Wolff's professionalism.
Wolff wrote a book about trump and his White House that a million folks bought in 4 days, that many thought was important and revelatory, despite picayune errors, and that dominated the news cycle for those same days. Get over it.
2
true, the lower we set the bar, the more relieved people are when the Very Stable Genius keeps the drool to a minimum, and refrains from bombing North Korea. But he has unleashed forces on immigrants, the environment, and now possibly Iran that make him as big a monster as we, the Hysterical, think he is. You cannot be expected to control your contempt in the face of a Mussolini, even if it strengthens his hold on the neanderthals who support him. There is no honor in holding your tongue in the face of tyranny.
1
Indeed. The orgy of smugness and throwing juvenile insults at the president in the media, late night TV, and Facebook has been an embarrassment ever since the election. Junior high seems mature compared to this.
1
Wrong. I'm not even going to finish this piece as the author misses the jist buy a country mile. Trump was elected by people who can't tell the difference between the National Enquirer (a publication Trump cites as a level arbiter of truth on equal footing with your Gray Lady and that directly supported his campaign and continues to do so like a propaganda organ) and well - you - the "Paper of Record".
My point: Live by the sword - die by it. Those 36 -39% who are susceptible to sensationalist, bombast in the first place are most susceptible to it in the second.
Remember. Enquiring Minds Don't Want to Know
1
Donald John Trump has none of the smiling, shrugging and soft- toned governing, political and acting talent and experienced natural and nurtured manner of Ronald Wilson Reagan.
While Reagan was a sane, sly, clever and wise fox, Trump is an inane, rabid, hungry and stupid dog. Two canines divided by a different history. Reagan came from Midwestern rural Illinois nothing. But Trump inherited New York City fortune and fame.
Reagan was drafted during World War II and made war movies on a Hollywood set. Trump dodged the Vietnam War era military draft by taking a bone spur 5x while playing golf and chasing women.
2
I don't intend to waste my time reading Wollf's gossip. My disgust with Trump is based on watching his campaign and a year of malfeasance, incompetence, greed and the worst appointments of any administration since I became politically conscious when Truman was president. "Fire and Fury" should be read by Trump supporters who can then proceed to rant and rave as to how it is all lies and innuendo, but deep down will not miss the irony of the most prominent liar in the country shrieking that a book about him is full of lies. At this point anything Trump says is suspect.
1
Mr. Stephens, "The Resistance" is anything but a byword for "the condescending and hysterical ninnies of American politics". That itself is an tremendously condescending and insulting characterization of those who are horrified by The Trump presidency, and are working to counter the corruption, denial of science, and cruelty of this disastrous administration. We are racing backwards and throwing away a hundred years of social and economic progress.
Anyway, Mr. Stephens, I had thought that you too were appalled by Trump and his greedy minions. Shame on you for this casual insult toward those of us who oppose him.
5
I rather thought that you missed the true impact of this book: Bannon is now out. Not just from the White House—from where he was already gone—but now Bannon is truly in the wilderness from where, hopefully, he does not return. I am positive that this was NOT a strategically intended goal, but I will gladly accept that unintended consequence.
Although I do not bother to read gossipy books, I will make an exception for this one in light of that small, but politically significant, contribution... who am I kidding? Maybe I’ll just give it as a gift to spare myself the pain of reading it.
1
The Trump sign just has to blink regularly.
Thank you.
Wolff is not the smartest guy or most credible guy at the table. He's a little richer, though, and hopefully has had his 15, because of predictable mass hysteria of bored, indulged people with mediocre intellects who gobbled up his book.
'Yet to a normal person casually tuning in, the president appeared reasonably affable and businesslike."
Does "normal" refer to we ignorant masses incapable of seeing the obvious? Really?
2
Despite comments that the roundtable meeting about DACA became confusing, the public did not see that because it was carefully choreographed and produced so the nightly news saw a man leading a group of political leaders. Once he had to answer questions on the newsfeed I watched, he just relented and said it's up to Congress. Then that was it for the newsfeed - the confusing part never made it to the general public. And THAT is why plenty of people do not believe he is an incompetent boob. There are plenty of people in this country who express themselves in soundbites and epithets; otherwise, Twitter would not be so successful. Sociopaths and psychopaths are great manipulators; do not confuse manipulation with wit. How do sociopaths and psychopaths succeed in luring victims? Masters of manipulation, twisters of language. Unfortunately, Wolff's own credibility as a journalist is fodder for an opportunity to be "trumped."
1
as long as Wolf can separate the faithful from their green, he'll sell hate books . He will need vol.2, before Thanksgiving, though, and that will be about it, I suspect
You frequently have good advice for liberals who are trapped in their bubble and in danger of overplaying their hand. We should listen to what you have to say and stop acting positively giddy about this book. You hit the nail on the head with your catnip analogy. I do enjoy reading excerpts from the book. I think Steve Bannon's quotes are the most illuminating. I tend to believe Bannon was telling the truth and was excommunicated from the fold for committing the one unforgivable sin in the eyes of the modern GOP; being honest about how manifestly unfit this president is to govern. Still you are correct the book has lowered expectations to the point where we are surprised not to see Trump drooling all over himself and having his diaper changed during cabinet meetings. That puts us in the unenviable position of having to listen to his GOP apologists say; "See? He really can speak in complete sentences!"
4
"Fire and Fury" is an historical document, a record.
No one now can claim they "DIDN'T KNOW" like the "Good German" of the 1930's.
There is indeed a Wolff at the White House door, and he's blowing it down.
1
"This is not a winning strategy. One of Trump’s underappreciated strengths is his sly command of irony, on display again last week when he tweeted that his two great assets in life were “mental stability and being, like, really smart.” Note the superfluous “like,” which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written. The president isn’t making a fool of himself. He’s having a laugh that’s part self-deprecation, part trolling, and actual wit."
The president is not capable of such writing, punctuation and wit, as has recently appeared in his tweets. Someone--probably an experienced Republican political operative who writes well and who has learned how to channel the president's voice--is likely responsible for them.
2
"Trump seemed unable to grasp what a “clean” bill meant..."
He knows exactly what it meant.
When Sen. Feinstein said, "We want a clean DACA bill." DJT replied, "A clean DACA bill with border security."
A point not grasped? Or, a correction made? I really loved DJT's claim, "I'll sign anything you send me." So, the Congress will work together and bring a "clean" DACA bill, with a wall? DJT won't be getting writer's cramp soon.
Mr Stephens is right.
Trump is cunning and to ignore this one trait will lead to him winning. He beat a lot of deplorable republicans and then Hillary.
He may have cheated,lied done anything to win.
He will not play fair.
treat him as a worthy adversary.
2
Don’t take the bait Mr. President, this book is a trap! Oops, too late.
2
Oh, Bret, I see it's you again. Now this article makes sense. I don't read these sorts of books but since the Republican Congress absolutely refuses to acknowledge what they are dealing with on any honest level whatsoever, i.e. Grassley and Graham discrediting testimony and refusing to give it to the public so they could maybe get away with it is one more reason everything since Trump came on the scene is a dumpster fire. And you and your compadres are part of that. If you don't want the likes of Wolff to do an expose, be honest about what is happening to your party. It's way I'm absolutely no longer a Republican. Complete and total dishonesty.
9
Ahh, here is the request for cool rationality from a Republican to combat the bombast, lies, and dog whistle emotional appeals to irrationality from Trump and his conning apologists. Like economists claiming people respond logically and cooly in their best interest, ignoring the all too obvious emotional responses of voters is what resulted in the travesty of the trumpian regime. Wolff's book is confirmation of the treasonous dishonesty and false promises of both Trump and his enablers in language than even irrational trumplodytes can understand.
2
While I fully intend to buy and read this equivalency of political crack cocaine, I have to say, I did see Wolff's appearance on CBS Morning News and by the time Nora O'Donnell finished with him, he was almost stuttering.
Wolff's book reminds me of be Edward Snowden Revelations. It crystallizes what we already "knew" to be true and maybe even caused some change. The push back against Wolff reminds me of the push back against Snowden. Discredit the messenger and maybe you can argue these things never happened.
3
Trump is not cunning. He is flailing.
Even in his free-fall, Trump has muscle-memory to con and bully-boast. But it's clear that time is running out.
3
Imagine my surprise when Mr. Stephens, without a hint of sarcasm and in an article on Trump, identified Steve Bannon as "peerlessly self-serving".
2
Brett, just because we haven't seen a monumental catastrophe yet, doesn't mean we aren't heading in that direction. The Republican base now unquestioningly believes that the Justice Department and our intelligence agencies are corrupted by the "deep state". Dennis Prager, whom you called a "conservative intellectual", tells his audience of millions, almost daily, that Barack Obama corrupted these agencies (and the IRS), and he calls the whole Russia investigation "fake news". The Trump movement is already doing serious damage to some of our most vital institutions. Please don't minimize the danger this movement represents by noting that the Middle East hasn't blown up, and the stock market is up. And don't condescend to your readers by implying that we don't know the difference between gosip and journalism.
5
Currently going the rounds (Apologies to G&S)
I am the very model of a Very Stable Genius.
I have a mighty button and no problems with my penius.
I have no time for television, golf, or social media
Since my brain is way way better than the best encyclopedia.
I like to tweet the lies of racist grievances historical
When Russian ties are mentioned I deny them categorical
I do not feel the sting of words because I am avenious
I am the very model of a Very Stable Genius!
(There are more verses)
3
I agree with the thrust and substance of Mr. Stephen's piece, but the person who characterized his point as the book doing "spectacular damage" to Trump's opponents needs to read his piece again. That kind of hyperbole does Mr. Stephen's more sober thoughts a disservice.
1
Stephens makes one very good pint in describing our smugness in pointing out Trumps deficiencies as well as our predictions of the future. I am guilty of both. I have always thought and believed that the future can be predicted with a rather cold categorization of the recent history of the facts. I didn't think Trump could be elected, that his bumbling idiocy could be clearly seen and the electorate would choose for experience over star power. Since I have thought that the clearer minds in the GOP controlled congress would do the right thing (as I defined it) and put the leash on Trump. I haven't been right on any of the key pivotal points.
