Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Bannon v. Trump v. Bannon

Bannon v. Trump v. Bannon

“When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.”

This flame war between Trump and former aide Steve Bannon is something else.

An article published in The Guardian Wednesday lifted passages from a new book ‘Fire and Fury’ by Michael Wolff. Bannon was quoted heavily in the book, calling the infamous Trump Tower meeting with Russians “treasonous.”

The meeting took place in July, a month before Bannon joined the Trump campaign.

From The Guardian:

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

Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, reportedly based on more than 200 interviews with the president, his inner circle and players in and around the administration, is one of the most eagerly awaited political books of the year. In it, Wolff lifts the lid on a White House lurching from crisis to crisis amid internecine warfare, with even some of Trump’s closest allies expressing contempt for him.

Bannon, who was chief executive of the Trump campaign in its final three months, then White House chief strategist for seven months before returning to the rightwing Breitbart News, is a central figure in the nasty, cutthroat drama, quoted extensively, often in salty language.

Breitbart News then devoted two posts, written without a specific byline, to requoting The Guardian post.

The Trump administration was not impressed and quickly shot back.

Full White House statement:

Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party.

Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isnt as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesnt represent my basehes only in it for himself.

Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.

We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.

Matt Drudge, whose Druge Report was at one time incredibly generous in linking to Breitbart News, had words:

And Donald Trump Jr. too weighed in after Bannon attcked him:

Apparently, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, whose disdain for Bannon is well-known, is enjoying every bit of this:

The Mitch-friendly, Senate Leadership Fund, forwarded Trump’s response.

Parts of Wolff’s book are already being questioned:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Is there any such thing as a staffer so loyal that they will not try to sell their tell-all in a New York minute after getting fired anymore?

    Scott McClellan? At least McClellan had access to W before he betrayed him.

    Connivin Caniff in reply to Immolate. | January 4, 2018 at 5:05 am

    Maybe Bannon was as sick as I am of all the left wingers and swampers dominating the White House, including certain Trump family members, and as sick as I am of Trump’s whining tweets, wherein he complains of the Hildebeast etc., but never formally orders his space-cadet attorney to actually do something. Trump has made some good judicial appointments, but otherwise he is crawling into bed with the RINOs. I don’t think that is what Bannon signed up for.

I don’t buy any of it.
It smells fishy.

We’ve seen the media try this tactic before, to drive a wedge between Trump and his supporters.

As always unless you see it directly from Trump take EVERYTHING reported by the mfm as fake news.

Yeah, this looks like craptastic standard fair for the media. Quotes from this book were available to seed interest and drive a narrative for a day… so why did whomever decide to do their release today? I don’t know, but .. I’m not buying that Trump and Bannon are really at odds.

More likely, they are using this to sniff out the weak hands around them. See who says what. Good intel op, IMO.

Not a lot of actual “there” there. So somebody who wasn’t a witness says some meeting which didn’t include Candidate Trump might have been about … well, something-or-other, which somebody will later investigate as evidence of intent to commit financial crimes … which is all bloody obvious, as no investigation can waste all its time investigating things which aren’t crimes at all.

[Yawn].

This is a fakeout. It’s a step up from the usual anonymous “inside source”, but just a baby-step. Wake me when something more substantial than an ordinary Dem wet dream crops up.

casualobserver | January 3, 2018 at 4:07 pm

Don’t how this finally ends. But I do know the infrequent visits I now make to Breitbart almost always find an attack on Trump Jr. Bannon has been gunning for him since leaving, I guess.

I don’t disagree that often with him, but I’ve always been turned off by his personality and style.

    I gave up on that website years ago. At best, several good writers did evolve through there.

      Drudge is hard to take too. In spite of being supposedly conservative/libertarian, he still fawns over the mainstream media and has a lot of tabloid click bait. He seems to love British Royal Family gossip. Drudge would probably reply that he’s just giving the people what they want and his consistent strong numbers reflect that.

        You probably know that Andrew got his start with Matt? Matt is such a hoot, juxtaposing topics like an orchestra conductor.

