>The New York Times is sitting on an audio recording that some of its staff believes could deal a serious blow to Donald Trump, who, in an off-the-record meeting with the newspaper, called into question whether he would stand by his own immigration views.
>Trump visited the paper’s Manhattan headquarters on Tuesday, Jan. 5, as part of a round of editorial board meetings that — as is traditional — the Democratic candidates for president and some of the Republicans attended. The meetings, conducted partly on the record and partly off the record in a 13th-floor conference room, give candidates a chance to make their pitch for the paper’s endorsement.
>After a dispute over Trump’s suggestion of tariffs on Chinese goods, the Times released a portion of the recording. But that was from the on-the-record part of the session.
>On Saturday, columnist Gail Collins, one of the attendees at the meeting (which also included editor-in-chief Dean Baquet), floated a bit of speculation in her column:
>The most optimistic analysis of Trump as a presidential candidate is that he just doesn’t believe in positions, except the ones you adopt for strategic purposes when you’re making a deal. So you obviously can’t explain how you’re going to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants, because it’s going to be the first bid in some future monster negotiation session.
>Sources familiar with the recording and transcript — which have reached near-mythical status at the Times — tell me that the second sentence is a bit more than speculation. It reflects, instead, something Trump said about the flexibility of his hardline anti-immigration stance.
Source: http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/trump-tape#.uoVMx1d6xq
Shocker. Who is /pol/ going to support now with the knowledge that their supposedly white nationalist hero is just a wolf in sheep's clothing?
Cruz and the New York Times are lying on the eve of Super Tuesday? Why are you surprised by this?
>>65780674
okay sure so why wont they just produce it then?
run it bitch
let me hear it.
>>65780954
The tape is background material; they need Trump's approval to release it.
Though stories are popping up all over regarding the existence of the tape that calls into question Trump's fidelity to his immigration rhetoric.
>>65780674
>new york times will not release tape even with trumps approval UNTIL OCTOBER
>absolute bullshit
>just another attempt at denting trumps campaign
>>65780674
The media has thrown everything at Trump including the kitchen sink, their last hope now is false rumors they could never back up.
>>65780674
>buzzfeed
>>65780674
>trump allegedly talked to the fucking NEW YORK TIMES saying he was lying about his stances
Wait, so you think the most demonized GOP candidate is going to disclose this sort of shit to one of the biggest and most notoriously liberal papers out there? You think he would honestly tell them he was lying about something so key to his campaign as his immigration stance.
Even if it were true that he is going to be softer than we think, why in god's cock would he tell the fucking NYT this info? This reeks of desperate bullshit that they're pulling the night before super tuesday just so they can hope to dissuade some last-minute voters before this bullshit can get fact-checked.
>>65782519
I don't even think trump is very credible but I have a VERY hard time believing he would state in front of the people who hate him most in the entire world, all his rivals for president, that the cornerstone of his campaign isn't anything more than a farce.
This sounds like bullshit
If they had a tape that could hurt hs campaign, it would already have been out there, and it would be played 24/7 by media.
Ted is torpedoing his own campaign to help the Waterfaggot.
>>65780674
Calling bullshit. Is this Ted Cruz posting? Why haven't you quit yet, Ratto?
>>65780674
>>Shocker. Who is /pol/ going to support now with the knowledge that their supposedly white nationalist hero is just a wolf in sheep's clothing?
I have some very bad news for you, this changes nothing for me even if it's true. Hilary Clinton, the likely Dem nominee, wants to "get tough" with Russia, a nation with thousands of nuclear missiles. Trump does not wish to do this, so therefore I will vote for the candidate that does not want the world to drown in blood.
>Trump wants to audit the fed
>Trump wants to release the redacted portion of the 9-11 report
Yeah, the elite is scared shitless and will do anything to stop him, including...
>there may be a recording that is damning...
I don't think this info is true, but I highly doubt he will be able to deport too many illegal immigrants. But hopefully for U.S people he will at least block them from entering
If this shit were real, that tape would have been bought, sold, leaked, and aired in a continuous loop on every media outlet right now.
It's completely fucking laughable the way MSM is throwing everything including the kitchen sink out there tonight. There's so much white noise at this point that I can't see how anyone is still listening.
ITT: idiots
trump knows he has little chance of successfully deporting 10+ million illegals. His statement that he will is his opening bid; he is asking for more than he expects to get. It's the most common negotiating tactic ever.