Stephens criticism of Wolf's book missed the point of the book. It is a slice in time, a chronicle of the attitudes of those around this totally dysfunctional administration. Wolf wrote it with a purpose and in that, he succeeded.
You lost me when you say his use of "like, really smart" is some clever word play: "The president isn’t making a fool of himself. He’s having a laugh that’s part self-deprecation, part trolling, and actual wit."
No, he's just using the colloquial, and everyone knows it.
This is how the right works. Take something relatively innocent and interpret it as having a very improbable alternative meaning, and pound, pound, pound, until followers actually start believing the propaganda the author intends.
5
40 percent of nation would still vote for Trump even if he shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue, remember? I don't think Wolff's book is going to have much of an impact on that demographic one way or the other. There is no bar for them. For that matter, there's no bar for many anti-Trumpers either. The President could solve the problem of dark matter and unlock the infinite mysteries of the universe. He would still be held incompetent in their eyes. There's just no pleasing some people. Let them enjoy Wolff's book if they want. Trump supporters have Fox News. Give the other side something mindlessly entertaining for once.
"But he’s not deficient in cunning, and that cunning deserves healthy respect from his political opponents".
Excellent point. Couple cunning with the reality that many voters are uninformed and gullible and one readily understands the Trump advice offered to Billy Bush -" just tell them and they will believe it." That advice sums up Trump's basic philosophy.
No one needs a book to know all we need to know about Trump. Reading his own words is all that's necessary. All this book provides is to call attention to another way to mine Trump for personal financial gain. Wolff was only the first of many to package presidential gossip in the guise of journalism. Won't be the last. And if the media can control itself and not add to the publicity for this kind of thing perhaps the forthcoming versions will not be as lucrative as the first.
"That’s not all the damage Wolff has done."
Wolff has done the damage? Not Trump and his minions who use his ignorance and used car salesmanship in order to shield them while they take apart much of what we as Americans have come to depend on?
What is disingenuous is to claim that the predicted catastrophes haven't happened. They are happening right now, all around us. It does not necessarily have to mean war with North Korea. Just look at what is being done by the various federal departments not to mention the congressional republicans who, all of a sudden, have become, oh so, bipartisan.
No, sir, Mr. Stephens, Wolff only put in writing what we all observe on daily basis.
3
look he's 71 - many decades of being a successful public operator - but we can no more be sure of what is actually in his mind than in anybody else's - we can only see, hear, and read about his behavior - judging by his personal history and historical precedents there is infinitesimal chance of a successful removal - political neutralization in November is the only real solution
1
Depressingly insightful, though hopefully overstated. (Perhaps it's the more observant independents and lazy Dems on whom Wolff will have most impacts.)
1
still waiting for something like a list of errors in the book. all I've heard so far is that he got someone's age wrong & confused 2 people with the same name. That doesn't qualify, for me, as "replete with errors".
3
This incisive commentary is a greater service to the cause of defeating Trump and Trumpism than many of the writings of liberal columnists. And I'm afraid they wouldn't have given us, at the same time, the abrasive but salutary observation that "we have turned the 'Resistance' into a byword for the hysterical and condescending ninnies of American politics."
Thank you.
Agree largely with the assessment of the impact of Wolff’s book - while the big picture might be accurate, the details are apparently so rife with fabrications that it renders the book as little more than gossip. It’ll be forgotten in weeks.
As far as the idea that the book will cause people to “misunderestimate” the president. I don’t think it will necessarily have that effect on the public. The news media is another story, however. As Stephens points out, Trump was clearly out of his depth in the immigration round table at the White House. But since he wasn’t a raving loon, countless DC journalists did the now expected “this is the moment he became president” shtick. The media is either too gullible, or so desirious of “normalcy” (makes their job easier), that it will turn any instance of presidential lucidity into a revelation of presidential fitness. An embarrassing display by the purported watchdogs, but to be expected.
Trump all by himself propelled this book from being just another post Christmas buy to the book one must have, perhaps doubling or tripling its popularity. Even Wolff noted this when he said he'd send Trump a box of chocolates. The mainstream media as it has since Trump's ascendance into the political stage of course has fawned over the book. America is fascinated not with issues but with personality...celebrity...and gossip about celebrity. The election was an American Idol season. And real issues got buried. People stayed from the polls if they were turned off by the candidates, or protest voted, thus enabling this bloated, lying con man to win. The Conservative wing of Congress takes advantage of our obsessions with personality, gleefully passing a tax gift to big oil and other big donors. As I read Stephens inaccurate explanation for Trump's use of the word "like" (I read it as emphasis on his really being smart) I can't help but concentrate on the fact that Stephens himself thinks corporate tax cuts were a good thing, and that we need more military spending. I'm trying not to be distracted.
1
While the book is much more akin to the Enquirer than the Times, it does have purpose if only to watch Trumps reactions to it, which have ranged from bombastic to theatric to just plain desperate. Criticism is like bait to him, no matter its legitimacy, and even his inability to resist it demonstrates his true colors. Trump's own repeated childish behavior, which most of us have long grown weary of, may be the only thing that eventually causes his base to question. I say, give him rope.
2
If Wolff's book works to further agitate and distress the already frantic Trump, then it has done it's work regardless of it's validity and verification of who said what to whom. For such a psychologically fragile person as Trump, the pressure from the press along with public outrage will hopefully push him over the edge of incoherence that no one ,even in his own supplicating and abetting party, can deny. However, the distressing end game might be Pence and he's not nearly as entertaining as that other guy.
2
Sure Wolff's book is gossipy and titillating.
But it otherwise does two important things:
1. It lifts yet another veil for those who are still reluctant to take a peek; and
2. It lets the so-called president know how much most of us can already see.
There is great value in pressuring a con man by revealing that we've fully caught on, especially when he has left himself with nowhere to run.
2
The problem with Donald Trump, ins't Donald Trump, he has always been who he is, a social chameleon who can intrinsically change his coloring without even trying and has absolutely no soul or form to his being. He is the X- Man, Mercury Man who can mold himself into any form to fit the mold without maintaining the form. The problem with Donald Trump is the people who support him and believe he is what ever he pretends to be and forget what they thought he was just seconds before. No one ever went broke underestimating the gullibility of the American people and Donald Trump is a very rich man.
“But if the anti-Trump movement has a crippling defect, it’s smugness”
The problem is not smugness.
The largest defect is gullibility.
The anti-Trumpers are willing to believe any cockamamie story cooked up by the Hillary acolytes that paints Trump in a negative light and attempts to explain away the American people’s rejection of the Democrats as some sort of foreign plot.
It is clear that Wolff’s Book is about as credible as the Russian dossier, but the true believers so want to believe that pablum becomes their best seller.
1
After Fire and Fury came out, an American friend, now a librarian in the UK, got a copy. I asked for “a book report.” She replied that the book was indeed juicy and while tabloidy in method and style, had the ring of about 95% truth. The author appears to have ingratiated himself to this vain president by deliberately publishing a few favorable puff stories, which then gave him a foot in the door of the White House. He was allowed a surprising amount of free access. Some of the reporting was careless in terms of names and dates, but my friend’s interpretation is that overall the book captures the mood and ethos of this White House, an insular world where many employees feel their efforts at restraining this president from the most outrageous actions constitute an act of patriotism.
1
or to paraphrase W, "don't over underestimate me..."
It's possible that your "never trump" will turn into 'never a republican' in the next few election cycles. One distraction-motivated televised meeting of both parties does not a sane president make!
If only half of Mr. Wolff's book is factual, and much of it is the stuff we already knew or suspected, then the frenzy over it is worth attention. But I agree with another commenter that this buffoonery is exactly what feeds the occupier of the oval office. A lover of attention, and seeing his name and words in print, we feed his ego on a minute-by-minute basis. Oh, and he loves seeing Hillary's name, too.
1
We are truly alone. Mr. Stephens has now descended into the metaphysical realm of parsing “..., like,...” in tweets, thus proving that the media, from Washington pundits to Hollywood VIPs, are busy devouring their own tails and debating the undergarment choice of angels dancing on pinheads. Congress pushes the level of dysfunction and cynical corruption to ever-astounding depths and corporate America is gorging itself at every available trough in an orgy of greed that can only end badly for anyone without offshore wealth safely tucked away. Yet the band plays on and the emerging threats to our lives (and our democracy and civilization—addiction, climate, election tampering by foreign governments, economic dislocations in a rapidly changing economy, state actors with nukes and WMD fantasies, and on and on—slide into the background. Who will speak for us? Who will address the issues confronting the 99.9% and try to find solutions while politicians and once-respected voices of journalistic criticism involute into a black hole of self-regard and obsessive navel-gazing? “Slouching toward Bethlehem”, indeed.
To convince loyalists that he's an unfit commander in chief we'd have to lose a nuclear war in Korea. Even more unlikely than getting into one.
I give you Donald Trump is cunning. Cunning Donald Trump sees Michael Wolff's book as a mortal danger to his brand and his presidency. His obsession with the threat led first to the series of tweets with cringe-worthy claims that his two greatest assets are "mental stability and being, like, really smart." (Was the President practicing subtle irony with his use of the valley girl/surfer dude phrase? If so, what came across was not the irony intended - instead the claim of genius traits sounded more like something from Larry Fine of the Three Stooges.)
The next counter demonstration from Trump was also bizarre, the on camera negotiation of immigration reform to reassure his supporters of his command of the issues.
Were those supporters reassured by Trump's display of "genius"? Not so much. Coulter, Hannity and Ingraham declared it a disaster. Representative Kevin McCarthy had to jump in to rescue the Boss on camera from giving away the store with a clean bill on DACA, free of border security.
Mr. Stephens, that you don't see "Fire and Fury" as the threat 45 sees suggests you may still harbor the belief this Emperor has clothes.