        While it’s true that he has a lot more interest in the glossy stuff and/or the sorry-ass-pope he has attracted an enormous following of readers who look forward to what he will come up, next.

        My guess is that there is a long back story with Matt and those who sustained Andrew’s “audacity” when Breitbart’s multi-mode BIG stories were evolving. The technology remains ever improving.

        Whereas, Drudge’s page has retained a reliable consistency. He should probably patent his fedora and page layout as how-to make money from your least likely allies.

        The beauty of Drudge is all the links to all the different sites.

Remember that this information comes through our corrupt media. So likely fack. I talk to the younger generation and they hate Bannon. Trump knows this and is interested in getting distance from Bannon. The people that are the base are there as they follow the Trump message, not Bannon. Trump tweeting as he has is a gift to Gannon as it assures more book sales.

Wolff is an enemy of the people. He is heavy Clinton supporter and part of USA Today.

Guess what? Bannon has just released a new book and any author will do anything to get all the publicity, good or bad, that he/she can get. Trump just gave Bannon as much publicity as he could without hawking the book on TV. Was it collusion or stupidity? Either way, Bannon wins.

    hmmmm, very interesting. Wish I had read this before posting my first thoughts below. You may have hit the nail on the head. It will be interesting to see what else is in Bannon’s book.

    But this isn’t a Bannon book is it? It’s a Michael Wolff that quotes Bannon….

    Or is Steve Bannon releasing a new book too?

Bannon has always been Bannon first.

OleDirtyBarrister | January 3, 2018 at 4:54 pm

In other Trump adviser/campaign staff news, Manafort filed a civil action seeking a declaratory judgment and injunction against Rosenstein, Mueller, et al.

It will be interesting to see if they court will exercise jurisdiction over the civil action or abstain in response to abstention arguments from the defendants on the grounds that Manafort could/should present the arguments in the criminal case.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4343227/1-3-18-Manafort-v-DOJ-Complaint.pdf

Steve Bannon is no Andrew Breitbart. No one else is. Bannon tried to run with the big dogs and now he’s a porch dog. Bannon had it coming, he asked for it and now he has had his ass handed him. Were it not for media, Bannon would cease to exist. Maybe he can find a gig on one of the Kardashian shows.

Whatever he may end up doing, his political show has been canceled.

    Matt_SE in reply to NotKennedy. | January 3, 2018 at 8:33 pm

    You’re awfully quick to swallow the media’s narrative whole. Do you have any skepticism in you at all, or do you just hate Bannon?

      I am a natural born skeptic and have been an auditor for more than 30 years. FWIW, I regard Bannon as a conservative. Conservatism withstanding, he made the story about himself instead remaining on track. Steve Bannon is not particularly interesting, nor was he elected to anything.

      Barry in reply to Matt_SE. | January 3, 2018 at 11:34 pm

      Matt, it’s near the end of the day. All day long and I’ve seen nothing from Bannon denying it. If I missed it, point it out.

        Matt_SE in reply to Barry. | January 3, 2018 at 11:53 pm

        As far as I can tell, Bannon doesn’t even have a Twitter account…at least I can’t easily find it. I found what looked like an account, but the last tweet was three years ago.

        Also, no response on Breitbart but I don’t know if he can just override their programming at will. One way or another, someone should get confirmation before smearing a man (sound familiar?).

        You are assuming that he’s plugged into a way to easily respond, when that’s not necessarily true.

        One thing that is confirmed from the WaPo is that the author of this book has a history of just making stuff up. But don’t let that dampen your enthusiasm for a good witch burning!

          Barry in reply to Matt_SE. | January 4, 2018 at 2:24 pm

          The author is certainly a writer of fairy tale.

          That does not mean the bannon quotes are made up. He’s simply not denying it. Bannon thinks he’s the story. He’s right, but not in the way he wanted.

Close The Fed | January 3, 2018 at 6:05 pm

I’m unsure how much of these Bannon quotes are accurate.

