At this moment, CNN is orgasmic over the New York Times’s claim that President Trump “tried to fire Robert Mueller.” This is the headline in the online edition of the Times:
That headline is simply false. Trump didn’t order Mueller’s firing; if he had, Mueller would be fired. A truthful headline would say that Trump considered firing Mueller; or wanted to fire Mueller; or wished he could fire Mueller. All of which, in my opinion, would do credit to Trump, since Mueller deserves to be fired for exceeding his mandate by pursuing criminal charges against people loosely associated with Trump that have absolutely nothing to do with alleged Russian involvement in the 2016 election. I think Trump is right when he says that the Mueller investigation is a witch hunt, and we can be pretty sure there aren’t any witches–if there were any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, it would have been leaked long ago.
My only other comment on the Times story is that it is based on four–count ’em, four!–anonymous sources. As though that gives the story credibility. It would be interesting to recreate the A section of the Times or the Washington Post, only deleting all “news” stories that are based on anonymous sources. Would there be anything left, or would we be looking at a sea of white paper?