And fuck buzzfeed for thinking they have some "bombshell scoop". Trump has PUBLICLY discussed the above strategy as it relates to his stance on immigration. Modern yellow journalism at its finest.
>>65780674
Breaking news Bolsheviks control the media and Hillary Clinton
Trump has always said he makes strong opening bids. He's said that for 30 years since the Art of the Deal. No sane person thinks they will ever get 100% of what they are asking for.
>buzzfeed
lol
>>65780674
Cruz always.
>>65780674
>buzzfeed
>>65783492
I doubt that he says straight out "I'm lying to my supporters." It's probably more along the lines of a straightforward presentation of what he's already said in public, only broken up into different portions of a speech (or perhaps in different speeches altogether) and buried underneath prepared applause lines. That had he put them before the audience in sequence, and in clear statements, they'd shake their heads and say to themselves "this isn't what I came here for. This isn't what I want."
>Source: http://www.buzzfeed..
Why do you keep making these useless threads?
>>65780674
>buzzfeed
>>65784465
If the Democrats can get away with Obamacare and there executive actions, I don't see how he can't basically enforce laws that are already on the books. He doesn't need to pass anything to build a wall or deport. In fact he can use a legal executive order to do those things because they are already written, we just lack a president that wants to do those things for obvious reasons.
>>65780674
So their criticism is that he goes into the dealership asking for a 40k car for 5$ so he can eventually reach a base price?
That's how all deals are done (if you're not too much of a pussy to shift your weight behind trying to gain an advantage).
This is a Rato lie, just like the lie about Carson suspending his campaign.
Even if he is lying it would make him the same to all the other candidates in the race.
I would still support him for his gun laws and other policies
>>65780674
i'm pretty sure if you can get some recording between the Lobby groups and everybody running for Office besides TRUMP. you would find out everything needed to convict everyone of bribery
>>65784465
Hey there guy. A lot of us know this. He's still our guy.
>>65780674
The fact that they are not releasing it, and instead trumping up the speculation is because there's nothing there.
If it were truly damaging, it would have been released days ago so that the maximum number of people could hear about it. The most they could do with nothing is to hold out and try to seed doubt in people's minds.
This isn't a new tactic, and speaks to the establishment's desperation with the Trump phenomenon. I wonder what other 'surprises' are in store, should be a fun Super Tuesday.
>>65780674
Read the actual report. It basically says that Trump doesn't necessarily believe it is viable to deport 11+ million people. He took a hard line stance so that when it comes time to negotiate there can be a middle ground. Had he come out with the much more reasonable stance of deportations in addition to conditional amnesty with benchmarks for certain illegals in a negotiation with opponents who want blanket amnesty, there is no middle ground there. This is a classic negotiation strategy and if you understand Trump you would understand that most of the unreasonable shit he says is not what he actually believes, it's simply the exact opposite of what the opponent wants so that a reasonable middle ground can be agreed upon when negotiations start.
>>65780674
>off-the-record meeting
>Jew York Times makes a recording of it
jews
every
single
time
Ted Cruz, making shit up again? Damn.
>>65780674
Carlos Slim is an owner of the NYT.
This is standard business practice. I do it while selling cars on craigslist.
>list it for higher than you actually want
>buyer tries to lowball
>show what a reasonable guy I am and offer to meet in the middle at the price I actually wanted
>buyer walks away thinking they got a killer deal
>>65785120
Enforcing the laws that are already on the books means a lot of illegals will be deported. But not all of them.
Trump knows this, everyone knows this. Unless we want to go full gestapo (now, now, /pol/, calm down), there is simply no practical way to force every single immigrant that is here illegally to leave.
Trump is a negotiator, he is going to incentivize leaving, but kicking in doors in the middle of the and rounding up families and putting them on a bus just isn't going to happen.
>>65786167
So how this ends up is that Trump supporters will give their guy a mandate to essentially redo the gang of 8 deal. No mass deportation, but a path to citizenship for a good portion of illegals ("the good ones"), in exchange for a wall.
>>65787506
This.
>>65780954
They need his permission. That part of the convo was off-the-record
>>65789133
As if the Jews of the TImes care about the law, they would immediately gotcha Trump if they could.
>>65780674
>buzzfeed
>>65789318
>law
Not law. The NYT cannot do just dump what they have and expect anyone in the future to talk to them off-the-record.
How this will go down is that Trump keeps getting flak for the story, from other candidates and other news organizations, based on reports from elsewhere that the Times has info that conflicts with Trumps other statements on immigration until Trump releases the NYT from their agreement not to use the material.