If accurate, I’m appalled by his bad manuvering. (sp?) I can’t believe he’d hand this innuendo to the left.

I supported Moore, and am still glad I did. You cannot help what an Allred would do. After 35 years in public office, he was entitled to think he’d already been vetted.

Interestingly, Moore did cause the hypocrisy of the Clinton democrat party to be temporarily shed. The fall out has been interesting.

I hope Bannon didn’t say this. He’s definitely on the side of those wishing to limit immigration. Also, Mitch McConnell hates Tea partiers, so who cares if for one day he’s smug? He’s always a smug, self-satisfied son of a bitch, who has enjoyed being in office and rolling every time a democrat sneezes in the same building as him.

Ya know, I think if I down-vote someone, I will give them ( And everyone else )the courtesy of an explanation for doing so.
I don’t understand these.

    OleDirtyBarrister in reply to snowshooze. | January 3, 2018 at 7:01 pm

    Quit whining about “votes”.

    The votes concept is sophomoric enough, and worrying about them is downright vapid.

      Well Morris seems to collect them like flies on sh%$. You only need to be worried if you are collecting as many as his. I think he holds the record of like 40 down votes.

OleDirtyBarrister | January 3, 2018 at 7:07 pm

The editors/publishers of books like this one always pressure the author to “go negative,” and puts an author that has taken a big advance in a precarious financial position of performing satisfactorily or face legal and financial consequences.

Bannon might have said one or a few negative things in a long interview, and that becomes the centerpiece.

OleDirtyBarrister | January 3, 2018 at 7:09 pm

If I were running for POTUS, I’d make all my staffers sign a CNDA/NDA (Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreement) and have them refrain from publishing any books until some period after I have published mine.

    Is that possible? Trump is not their actual employer, is he?

    I disagree. If you look at the history of the 1st Amend. it is all about being free to express yourself even if you are wrong and allow for counter discussion.

    Hamilton declared, freedom of the press “consists in the right to publish, with impunity, truth, with good motives, for justifiable ends, thought reflecting on government, magistry, or individuals.”

    John Milton:

    A man may be a heretic in the truth, and if he believe things only because his pastor says so, or the assembly so determines, without knowing other reason, though his belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy.

It seems to me that the cascade of leaks from the White House have dried up since Bannon was booted out. He’s become less impressive since.

    Matt_SE in reply to tarheelkate. | January 3, 2018 at 8:43 pm

    List of white house personnel fired in 2017 before Bannon (who got fired on August 18), and not including people not directly in the white house:

    – Michael Flynn (Feb)
    – Katie Walsh, the former deputy chief of staff and close ally to the chief of staff Reince Priebus
    – Michael Dubke, the former White House communications director (May)
    – Mark Corralo, the spokesman for President Donald Trump’s legal team, resigned on July 20, 2017 within two months of being on the job.
    – Sean Spicer, the embattled former White House press secretary, resigned on July 21 after telling Trump he vehemently disagreed with the selection of Anthony Scaramucci as White House communications director.
    – Micheal Short, the former White House press aide, resigned the same day as Spicer, after Scaramucci revealed plans to fire him.
    – Reince Priebus, the former White House chief-of-staff, resigned just six months into his tenure after a public feud with Anthony Scaramucci, the White House communications director.
    – Anthony Scaramucci, who “resigned” as the new White House Communications Director on July 31,2017 after just ten days on the job.

    But I’m sure NONE of them could’ve been leakers. Just Bannon. Because reasons.

Bannon had been doing some things that certainly seemed counterproductive and the leaks did slow when he left. There was another time when he pulled Trump into a photo with someone and Trump was very angry for putting him a position he should not have put him in. He apologized, but I remember thinking how odd that Bannon made that mistake.

I don’t know what he’s trying to do here. The timing of his accusation, just when the Russia story is being exposed in great detail, is very odd indeed.

Does he just hate those kids so much? Does he truly believe they need to be exposed? He better have more than just the meeting in Trump Tower. It is very strange!!