He doesn't... and "Fire and Fury" promises to be the tell all which conveys the truth about 45 and this White House in the gossipy way appropriate to this Internet media age. Trump and his staunchest supporters rightly fear the impact of this book. You aren't serving the country by trying to blunt that impact.
2
Bret Stephens is right.Michael Wolff's tell all book does nothing but enrich Mr. Wolff. I get just as informed and thus distraught by reading the real news in the New York Times each day.Juicy tidbits are unnecessary.Mr.Trump and his cabinet daily make such poor and or illegal judgments that a story emerges, a sad, sad story.
A "sly command of irony" is not leadership. The avalanche of unflattering adjectives applied to the president are true, and for this reason, he has the support of his party and his base. The Wolff book will not put off any of his faithful. They'll shrug and say, "he's being himself, leave him alone". The book may not be investigative journalism as much as a glimpse of a day-to-day look at a malfunctioning presidency. The contents can't be mere gossip, given the outcry of angry denials from the White House.
"Fire and Fury" isn't nearly as damaging to the president as are his own tweets and spoken words. They are far more powerful than any kiss-and-tell book. That's because those words came from the horse's own mouth.
1
Absolutely, Bret! You don't get where Donald Trump is, like so many others in the field of business, without being a high-performing sociopath defined as "a person with a personality disorder [Trump's being massive narcissism] manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience." Trump clearly is very "cunning" in defeating a pack of successful professional politicians to seize the Republican nomination and then barely squeaking out an Electoral College win. But, his antics and clear inability to govern except of, for, and by himself has been creating a sizeable and rapidly increasing backlash that hopefully may do this November what his Congressional Republicans "enablers' are unwilling to do--contain his worst instincts and policies in a Democratic-controlled Congress.
Imagine Trump sits down with a loaded revolver playing Russian roulette and his cabinet and worshipful admirers marvel at his bravery. How tough! And every time he spins the carousel and pulls the trigger again Trump crows "all the so-called experts swore I'd be dead by now! But here I am!" Now imagine that instead of his OWN head, Trump is playing Russian roulette with barrels against everyone's head but his own. And because the "so-called" experts cannot say which specific pull of the trigger will end the game, the nation assumes Trump has some magic to continue pulling indefinitely.
A depleted State Department, denying climate change against the weight of evidence, disparagement of critical alliances, provocation of unstable regimes, attempting to manipulate the DOJ, attempting to place incompetent judges to lifetime appointments around the country, equivocating with regard to hate groups, expressing admiration for authoritarians and our nation's adversaries, enriching himself through his office, settling personal scores under color of government, attacking any source of information counter to his interests and that's all not to mention his obvious lack of knowledge... click, click, click, click, click... these conditions can only exist for so long before there's a tragedy.
Is there really that much difference between Wolff and the news media? They created the monster that is Trump. They were giggling all the way as they turned the political conversation tabloid. And now, they use Americans learned behavior of constant moral outrage to beef up the ratings/readership.
2
The Resistance is not about hysteria or about condescension. It is about a persistent effort to keep our republic and protect it from the corruption of Trump and the GOP.
The Resistance works to save healthcare for millions of Americans. It works against the travel ban, the theft of millions of acres of protected lands that are part of the national monuments, against the gutting of the EPA, against off shore drilling in ALL the coastal states, not just Florida, against breaking up families by deporting law abiding undocumented people, against the government trying to force an undocumented teenager to have a baby when she wants an abortion, against gerrymandering and voter suppression, against the federal government interfering with states that have legalized cannabis for medical and for recreational use, against a return to practices that feed the prison-industrial complex, against policies that will retard middle east peace, against blowing up the Iran nuclear deal and more. . .
The Resistance is working to give control of Congress to the Democrats in November, to put a check on this president until we can vote him out of office in 2020.
The United States is US. We get the government we deserve.
It is extraordinarily generous to assume that Mr. Trump is making a self deprecating comment. Has that ever happened before?
1
Wolff's book put trump's incompetence at the forefront of the national conversation, and trump is playing defense now, no matter how "cunning" you find his use of the superfluous 'like.'
So the self-promoting and fact-challenged carnival barker is being trumped by another self-promoting and fact-challenged carnival barker — Wolff.
And trump is stuck trying to keep up with the national conversation generated by the book. Buttressed by outrage monkeys like Stephen Mitchell, foaming with repetitive and nonsensical talking points on TV.
The book is not a 'strategy' and does not pretend to be. Wolff is not on anyone's 'side' but his own (and he paints the NYT with the same brush as Fox News - with which I disagree).
But his missive further erodes trump's already tenuous legitimacy. trump's questionable effectiveness in 'looking good' for the cameras on occasion doesn't change what we already know from trump's more persistent habits. By the same token, any hopes to dissuade trump's hard-core supporters is a fool's errand anyway.
So yes, Wolff's book is not part of a 'winning strategy' to unseat trump. And yes, the upcoming elections are the only path to gradually unseating trump.
That doesn't mean that Wolff's book was not only an inevitability, and also doesn't mean that Wolff's book doesn't have a place.
Let's just call it karma.
2
Sorry -- Miller, not Mitchell
Of course I didn't vote for Trump and I dislike him. However, I don't think that "coastal elites" really get it. Trump is merely a pendulum on the opposite end. Clearly something is very wrong but Trump is not alone. I blame the self-righteous, pretentious, self-serving, unsophisticated left and their echo chamber NYT for the troubles in this country. How could they look down upon the regular folks by claiming they care about environment, they support equal opportunity and diversity? California is probably the most environmental unfriendly place in this country. Sure, affirmative action to the "under-representative minorites" but keep the legacy program. Equality and diversity are great as long as NIMBY and not in their "segregated but equal" communities. SO FAKE! SO SHALLOW! SO LAUGHABLE!
Now back to Trump. So far, he has been effective. Just once, maybe the entire establishment should come clean. Trump introduced a new world order and it is working. I said this many times. Trump may end up winning two Nobel Peace Prizes (of course only if the committee is "fair and balanced"). The crying Wolf of nuclear apocalypse didn't happen. What about rightly moving US embassy to Juresalum? Nothing happened afterwards.
We small people have been fooled by the establishment. Of course Trump is draining the swamp. The true nature of politicians is that they only care about themselves. We may feel we have democracy. But we are really on our own.
1
Yet another claim that the opponents of Trump must scrupulously observe journalistic standards, the Marquis of Queensby Rules, and Emily Post. As if anyone ever defeated a guy like Trump by taking the high road. As Butch Cassidy said, there are no rules in a knife fight.
1
Bret Stephens is an avowed "Never Trumper" (as restated in his column of December 29, 2017). Even so, he does not welcome this skewering of Trump by Michael Wolff. Instead Stephens, like his conservative colleague, David Brooks, objects to "Fire and Fury," for being sensationalist journalism of the lowest order. Since Stephens and Brooks are on the same page, it makes sense for me to simply repeat what I wrote about Brooks earlier this week. Substitute "Stephens" and a couple negative adjectives as necessary:
"Mr. Brooks disdains "Fire and Fury" as the lowbrow work of a "rumor spreader." So be it. Every highbrow screed about Trump, including many by Brooks himself, has been unable to breech the informational bunker, deeper than any coal mine, of Trump, his enablers and partisans. Wolff's book, however, has caught everyone's attention, most notably Trump and his staff. Yes, some of it is mere rumor, and some of the facts are wrong, but that hardly matters. Despite all, Wolff has given us the truth about the Trump White House, a truth so tangible that nothing the White House says, can counter it. Indeed, the ouster of Stephen Bannon from Breitbart further confirms the value of Wolff's work. Low brow? Sure, but while Brooks prefers to operate at a high-minded remove, and keep his hands clean, Wolff got down in the muck, and engaged in hand-to-hand combat. There's a war for the soul of this country, and many ways to fight that war."
2
I am so tired of Trump 24/7 as it is all the elected congressional republicans and the oligarchs that pay for them who are the problem and has been since Newt and before that Reagan. Of course, Clinton and Obama were neocons that perpetuated the inequality in Amerika.
The swamp really needs to be drained getting the highest number of lobbyists out of DC, politicians who only have corporate masters which are many, media ownership rules, supremes have been a tool also and so much more.
Yes, Wolff's book is a bonanza for the uninformed and the irrational. Such people, the dogmatic right, will associate the book with the rational, the pragmatic, i.e. the liberals. It serves the right as fine ammunition, saying the left is just as unscrupulous as they are, in attempting to support its arguments with mere gossip, "fake news". It severely diminishes the image of the left as a sensible, fact-based, (relatively) impartial, loyal opposition, and as such, Wolff's book must be condemned by the left as totally unrepresentative of the voice of the liberal community.
I'm not bothered by the book. I'm not bothered by the truths (and no small measure of gossip) about trump revealed in the book, most of which we knew or could have deduced already. More of us could have done our homework before the election just by watching trump and paying attention to people like his former ghost writer Tony Schwartz and David Cay Johnston.
No, what bothers me is how much attention we pay to all this stuff, at the expense of the deluge of behind-the-scenes actions (or refusals to act) that are decimating our government's abiltiy to advance the public interest. Most dangerous of all is that as the trump administration destroys whole departments and agencies from the inside - think State Department, EPA, Justice - we are silently watching their functions impaired not just today but for the generation or two it will take for their institutional memory and expertise to recover - if it ever happens
This is is how empires fall and dark ages begin.
1
The book is salacious. So what. It’s a sugar high reflective of the problem Trump presents.
You’ve said, on many occasions, that Trump is slowly eroding the office. This important fact that gets reported day after day after day. This is what voters will remember at the polls. Not “Fire and Fury.”
Wolff's book, entertaining as it is, is certainly a lightweight when compared with the best political books of the last century. But it's certainly worth more than this column.
1
STOP HAWKING PROBLEMS: FOSTER SOLUTIONS
For once, the Editorial Board has identified a solution to the Trump problem: VOTE. Only a complete takeover of Congress can stop the cabal of donor-serving Republicans and president from wrecking our institutions, budgets, and future.
Focus should be on the November election. Period.
Yes, Mr. Stephens your argument does work for Trump's base..every book like this, every CNN interview that goes off the rails, and every late night host opening monologue only confirms what his base believes---Trump is like a political genius, the way he toys with the media and behind the curtains is making America great again. However, Trump's daily display of all those qualities you list at the end of your article is cementing his poll numbers in the 30's. No President should have the numbers Trump is polling with an economy like this or for that matter, relative peace. No doubt, Trump has lowered the national bar for Presidential behaviors, but for the majority of the country that don't like fitting under it.
A conman tells people, everything they want to hear and nothing that they need to know. Trump manages to avoid both ends of the spectrum. His tweets are often offensive in their crude irrelevance. Is he shrewd or as apathetic about being POTUS as Wolff suggests?
Perhaps the "Big Guy" job itself has become superfluous to a degree. In this era of globalization, the high tech world marches on, driven by factors unrelated to politics and the FED has controlled this economy since ZIRP.
Personally, I read about a third of the book until I felt sleepy and thought to my self, what else is new?
2
President Donald J Trump brings to my mind Mad Magazine's 'Alfred E Newman'.
I think I remember seeing a 'Mad Magazine' cartoon featuring 'Alfred E. Newman' (their by now politically incorrect and by appearance, developmentally challenged mascot).
In the cartoon, the fictional Alfred E Newman was depicted in a presidential portrait painting, hanging on a wall, alongside identical portraits of actual presidents.
I try to imagine the inevitable presidential portrait of Donald J Trump on some wall, and I'm finding it very difficult to distinguish the aesthetic impact between the two.
1
We will never be rid of the effects of Trump if we fail to see that he is cunning and he has mastered the art of manipulating the media. His tweets are a form of "shiny object" that causes the media and liberals to chase ,like a kitten with a string. All the while, Pruitt and others are devastating our country. We need to focus on the real enemy--the Republican Party and crush them in 2018, and then EXERCISE the resulting power, without any fake effort towards "bipartisanship ",(it doesn't exist-its merely a tool for Republicans to hinder democratic values) and fix things. Its about time Democrats stop trying to get everyone to love them, and exercise power that benefits the majority
1
The unkindest cut of all is that people aren't talking about Trump anymore -- at least not in conversations over coffee etc. Months ago, he was all anyone could speak about because we were all gobsmacked by his occupation of the oval office. I don't even hear people talking about the Wolff book because it's already old news.
Trump is on the back burner, i believe, because talking about him in friendly get togethers would be like talking about death. Everyone knows about it, but no one wants to dwell on it.
This column gives Trump far too much credit. I would argue that he has never appeared as "self deprecating." I don't think the man has the ability to laugh at himself. Quite the opposite. He takes everything far too personally and as his wife and others have said, "hits ten times back." This is not the first time he has had to defend his abilities, judgement and intelligence and it won't be the last. The bar has never been lower and I find it utterly incredible that journalists, talking heads, and others are spending so much time on this. Surely there are more interesting things to talk about. Just watched a show last night about Black Holes and dark matter. Far more interesting!
I believe that almost all sentient people had formed strong opinions regarding Donald Trump by November 6, 2016. I do not believe that Wolff's book, nor any news story, interview, press conference, speech, or other events are going to change anyone's opinions. If the 2/3 of the electorate who do not like Trump are motivated to get out and vote in both 2018 and 2020 then he will lose his power in Congress and then his job. It really is that simple.
I never thought I would find myself defending Michael Wolff, but many people are missing the whole fascinating cultural hypothesis behind his book, which he explains in great detail in the opening chapters.
Basically, as he chronicles, it is a tale of the clash between the New York and Washington cultures and how the New York entertainment-publishing culture, personified by Donald Trump, came to take over American culture and the American political system.
Wolff correctly grounds entire the Trump phenomenon in the glitzy, bonfire-of-the-vanities, New York world of the 80s and 90s. As he explains in great detail, in response to this new money culture, an entire generation of celebrity and money-based publications sprang up in NY, such as Spy, the new Vanity Fair, New York, the Observer, JFK Jr.'s George, and Murdoch's New York Post (with its infamous Page Six). This was the glittery world Trump navigated for so many years.
Worse still for our culture and political system, these new publications spawned an entire generation of writers, publishers, editors, TV producers and literary agents, who from their base on Sixth Avenue, went on to take over the entertainment industry and the publishing world (including political journalism) and imbue them with the celebrity, gossipy values that Stephens decries in his column.
It was this celebrity-entertainment culture that produced Trump and eventually subsumed the whole American political system. Conventional politics are now dead.
1
There is so much speculation and just plain incorrect information in this book that it should rightfully be in the fiction section of the book store. I’m reminded of the ‘Boy who cried wolf’, and it will likely have the same effect.
My old grandfather could be crafty and cunning, even witty in one moment and forget your name in the next. It took only a few such experiences for family members to learn to listen to him politely but never take him seriously, certainly never let his "thinking" guide your actions. Puzzling thing, though, my grandfather never became cruel or crass. His real nature was invariant to the end. Thus it is with Mr. Trump.
1
An excellent analysis by Bret Stephens. Sadly, the children in our country are growing up with a role model in the White House whose narcissism and
hourly Twitter reactions are only fueling the flames of cynicism. While every occupant of the Oval Office has had his flaws, most of them had a basic integrity and respect for the office they held. This President's irascible behavior lacks not only those important qualities, but his total lack of humility has left us with an ugly stain that I am afraid can never be removed. Until he is removed.
2
a couple of points:
1. the bipartisan meeting was a response to the book. it seems to have worked on you but most thinking people saw through it.
2. the purpose of the book was to make a lot of money get under trump's skin. mission accomplished
3. the more he is publicly embarrassed the sooner he will have the inevitable breakdown.
bring it on.
1
This book is no tactic to take on the Trump presidency, Mr. Stephens misses the point. What “Fire and Fury” does, even with its inaccuracies, is verify for those alarmed by Mr. Trump that it’s not a partisan issue; EVERYBODY is alarmed by this man being in the White House and is either suffering through him or using him politically. “Fire and Fury” is not so much about Donald Trump as it is those who surround him. We have been able to see and shout that the emperor has no clothes from before he was elected. This book shows that Republican leadership is willing to risk national security, willing to not win in 2018, willing to look like sycophants to a supremely unfit president, if they can get their legislative agenda rammed through while he’s around willing to sign whatever they put in front of him.
1
No, you are right, there have been no catastrophes, but can that be attributed to him or the people around him that can manipulate him to not push the "button?" He and Bannon when Bannon was available are chipping away at the structure of government and deregulating in many areas what is protecting the country - off shore drilling, not filling hundreds of positions in various government agencies as people, like rats leaving a sinking ship, flee long held positions. This characterizes catastrophe. Wolff's book is another shiny object to deflect what is really happening.
Journalists who have ventured into Texas, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Alabama to interview Trump supporters have found that many of them hadn’t heard of recent events that NYT columnists consider vital. Didn’t know about the Women’s March. Couldn’t identify James Comey.
So I doubt they are cackling with satisfaction, glad to have analyzed “Fire and Fury” and found it unconvincing.
There will be many more books and tell-all’s about Trump and Family to come, Mr. Stephens, and of course we will eventually learn of the quiet interrogations examining DJT Jr. and Jared Kushner. Get used to it.
The wave is coming. Woolf is riding it. He hasn’t changed it’s course. He can’t. Neither can you.
1
Wolf's book just feeds the feeding frenzy around his presidency. Mr. Stephens
is right. The book is flawed and I believe his opponents highly underestimate
Him. You want him out? Vote!
Clinton’s Cash. Fire and Fury.
Nothing really new here.
Both books were intended to undermine their respective subjects. They were picked apart by critics and loved or hated by partisans.
They are simply an update of the broadsides published during the halcyon days of our Founding Fathers.
I agree about the worthlessness of Wolff's book.
I have no interest in reading a "tell all" book pretending to be journalism, written by a guy who uses his access to the White House to cash in on the very real and justified dismay that many Americans feel regarding Trump and what he is doing to our democracy.
Wolff doesn't even bother to hide his lack of concern for the truth of all that he wrote, which has been disputed by some. If it feels right to the reader, then it's okay with him. Well, it's not okay with me.
As a member of the resistance, Wolff and his book represent part of what I am fighting against.
I was taught and believe, and continue to teach, that no matter what one thinks of the current occupant of the White House, patriotism and commitment to democracy mean respecting democratic institutions as set up by the founders, including the office of the president.
Mr. Wolff demonstrates no such respect for democracy, the office of president, or journalistic integrity, all of which I believe must be restored (among other things) in order to put right what has gone wrong with our political system.
For the resistance to wallow in this sloppy, gossipy book is to become the very thing that we are fighting against, and I, for one, refuse to do it.
Somehow I think this poster would not have written a similar comment regarding the endless attacks that Pres. Obama endured for eight years. I recommend the comment from "Socrates" as a good response to the phony outrage of this posting by Teg Laer.
1
While the book may not have the intended impact on the White House the author imagined there is the joy of seeing Steve Bannon fall from power. It will remain to be seen what direction Breitbart takes without his direction. He undoubtedly had some influence during his brief White House stint. His influence may have been overblown but time will tell.
1
"Wit."
If I understand the meaning of the word, it is definitely not something I would associate with Donald Trump.
*Misunderestimation* is not a word, and doesn't make sense in this context.
*Underestimation* itself conveys the mistake many of us have made with regards to Trump.
Between its various critiques, the Times has taken an almost singularly negative view on Wolff's book. Clearly, the book is not by a political journalist or edited by the Times, but this paper appears to be holding the book to such a standard--one that perhaps it was never meant to meet.
As CNN has reported, the broad brushstrokes of this book are true. Despite the book's numerous faults, I have learned much from Fire and Fury, even as someone who has followed news about the Trump presidency with near religious zeal. The book has provided useful context for understanding the nonsense that comes out of the White House and quite frankly, news from the Times and other major outlets.
Clearly, in today's climate, it behooves the Times to distance itself from "fake news" to protect its reputation and the integrity of the 4th estate. However, "liberal catnip" is unfortunately dismissive of a work that clearly shows how warring White House factions and Trump's disinterest in policy are driving the political chaos that affects our daily lives.
1
Slam, I think Stephens is right. I suppose we all need to be a little less Seth Meyers, a little more Nicolas Kristoff.
1
This essay is a much-needed alternative perspective on the Wolff book. But let me offer this additional perspective: One of the telling points Wolff makes is that Trump views history as driven by personalities, not by institutions or policies. Trump sees himself as such a personage, celebrity, star. He’s always performing, always trying to improve his ratings, as it were. That’s why it’s no accident that he referred to the Cabinet room as “the studio.” Wolff understands all this and that’s why the book is so good. It isn’t conventional journalism but a series of personality profiles. Yes, there are errors in it but taken as a whole, this snappily written book gets it right. I can’t prove it, but I think many journalists don’t like it because they know it’s right and wish they’d written it.
146
Yes. The snark from established and “credible” journalists seems to have a strong dose of jealousy.
2
Isn't living by what you can't prove the definition of magical thinking?
2
Mr. Stephens misses a key point in this essay. He writes, "to a normal person casually tuning in, the president appeared reasonably affable and businesslike." Here's the thing, Bret. Thanks to Trump's divisive presence, it is nearly impossible to find "a normal person casually tuning." Trump's most far-reaching accomplishment to date has been the extreme polarization of U.S. politics.
We have a political landscape where roughly 2/3 of the public detests Trump while the other 1/3 reveres him. So in reality, everything Trump does is seen through the prism of partisanship. Wolff's book will do very little to change the current calculus.
What Wolff's book has actually accomplished is to destroy Trump's relationship with Steve Bannon. And that is ultimately a good thing for the health of the nation.
239
Great point Civic Samurai.....No such thing as a "normal person casually tuning in". I can not remember the last time I spoke with a single person who was not completely "for" or "against" Trump. Nobody left for him or media to "persuade".
2
And who, exactly, gets to define a "normal person"?
1
I found the book completely entertaining, yet horrifying.
The book wasn't an attempt to write a definitive foot-noted presidential history, but rather a People-magazine or made-for-TV movie account of what's going on in the White House.
IMO, it will be easily read by a wide audience, including Fox viewers and gossip magazine adherents as well as by pundits, historians and others.
100
CW,
What makes you think they can read?
I voted (fairly enthusiastically) for Hillary Clinton, but I accept that President Trump is the President of the United States, the democratically-elected choice of my countrymen and the commander-in-chief of the American armed forces. Therefore I try never to speak disrespectfully of him, especially not when foreign people are present. I think any American patriot should do the same. The fact that so many professional Democrats find it impossible to do so makes it vastly less likely that I will support their candidates in future elections.
2
American patriots should keep silent about Trumps glaring unfitness to be president? By saying nothing you are complicit in the ongoing destruction of what is good and right about the United States. I still love my country but I will NEVER stay silent about this travesty of a presidency.
1
That is not a good way of choosing who to vote for.
1
I haven't read the book, but based on what I have heard, it seems to me Stephens has missed the important point of the book in his criticism. That is that the people inside the Trump administration have contempt for his competency as president, even those who outwardly support him. That is an important and worthwhile thing that Wolff has revealed. How the Congress and the voters will deal with it will be interesting to see going forward.
6
I think the writer blunts his own point by making the case that Trump's base is so loyal and so in his sway that Wolff's book only buttresses that support. Pretty much a status quo equivalent of the situation before the book was published. In other words, no damage done, despite the admonishments of the columnist. Fire and Fury will neither get Trump tossed out of office, nor reelected.
3
Let's not forget the use of "catnip" during the 2016 Republican primaries with Obama-bashing, Hillary-hating, and all the brash talk about the incompetence of both the previous president and the low energy, "lock-her-up," crooked Hillary. The right wing base salivated at the flame-throwing Trump's incessant ramblings of incompetence and crookedness in order to destroy Obama and Clinton, and in so doling, motivate his rabid base.
But the Democrats should not be accused of smugness as suggested by Wolff's book, because the Republican establishment cynically decided that in order to have power they could tolerate Trump's incompetence, and the base angrily decided that "we don't care whatever you call him...we love his bashing of the press and the Dems."
Anger and cynicism are not more noble than smugness.
7
The book tells the truth about Trump and I think the American people understand it.
12
"The catastrophes haven’t happened, and maybe that’s just a matter of luck." The word left out here is "yet". Wolff's screed merely added to the vast and rich body of evidence that Trump is "ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office." It will make Wolff a rich man but change no one's mind. It will take more than luck to get our nation through this but get through it we will, bloodied but unbowed, starting with the 2018 elections.
3
No, Mr. Stephens, it's not a matter of juicy gossip. The Wolff book is important because it provides confirmation from numerous inside sources of what we suspected all along: the emperor has no clothes.
In fact, Trump is irrelevant...a distraction....a tool used by the Republicans to sign unilateral legislation they railroad through the process, to the detriment of national interests.
The truly significant point of the book is that it reveals how deliberately complicit is the circle around Trump, and the extended crowd of Republicans, who are more intent on exploiting power for their own selfish plutocrat interests than in the interest of the country.
THAT'S the takeaway from the book....and the overarching reason to throw out this corrupt, self-serving crowd of GOP sycophants at the first opportunity, in November. We will remember your party's craven loyalty to the Boy Kng.
19
It's impossible to miss Michael Wolff during his media blitz.
His comments on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert" were (nearly) credible -- that he forged a single narrative based upon the conflicting, back-stabbing stories told to him by Trump staffers.
In today's American culture, this explanation is way too nuanced and we remain mired in our truthiness. The mere fact that such a book is written and published one year into a presidency is a sign of dysfunction writ large.
31
One needs to remember that Stephens in a previous incarnation thought G.W. Bush a great president and the Iraq war inspired policy making. One could thus be forgiven for thinking his ability to opine on presidential competence and character is somewhat circumscribed.
Wolff's book was just another contribution to the presidential tell all genre, of which there have been many, and confirmed the highly negative image of a president who has record low levels of approval among the public at large. This majority opinion is unlikely to change much just because Trump doesn't start chewing the carpet on occasions like the bizarre assemblage at the WH on immigration, while the "stable genius" tweet has become an international joke. If the consequences of Wolff's book were so counterproductive as Stephens claims, why was the Trump push back so violent producing as it did gems like the "Stable genius" that just served to confirm for most people it's basic thesis?
144
Brett Stephens is a very articulate and credible neverTrumper. Compared to the present occupant of the White House, Bush is a genius. All past presidents are preferable to this one. I understand what he is saying even as I continue reading the book. I cringe every time Democrats (or anyone else) call for Trump’s impeachment or for using the 25th amendment (which isn’t really applicable). We need to vote him and the Republican Congress out in the next elections. We’d better get busy!
2
Trump and the GOP Congress won with the help of their successful long-running voter-suppression, voter-purge, automated black-box vote counting, hate-radio-Fake-News-Facebook propaganda campaigns.
They're very good at political hijackings and tyranny of the minority by every Russian-Republican means necessary.
He's not a serious President nor is the GOP Congress a serious Congress...except for the very serious damage they do to the nation every waking second with their 0.1% nihilism.
We're entitled to a few laughs and self-congratulations while we have to suffer through the American abomination that is Trump and the systematic Republican subversion of free-and-fair-elections.
Wolff is just shining a flashlight on Trump-GOP moral rot.
If he got some details wrong, that's regrettable.
But the painting is accurate.
America knows there's a corrupt Moron-In-Chief happily propped up Randian-Russian-Republicans hellbent on psychopathic power and greed.
Democrats, independents and Republicans with a moral compass are preparing to make a difference in 2018 and 2020 in record numbers to outweigh Republican subversion of democracy.
Until then, we're entitled to entertain ourselves with the incredible naked stupidity, greed, corruption and unAmerican soul of Donald Trump and his co-conspirators.
https://www.rockthevote.org/register-to-vote/
273
Socrates, whoever you are, keep up the good work. Your cogent responses to the attempted diversions of pseudo-intellectuals like Stephens are right on the mark.
4
Stephens suggests that the left should not spend time mocking Trump for that strengthens his support? Nonsense. Anyone who remains a Trump supporter after watching his performance over the last year will remain a Trump supporter even if he started an unnecessary nuclear war in which millions died and the Earth was despoiled. The "casual" people who turned into the president's televised meeting and came away impressed cannot be convinced other wise no matter what the Democrats do or say. For it is obvious to all but the blind Trump acolytes that he is a CON ARTIST! He play acts to look "presidential" when he wants to portray that image. He even told the world that in one of his rallies when he said: "You want presidential, here is presidential" as he walked slowly to the podium with a serious look. Everyone in that dim witted crowd laughed, but not any serious person.
So, "Fire and Fury" has some "casual" errors in it? Then why is it that Stephens cannot mentions one. Trump lies about substantive things every day. His record of such lying is legend and can easily be verified. So when one compares the Wolff book and Trump over which one is more truthful, there can be no doubt that Wolff becomes the one to be believed.
Expectations of Trump are based upon over 140 years of how a president should behave. If voters are stupid enough to be fooled by Trump's cons then books like "Fire and Fury" are irrelevant to how these people judge Trump. And Stephens knows it.
2
I'm not so sure that Dems, Independents and moral compass R's will make a difference this autumn and in 2020. They have previously bought fake news & outright lies, and me thinks they may do so again. That is, if they even show up at the ballot box.
Don't get your hopes up too high, it felt horrible in 11/16 and may come around again.
"But he’s not deficient in cunning, and that cunning deserves healthy respect from his political opponents."
Absolutely. One of Hillary's mistakes was to underestimate how cunning a con-man he was.
57
Actually, it was not campaigning in Wisconsin and western Pennsylvania, barely campaigning in Michigan, and wasting precious resources in Georgia, Texas and Arizona that did her in.
Not telling the truth about her health, which included wearing weird blue sunglasses and keeling over on a cloudy morning in NYC did not help.
Or setting up a server in her basement. Or calling Trump's supporters Baskets of Deplorables.
Shall I go on?
Hillary's mistake was in not realizing how many more ignorant deplorables there were who could vote and the Republicans' ability to win the presidency only through the Electoral College, an institution they were so willing to end until it became obvious it was another friend of theirs.
4
Truth was irrelevant in the 2016 presidential election. The biggest mudslinger won; negative ads work.
2
I believe Mr. Stephens misunderstands the purpose of Mr. Wolff's book. Simply put, its purpose is to speak the unspoken, not so much specifically, but showing the aggregate sense of how the people closest to Trump feel about working for him. I don't believe it will change minds about his Presidency but rather to put the public on high alert about his mental competency. Seen through the prism of the book, we can see how his recent meeting on immigration reflects his lack of knowledge on the issue and his utter lack of focus, to the point that he's changing his position drastically based on the last person who spoke. Thank you Michael Wolff, not for your reporting of every tiny detail, but for letting desperate and fearful voices be heard.
484
however tabloid like, our need to have this over rules . . . the book shows what we do to ourselves as we wait, hope and wish this man out of our lives. It's also somewhat disconcerting that we think WE can determine who's next, who will be the perfect candidate after as though WE know. We allowed this to come, we are unable to rid ourselves of him as no one, when writing our rules and regs anticipated such horror. Hard to listen to ourselves have any answers at the moment. Wolff has given us fodder on which to feed while we are so so hungry for a demise of the endless show.
1
This person seems to have read the same book as I’m reading.
1
The purpose of Wollff's book is about making money. If somone had written such a book about Obama, the media would be screaming racism from every page.
3
I'm glad you reiterated what you thought of Trump at the end of your article, because I already thought you changed your position on him; I always enjoy reading your column and watching your tv appearances. I still have to ask: do you actually believe he made his "genius and, like, really smart" remark jokingly? I thought it matched the comments he made over the years unironically, for example when he let us all know that he has the best words of all the words, or a really good brain. I agree, usually the "like" is used with a wink on twitter; I don't think Donald Trump grasps that though (I'm not claiming that he has dementia or is losing his wit, but: it fits).
46
People like Trump who get into highly competitive schools like Penn despite (surely) mediocre test scores are notoriously unreliable braggarts about their intellectual and academic wualifications.
1
It amazes me that some of you continue to underestimate Trump. He's ignorant and has no attention span, but he's not in a vegetative state. 2-year-olds are capable of that level of sass, yet you can't bring yourselves to give him even that much credit. That's why he wins; that's the point. There is no greater advantage than to be underestimated. You'd have thought Bernie Sanders would've made that clear enough.
1
It certainly feels a bit like the boy who cried wolf, day in and day out. Cable news is always airing “breaking news” that is a tired loop of gossip and pondering. Major news stories about problems in the federal government agencies or simply of national and world news events are being silenced. Trump is effectively pulling the levers of media with each of his outrageous acts, and one of these days the media will finally realize they were punk’d. Imagine a day where the media only asked Sarah Sanders about substance on smaller issues and ignored a big tweet? Imagine if they asked about specifics of congressional bills? Imagine if - for just a day or a week - journalists just left the broken record stories off the pages and screens.... and reported on other issues. They could return to the scandals and all the absurd behavior after their short sabbatical, but wow... it sure would be interesting to see what else we could learn.
30
I do not believe for a second that Trump was using the term, "like", as humor when he wrote it. He's not capable of self-deprecation.
2
Winning Strategy? It’s not a strategy it’s a guy who wrote a book - we aren’t all coming together to figure out how to deal with this guy and Wolff’s Book was part of our @strategy”. This whole notion we are going to get Trump’s facade to crumble with the 30% of America’s backwash is a flawed, perhaps even absurd, premise. Our only hope is that the 30% that exists between them and NeverTrump stay awake and know this is not good for our country. Take Wolff’s book for what you want but trying to frame it as part of a “strategy” is indicating to his backwash exactly what they think: this is all part of a coordinated effort to take down their great hero. No, it was a guy who had access and wrote a book. Full stop.
12
Wolff's book is emblematic of the Trump era. Slander, vilification, chest-beating, innuendo, snark, lies, slander, fake news, and alternative facts are Trump's stock-in-trade. Why should the first book about his presidency be any different? This expresses the times exactly as Trump would have written it.
210
Embracing wholesale the Trumpian rewriting of political culture is not exactly the best way to resist him. Is that hard to grasp? The mud pit is Trump's natural habitat; for decades it was the Clintons', as well. Fighting him on his turf is why he "won".
1
Concise and bang on.
1
The comparison of Fire and Fury to a based-on-actual-events made-for-TV movie is apt. But I suspect that the damage you attribute to it is overblown. Fox News has been doing the same thing for years, and I do not see a similar effect on conservatives. Fire and Fury is tabloid fun and it appears to contain many grains of truth, largely from the mouths of White House insiders. For you, Mr. Stephens, this information is completely old news, but for others it is revelatory. And it puts the Hannities and the Limbaughs and the Bannons on defence. Liberals have been playing defence for years, addressing such things as Birtherism and Bengazi-ism and Vince Fosterism. Fire and Fury may be a cheap shot, but politics is conducted on several levels and Democrats and democrats have been too polite to engage with the gutter-sniping ascendant nativist Right for a long time. They have rationally dismissed them. But rationality is only half the game. Rational right leaning intellectuals totally missed TRUMP. They totally do not get him and look what happened and where we are. And rational left wingers have defined themselves as rational and therefore do not even acknowledge the TRUMP phenomenon. They act shocked that people believe that the earth is center of the solar system, when they have credible scientific theories that puts the sun in the center of our local system. They are totally dismissive of irrationality. That may be good real science, but it is bad political science.
397
Bravo. That feeling you get when someone expresses everything you feel... Perfect
1
You gotta be British: "defence."
Good comment. Last sentence communicates a valid point, just clumsily said. (I don't have a quick fix for it, either. Oh, well, man's reach should always exceed his grasp, they say.)
Yes, the book contains many grains of truth. In fact, a sizable mound.
1
Great column. Indeed, Wolff has been as slippery in interviews about his book as Sarah Huckebee Sanders at the podium defending her boss. Meanwhile, the coastlines have been opened up for drilling, the Democrats continue to be kept in a headlock by Mitch McConnell, HUD continues to be run into the ground, the State Department remains a zombie version of its former self, the Justice Department continues to be infected by Trumpism, ideologues continue to be appointed to the bench, and the ambassador to the Netherlands remains someone publicly humiliated by being confronted (by a media that knows HOW to hold someone accountable) by the lies he has told about the Netherlands. Most of the U.S. press seems to be too distracted by crazy tweets, gossipy books, and a televised meeting in which Trump mimed sobriety to cover the ongoing destruction of U.S. institutions and the nation's reputation.
57
I generally agree with Mr. Stephen’s comment that, in ordinary times, Mr. Wolff’s salacious book has no place in the public discourse. However, these are not normal times. This president uses all the weapons at his disposal, especially lies, to empower himself. What are thinking people supposed to do when the bully pulpit has been kidnaped? To a certain extent I believe in fighting fire with fire. Mr. Wolff’s book must be viewed in the context of all the media surrounding this president. Is it the only source to be considered? Certainly not. But only being content on the “high road” is a form of elitist nihilism. This book, taken together with all accounts across the political spectrum, has its place. Let the reader decide.
374
Taking the high road is most certainly not elitist nihilism.
It *is* not becoming the thing you are fighting against.
You don't fight corruption with corruption, you fight it with integrity.
These are, indeed, not ordinary times. Few, it seems, are willing to have the guts to stand up for doing the right thing - expediency, then, is king?
If the resistance has succumbed to embracing this book with that kind of self-serving cynicism, Trump and those who enable and use him for their ends, have already won.
1
"When they go low, we go high". It sounded like a joke then, given the Clintons' long history of mudslinging. I guess now there's no doubt. Donald Trump isn't the only one with a "sly command of irony".
2
Problem with democracy: We vote in people like 45. The hoi polloi, like me, have difficulty recognizing propaganda, spin, and half-truths as such and so we swallow them as bitter truths, because we consider ourselves wise adults. Descartes said that no man would trade himself and his talents for another's. Would our mental mirror lie to us? All is vanity, thus sayeth the Preacher.
1
I don't know why Bret and others in the media who aren't Trump enablers feel it necessary to diminish it when it hasn't been out a week. This is a gossipy book plain and simple. The country is sick and tired of Trump period. If diminishing him makes it easier to sleep at night it serves some good. Lets wash this man right out of our hair.
I am so sick and tired of him already that I can't imagine anyone except for the supporters of PNAC and other neocon dreams and the evangelicals having the slightest interest in sullying our inner landscape with this trashy man any longer than we are forced to.
14
The book is trash. What's damaged Trump's critics is their rush to promote it as "fake but accurate." That kind of desperation fuels the sense that they will do anything, including stoop to the lowest journalistic standard, to validate their biases. It's all about their own views of him. That's not even close to journalism.
His critics should stop trying prove they were *right* about him all along, that his election was some sort of unreal nightmare from which they will soon awaken, and it's only a matter of time before he's removed from office. This is fantastical thinking. This isn't thinking to be taken seriously.
Congress and the media, despite their bravado attempts to *protect* the public from Trump, are actually responsible. He was elected because they seriously let down the American public. It is their own incompetence and self-centeredness that allowed someone like Trump to crash their party. Obviously, Americans believed they were doing a very, very bad job and sent in someone tough enough to deal with them. (And, now, they seem to be doubling down on their failed approach.)
If they want to be rid of people like Trump, they need to get better at doing their own jobs.
13
I had a rep as a v. fair grader so here goes.
Style: Wolff earns D+ for over-the-top and slangy and redundant stuff here.
Organization: C- for a wandering and repetitive scheme.
Citation of Sources: D for failing to give full documentation
Tone: C+ for trading objectivity and calm for NatEnquirer yelping.
Judgments: B+ (It's got Bannon, DJT, the T kids, and several others down v. well with unfortunately some examples that need citations: "This story was related to me by X on xx/xx/xxxx and supported by A, B, and C.").
Conclusion: An unfinished but potentially important book.
It badly needs re-editing. I could circle 4 score and 7 poorly expressed, cite-omitting, or redundant spots. The style is Junior G-man adolescent and undermines the serious attack.
That does not make its central points wrong, its summarizing unfair, its perspective a failure, its over-personalization unforgivable - the latter is dumb in serious investigative journalism, maybe, but unforgiveable in pop writing, nope. I give the book C- as "Unfinished", and would suggest that with a 2nd or 3 writing, it would be a B or B+, and I'd encourage that because the themes deserve taut organization and clear documentation.
One's readers deserve more light, less fire, and more order and less fury. A tighter, footnoted, calm book would have earned wider acclaim. Pity the author and publisher rushed never got that done.
"One of Trump’s underappreciated strengths is his sly command of irony, on display again last week when he tweeted that his two great assets in life were “mental stability and being, like, really smart.” Note the superfluous “like,” which is stupid when spoken but intended as humor when written"
Reminiscent of the main character in the movie Zoolander.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/ben-stiller-reads-trumps-like-really-smart...
4
If our news media were still capable of upholding their proper role as the Fourth Estate of American democracy, they would supply far broader and deeper coverage of the countless, far-reaching consequences of the current destruction-in-progress of any and all of the sane regulations that our country used to have.
Instead, true to form, the bulk of our news media output is to obsess over and magnify Trump's silly tweets, ugly personality antics and obvious mental health problems -- failing to identify them clearly as nothing but a grand smokescreen.
40
The American press must pay its way thru advertising and eyeball counts. That makes sensationalism necessary. It must also keep access to power. That means that it can only demand so much of power.
The deal at present is that antics, tweets and smokescreening get the headlines, and the far-reaching consequences stay on the back pages in print, and off the airwaves entirely. Broader and deeper coverage might last a week, until the leakers in the agencies are shown the door and the advertisers revolt as one.
Matching “cunning” with “ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office.”, completely explains the train that is Trump and the momentum it continues to gain.
14
The American voters will not be stupid during the next few highly significant election cycles.
If we cannot put faith in American democracy, then we deserve to be punished and whipped by tyrannical bullies, who claim to love their country more than themselves.
By now, we know well our Con-Man-in-Chief -- we have suffered through his self-congratulations and hypocrisies, every day -- every day since.
13
Trump is also devoid of conscious, thus he can deny the truth and his minions believe him. Trump will not leave office on his own. I wonder if he would leave office if voted out. He would likely call if voter fraud and just stay. His allies would not remove him because they are afraid of him for some strange reason. They are afraid of the bully, which is what the bully wants. Fire and Fury simply gives Trump something to deny and Republicans just say, "well, the president denies it, that is good enough for us."
5
It is particularly perplexing and confounding that the idiot Trump, the incurious, uneducated, grifter, cheater, liar has been able to marshall the entire Republican Congress and most conservative so called journalists to keep giving him cover, holding him up as effective, brilliant, etc. That he could reduce people of long-standing public service and experience to fawning, groveling clowns bowing down to him is beyond comprehension. In photo ops with Trump. I have never seen the likes of the grinning Paul Ryan, McCarthy and many of the others who are now calling him brilliant and fresh and inventive. After this is over and we move on to a more reasonable, sane period in our country's history, if he doesn't end it with a compulsive push of the nuclear button, I don't see how these sycophants to ignorance and vileness hold their heads up, unless there is as little to them as there seems to be at this point.
2
"... and actual wit."
Well, that's a stretch, but he is halfway there.
19
If Wolff's book is Exhibit A in how not to damage Trump's presidency, the pages of the Times this last year are Exhibit B. Of course Trump is not qualified to be president, but what we have seen in the last year on these pages amounts to tendentious, editorializing journalism. Or for the polysyllabic averse, fake news. It is telling that the "mainstream" George W. Bush, who did far more damage to the Republic (so far) than Trump with his Iraq War, was actually supported in these pages in that fraud. Apparently the editors here can't tell the difference between style and substance.
22
It's about time someone realized Trump's "cunning" ability to turn the energy of other people's animosity against them. He's been using the leverage of other people's money all his life and is indeed a genius at marking up his own value via the value of attention and a host of other intangibles. Trump's election win is a classic case: He lost the popular vote by a significant margin, yet gained the White House platform. He realizes that as long as he has one third of the nation behind him, he can do as he wishes, however absurd or perilous. And most of all, he realizes that as long as he appeases the plutocrats that own our government, he has the full support of the Republican Party.
298
And he realizes he can count on the support of then Bret Stephens' of the "journalist" class to give him cover one more time. Cunning. He might have been cunning at one time. Now he's just surviving on hate and vitriol.
2
My God, those menacing Plutocrats again! Help us the sky is falling....
1
The greatest sin is Greed and Greed won. Corporations won and they will continue winning. We are fighting the wrong enemy. The enemy is the lackadaisical American.
List the privatizations of wars, schools. health care, housing.
Corporations won the election.
Democrats lost the war on wars for several years ago. They helped charter schools when poor neighborhoods have no school, and own large profit making housing while Veterans, Americans sleep in the street.
And now a best selling novel idea of a book, about our President, about our country, tells the world just what America has become.
126
This post is far too wise to get the credit it deserves and the caution it should heed.
4
No, the greatest sins are pride and betrayal, and Trump and Bannon evidence them to a breathtaking degree.
1
the greatest sin is envy, and the readers here have been committing it like a tsunami
I agree with everything you have said except for saying trump was being ironic when inserting the word "like" in his tweet. I've seen so many videos of his saying this in describing his smart, clever, ingenious, never been done before actions.
Also, are reckless and dangerous interchangeable? If not, I think that should have been included in your right-on list of his traits.
1
The reason the media is talking about Wolff's book is because EVERYONE in Washington has known the allegations are true, but the MSM are too cowardly to say it outright, and now they can "say" it over and over by quoting the book. Wolff has done what none of them were willing to do: point out the would-be emperor is wearing no clothes, but out loud to everyone else watching.
17
Gossip is Trumps platform and the source of your income.
7
I´m afraid you're entirely right, Mr Stephens. As the Bruce Willis character says in Pulp Fiction, 'This is how you're gonna beat 'em, Butch - they keep underestimating you.'
3
I was happy to see this piece today. From the outset, I had no intention of reading this book as I thought it would just be stooping to yet another low level.
We already know of his buffoonery. Gossiping about it only gives him more joy. This is like oxygen to him. He can point to it and say to his base, “see, they are being mean to me”.
What we need are facts and a strategy to defeat this man. Calling him names and pointing out his flaws only gives him more fodder for his “rallies”.
The real danger is how he lands hard right on policy. Whether he truly believes or understands the ramifications of his actions means little to him. He needs and wants the full throated cheers of his supporters and the blessings of those above him (Mercers and Koch’s). Gossip and name calling are not strategies. Education, facts and consensus building are. Voting is a strategy.
The country also needs to learn how to deal with his narcissism. We feed it every day in newspapers and television. He sees or hears his name hundreds of times a day. Is there a way to report the news and let his name be spoken or written as few times a possible?
Also, would the adults in the room, please stand up and take over. Oh, wait, the adults is us....voters.
192
I agree with all you say, but if the Democrats expect to beat Trump in 2020, they must have a candidate who resonates with most of the country and does not allow him/herself to be boxed in by multiple obsessions - inequality, race, sexism, climate change, for starters. Yes, Obama won twice on these, but look at his legacy, or lack thereof. In fact, it led us to Donald Trump. Democrats must stop idolizing people like Obama and the Clintons who can't move them forward in 2020, and possibly not in 2018.
So we need to just play nice to this buffoon and he will go away.
1
I don't agree that Trump can in any way profit from of capitalize on all the publicity or negative points of this book. Too much of it rings true to people after a year of being subjected to insane tweets, daily lies, and lots of well sourced flawless reporting on the antics in the West Wing. This book is simply an acceptably gossipy and fun read (I notice you are criticizing a book you haven't even read, and probably haven't read the excerpts online, so your criticism is kind of irrelevant). It's very gratifying to see a bully get which he richly deserves. Trump's had this coming to him for a long time and there's a big audience for this exposé. It doesn't matter if it's not 100% journalistically pure. As John Podhoretz said, even if 20% of it's unreliable, it's still damning.
1
I think a little empathy for the left is in order here, Bret. Yes, I wish someone with more credibility had written a more accurate book on the,Trump White House. But, on the other side of the coin, it can be said a out the book "You get the picture". Problem is we have had the picture for quite sometime now. While I read the Times , the Post, watch NBC, PBS, and NPR, all viewed as liberal bastions (although you, Brooks, Gerson, and many other conservatives are part of that and I do read your articles), you forget to mention the left has had to deal with Bannon, Hannity,Savage, Limbaugh etc for years. For it really isn't what's in the book or the author that really counts. It's the audience that looks to the publications in the grocery store checkout as the gospel that is the real cause for concern. Many look at liberals as having been "Born With Two Heads". I assure you I only have one.
4
So much wishful thinking and whistling past the graveyard in this essay. Trump's numbers keep falling and are fast approaching the territory it took the great misunderestimator six years to achieve.
3
It's been said over and over again that Trump is where he is because of the media and it's desire to sensationalize. Just as they sensationalized non-issues with Sec. Clinton. Trump loves been sensational. He can play that game better than anybody. The comedian/satirist Samantha Bee has been bemoaning the lack of focus on the real issues, such as the erosion of privacy, the protections to the environment among numerous others. Yet, the competition between the mainstream media and late-night comedians to dwell on the insignificant continues.
4
I agree with Mr. Stephens: we cannot run around like Chicken Little and keep saying, "The sky is falling. The sky is falling." about every little thing trump does. If we, the resistance, endlessly chronicle the small problems the country's attention span over time will wane and cease to pay attend to his truly incriminating actions. I have family members who are trump supporters and every time a minor error is acknowledged by the mainstream media they say, "See!" Stop covering his minor, absurd behavior and start focusing on information that will eventually get him either impeached or voted out of office.
3
Very good assessment of the book an situation. The Trump haters, starting from Elizabeth Warren to CNN have succeeded in firming the Trump base. They have even alienated some of their own even though it appears their core supporters can't get enough anti-Trump rhetoric. Your reference to how the media treated Reagan is spot on. Trump is not Reagan but he too figured out what America is tired of and bad grammar and limited vocabulary aside, continues to strike chords with many people. Wolff's book is a tabloid on steroids and Chuck Todd's and other solid liberal pundits' focus on it as if it were fact laden, diminishes what little credibility they have left. As anything but a Trump advocate, I am disappointed by the constant barrage of attacks. You have hit the nail squarely.
4
The Trump haters have succeeded in firming the Trump base? Oh, I think you give the Trump haters way too much credit. It's much more likely that there are a lot more under-educated, uneducated, bitter ignorant people who feel the life they felt belonged to their white supremacy has been taken away by anyone not them. And here comes Trump, who is only them in ignorance, so they're in his lap licking his face like a happy dog.
1
Please, let Wolff's success with this book go. Trump, more than anyone, deserves a loose with the truth, gossipy diatribe against him. Also, the 65% or so who are not his supporters need some ammunition even if some of this ammunition are blanks. As an Obama supporter, I found it abhorrent with Trump's pre campaign campaign about Obama's birthplace and his undoing of everything Obama since his inauguration. Trump's white hot hatred for everything Obama is because Obama is everything Trump is not and never will be.
17
Great wake-up call Bret. The morning after the election, I too felt a very deep political emptiness in my soul. The only thing that kept my political hopes alive was my sincere belief that Donald Trump would self destruct within the first 3 months.
Then reality phased in when I realized that some of my best friends and even family still supported Trump. Was it because they hated Democrats and their liberal philosophy more than anyone who was a Republican? Probably.
Regarding Wolff’s book, I haven’t read it nor do I have any interest in reading it. All you have to do is watch and listen to him to see holes through him and his story. He and his publishers didn’t even bother to checkout the name in advance to see if it’s been used before. It has! But why was I first attracted to read some of his quotes and even watch him on some of the news stations? Because WE thought this might be the STRAW that breaks his back! Trust me, at some time in the future Trump’s reign will end just like Machiavelli. How can we bring this on much quicker? Get involved seriously into our political system and vote. Yes, it’s really that simple!
6
It is as simple as Democrats and sane Independents getting out and voting in every single election. Alabama and Virginia should have confirmed that lesson the last two months. There is nothing that is going to enlighten Trump's hard core base but if responsible voters would vote, that small knot of hatred could be sidelined where it should have been all along. Another lesson is that hatred is a great motivator. The haters got out and voted, even though they weren't the majority of the vote, but they caved in the Electoral College with some of its bizarre winner take all far right bastions of ignorance and illiteracy.
3
Uhoh, here we go. The next conversion of a 'conservative' from NeverTrumper to oh-well-it's-as-bad-as-it-seems-Trump-is-AOK-er. Predictable but also incredibly disheartening.
4
To claim that Trump is capable of irony when talking about himself is taking a long leap of faith. I think that most people appreciate that the book is half a tabloid hack job, but many of the reviews on Amazon show that in the face of Trump's attempts to block distribution of the book, buying it is a political act, and perhaps, given where we are, a necessary one.
15
I don't see why fighting shallowness and ignorance with shallowness and ignorance is worse than continuing to play intellectual to counter ignorance. The last is completely ineffective against ignorance since they abhor thinking.
2
Why does Stephens, a conservative, spend so much time telling liberals how work more effectively in their opposition to Trump? Something isn't quite right in this pattern of focus and the double-fold rhetoric.
13
This article reminds me of the Conservative argument against climate change: It is cold now, so there is no global warming.
No. I see Trump on TV all the time. He is not competent. He cannot control himself. I do not need articles like this to tell me otherwise.
18
Ugh. I acknowledge the truth in what you say.
Can you offer a simple, effective strategy to replace what we’re doing?
2
If anyone wants to read a great rebuttal -- or alternative -- to this article, Margaret Carlson's piece in today's Daily Beast is wonderful.
5
Thank you. I'll head there now to purge this conservative blast to enable the Liar in Chief one more time.
1
"But he's not deficient in cunning.." Yes, absolutely, as displayed in his Greatest Show in January, i.e., his meeting with Congress several days ago. He was the bobbing head one often sees on car dash boards. "Healthy respect", Mr. Stephens, never. The words "healthy" and "respect" are only to be used in reference to the deserving and are tainted when used as adjectives for the word "cunning." And certainly should never, ever be used in the same sentence when speaking of Trump.
Now back to THE book of this still young year. I appreciate your opinion. I have not read it nor will I. I need a break some time during my waking hours from this elected (?) creature. But, sir, save your venom and criticism on what counts. That is Trump, his state of mind, his ominous actions, his lying words. And perhaps it would be beneficial to write about his GOP Congress also, the Party which is right down there in the gutter with him. This book of which you speak is not even on my list of fears and concerns for our democracy. But Trump is.
740
Trump is deficient in cunning and Stephens is deficient in an honest assessment of the White House buffoon and the never ending dumpster fire he's feeding with the help of Grassley, Graham and Stephens.
3
Well said.
2
Perfect
1
Can't imagine the target audience for Wolff's book. No functional psyche would want to wallow in the slimy details contained therein. Just reading the news is a surfeit of nausea-inducing particulars.
Who are these people who would spend time, or money, to voluntarily ingest more?
1
I am wavering between agreeing with Stephens and arguing. So I'll do both.
We have indeed lowered our expectations of the Presidency, and are presently deeming failure to start a nuclear war, and defeating ISIS to a point in which they turn terror on other Muslim countries, making the tinderbox even more so, a victory. The stock market hasn't actually collapsed, and the actions undercutting the ACA has only hurt people, not killed them. Oh frabjous day!! Let us chortle in our joy and watch the President mouth some of the words of the national anthem, very visibly not taking a knee. What a statesman!
But to criticize the Wolff book for being vapid, cheesy, unreliable, poorly supported by attribution, truthy, gossipy and a set of alternate facts - well the opposition ALWAYS adopts the successful tactics of the current leadership. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
We have seen over and over again that we cannot fight Trump or the wall of determined ignorance that supports him with logic, reason, fact, truth, shame, criticism, or any other set of tools that a person with ethics chooses. That leaves fighting fire with fire a viable option, even if it makes us want to toss our lunch.
9
"Resistance into a byword for the hysterical and condescending ninnies of American politics"- mais non Mr Stephens. In an otherwise well written piece you miss the point. I am a college graduate with a Master's degree, with, at 73, almost a lifetime's experience. and finally with 26 years as a Marine infantryman. "A stable genius" perhaps not; a "ninnie" hardly.
I had no particular interest in acquiring Wolff's book since from reading excerpts it merely confirms my assessment of Trump. That was until I read the reviews on Amazon. Those reader comments-lots of comments- spent no time critiquing the author's prose or grasp of the facts. Instead they focused on RESISTING Trump's attempt to suppress the book's publication, and as a bonus "sticking it to the man." I promptly ordered the book and ordered a copy for my daughter who is of like mind. In my opinion 2 X $18 better spent than donating to a political campaign, at least at this point. I may or may not even read it.
Granted the only truly effective resistance will be the 2018 midterms when finally we will have the opportunity to reverse the deplorable record of voter apathy and flip the House and Senate. If patriotic Americans don't seize this opportunity then we're doomed to two more years of unchecked Trumpism.
Meanwhile, petty or not, I relish every jab at Trump's ego. The man is no fighter; rather he is as many have said a little boy and a schoolyard bully who can't take a punch but rises to the bait every time.
8
What Stephens doesn't get is Woolf wasn't out to damage Trump, he was out to make money. And he succeeded fabulously.
6
Excellent article and clearly needed in this current smug period of moral scolds who holler impeach in the theater akin to yelling fire. Yup, catastrophes, per se, have not occured as predicted. Yet of course every day Trump reveals the emperor sans clothes in other ways. And after Stephens' descriptions of Trump as ignorant, vain, gauche, etc., he comes to the point: he's cunning. Sly. I don't agree that he has a sly command of irony but he does display cunning when Trump is having a laugh that's "part self-deprecation, part trolling, and actual wit." It's tricky w/this fella, Trump. He doesn't put Roy Cohn and Putin at the top of his list as a fool. As an amoralist, certainly, but getting to compromise does mean breaking a few eggs. Again, Arthur Miller's words from "Death of a Salesman": attention must be paid.
5
Stephens believes that ‘Trump is ignorant, incurious, vain, gauche, bigoted, intemperate, bullying, suggestible, reckless and morally unfit for his office. But he’s not deficient in cunning,..’ And he’s right! But, while we’re all in a tither over the revelations in Wolff’s book, this administration will continue to enact policy that will change the fabric of our country for years to come. We need to stop reading the book and get back to doing what it takes to get the best Democratic candidates on the 2018 ballots. And, by the way, it struck me that when Trump asked “Who’s that?” after hearing the suggestion that John Boehner would be a good chief of staff, he may have been making sly commentary on what he thought of Boehner.
2