When did this guy interview Bannon? If it was right after the meeting with Fusion GPS was revealed, then wasn’t Bannon expressing due concern that this is how Mueller would get Trump?
This of course assumes the author isn’t just making stuff up. He seems to have a reputation for that already.

Also, the part about Breitbart publishing two articles without bylines is suspicious. As in the case of the two former Kelli Ward staffers who used to work at Breitbart, there seems to be a cabal of saboteurs who work there, including current employees.

Finally, I note that the GOPe hates Bannon because he has declared that he’ll primary their squishes in 2018. They have every incentive to lie about him to destroy his reputation.

Interesting how all the people piling on Bannon for his “quotes” don’t seem to consider the possibility of the whole book being a hit job on Trump/Bannon/the GOP. This whole kerfluffle has made everyone on the Trump team look foolish & inept. If indeed Bannon made those comments about Trump/Don Jr/etc he deserves all the venom he is getting but I want to feel that this is not just another piece of liberal trash designed to cause division.

RIP Rowdy Roddy Piper.

Bannon has always had differences of opinion with other WH personalities concerning what actions the POTUS should take to advance his agenda. There were well documented reports of clashes and general hard feelings between Bannon and Jared and Ivanka. And, it was widely rumored that Bannon was releasing information, which would provoke a negative reaction from those conservatives with whom he had influence, to pressure Trump to heed his advice. So, business as usual in most governments throughout history.

As to Bannon’s reported remarks in Wolff’s book, no supporting evidence, such as audio or video tapes, has been produced to substantiate Wollf’s account of Bannon’s statements or the contest in which they were made. And, if Trump’s agenda continues to advance as it has been, Bannon’s influence on Trump supporters will continue to wain. Bannono is neither a Kingmaker or a Kingbreaker.

So, if all this is accurate, it is still nothing more than a tempest in a teapot.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | January 3, 2018 at 10:40 pm

    Der Donald, Donald Jr., and the White House spokesholes all disagree.

    On every particular. Or did you miss that…???

    MIGHTY big “teapot”.

    Heh…!!!

      Matt_SE in reply to Ragspierre. | January 4, 2018 at 12:04 am

      Goddamn, you’re stupid.
      All that’s required for this to be a hoax is for Trump to have been fooled and tweet something out in haste. And that sounds JUST like something he’d do, doesn’t it?

      After that, the hoax has informal “confirmation” because someone with name recognition responded without checking the facts.

      But I guess some stories are too good to check, huh?

        Ragspierre in reply to Matt_SE. | January 4, 2018 at 9:38 am

        Well, no, I’m not stupid. I am better-formed that you, however.

        Der Donald didn’t “Tweet something out in haste.” At least for once. He managed to lay out a rather coherent press release, with some help, I’m sure.

        The Administration spokesholes ALSO had statements that, remarkably, were not contradictions or “explanations” of what Der Donald said.

        So, no, I’m not stupid and these stories are very likely vetted and verified.

        Your blind faith is noted, however. Your virtue has been signaled.

      I’m not clear on what you are saying, here. Want to elaborate?

      As to it being a tempest in a teapot, that is all that it is, even if Wolff reported Bannon’s words accurately. Bannon was not instrumental in getting Trump elected. And, as DJT does not have to seek reelection for three years and might not do so even then, he really does not need Bannon for that either.

      What people have to understand is that Bannon is an ideologue whose agenda is to destroy the Establishment at all costs. He saw, in Trump, a way for him to do that. Trump, on the other hand, is a pragmatist who only wants to achieve his agenda goals. He cares little for “destroying” the Establishment, unless it stands in the way of achieving his goals. And, that is the divide between Bannon and Trump. When Trump did not do things the way that Bannon wanted, then he began to attempt to apply pressure, through various means. And, that led to his being ousted from his position in the WH.

      What hurts Bannon’s credibility the most, is evidenced by his repeated public statements that the meeting between Don, jr and Russians at Trump Tower was in no way improper and especially not treasonous. To do a 180 on those statements, without any evidence being produced to support that reversal, one has to seriously quest the man’s veracity. He has, essentially impeached his own testimony, unless he can produce compelling evidence to support his reversal.

      So, much ado about nothing, in my opinion.

        Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | January 4, 2018 at 12:43 pm

        The entire administration disagrees.

        As do many people on the right side of the political spectrum. Including Bannonites.

          What are you talking about? The entire administration disagrees about WHAT, exactly?

          Mac45 in reply to Ragspierre. | January 4, 2018 at 1:03 pm

          If you were a single term President would you worry about Bannonites? So far, Bannon has only managed to get a Democrat elected as a Senator from Alabama, the first such in like FOREVER. How does that help the conservative and, especially, anti-Establishment cause? It is like helping the Germans invade London in WWII.

    Barry in reply to Mac45. | January 3, 2018 at 11:41 pm

    Bannon’s had all day to correct the record. I’ve seen nothing that suggest he has.

    Bannon can be useful, until he’s not. Making the comment he did was exceedingly stupid.

    As I said above, Bannon is for Bannon before anything else.

      Matt_SE in reply to Barry. | January 4, 2018 at 12:06 am

      Sorry, but I’m not in the mood for another Roy Moore smear repeat. Someone needs to get in contact with Bannon and confirm or deny the allegations. I won’t tolerate guilty until proven innocent tactics.

          This is nothing more than a means to learn exactly what Bannon said and, if possible, get him to publicly refute it. If the action proceeds, then Bannon could be deposed, under oath, to determine what he said. Any tape recordings of his statements to Wolff could be subpoenaed and examined. So, we would find out how accurate the reports currently existing are. At the very least, such an action , or threat of action, could get Bannon to publicly .explain his alleged statements.

          Also, as this is a commercial publication, not a news organ, 1st Amendment protections, which traditionally apply to the press, do not apply here.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 4, 2018 at 12:41 pm

          Wow. More than usually full of shit!

          Explain how the First Amendment does not cover books.

          ‘Cause…just damn…!!!

          The courts have decided that it does not. If it did, then there would be no actionable libel in this country. Anyone could say anything at any time in any way and it would be protected. But, this is not reality. Sorry.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 4, 2018 at 1:16 pm

          That’s clearly your bullshit. Cite to a case on point.

          In fact, it IS hard for a public figure to sue for defamation, and rightly so.

          Every news outlet is a nominally “commercial publication”. From what part of your ass did you pull that term?

          What the T-rumpian lawyer’s letter is is a bean-ball, thrown at the heads of all concerned. It’s purpose is to intimidate.

“All human evil comes from a single cause, man’s inability to sit still in a room.” — Blaise Pascal

Money, money, money

I wish more of our POTUS’s were as sharp as the Trumper. Feels comforting to have such men as Gorsuch, Mattis, Kelly, Tillerson etc in position to serve the country. Feels comforting to see ISIS smashed, manufacturing up, my taxes cut, stock market going through the roof taking my IRA with it. Best of all I don’t miss Obama running off to Europe and the Middle East telling all who would listen how bad the American people are. Another thing I loved was saying Merry Christmas everyone!

Given the Roy Moore fiasco, it certainly casts a large shadow over Bannon’s support of Trump during the election. Especially since we now know the Hillary campaign wanted Trump to win the nomination.

Gosh– can we see the unsupportable, fabricated statements from Trump toadies Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Stephanie Grisham in larger font. They have so much to prove with no direct knowledge of what really went on inside the Trump family.

Michael Wolff wrote a book about the happenings in the West Wing during Trump’s first year, publishing the comments and opinions of the presidential staff that spent much of its time tending to the authoritarian ramblings of an incompetent. What was really true lies only inside the minds of those talking to Wolff.

And what we know for sure is that Trump did not forbid Wolff from visiting the West Wing since he held a high-priority visitors pass. So we have another Trump lie to go along with the Sanders and Grisham fabrications.

Rumor has it that there are audio recordings to support the book. We shall see!

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend