Everything about that highly promoted New York Times “interview” with former Trump White House Chief of Staff John Kelly — , a general, if you have n’t heard! — , reeked of chicanery. However, the Times reporter’s phone conversation transcript, which was n’t made public until two days later, shows how artificial it really was.
The unique article was published on Tuesday and contained Kelly’s answers to questions that the writer, Michael Schmidt, was posing. It included a mix of music fragments and text rates. A sound picture with the title” Kelly on the Importance of Character Over Policy” was located at the very bottom.
” I’m not recommending something to anybody”, Kelly is heard telling Schmidt. ” I’m only saying — , another than, that when you’re looking to vote for one, independently, you’ve got to, you’ve got to look at the personality and all those kinds of things and then start looking at the animal’s policies”. ( It would be nice to live so comfortably that you can afford to vote primarily based on how much your life and that of your loved ones ‘ lives are literally impacted by someone’s choices. )
In Thursday’s version of the Times ‘” The Daily” audio, nevertheless, there’s a more prolonged version of that saving that accompanies Kelly’s remarks. In that variation, Schmidt says things first. Is there anything else we should discuss, or is that sufficient? he says to Kelly. ” I think it’s plenty”, Kelly replies. ” But like I said, Mike — , I’m not— , just to make it clear, I’m not recommending anything to anybody, I’m only saying — another than …”
For the interviewer to ask the area whether there’s anything more” we need to discuss about” or “is this much”? More so than a questioning meeting that Schmidt had been attempting to secure for four years ( as he said on the radio ), it sounds more like the pursuit of a common knowledge that their shared purpose was accomplished, the aim being a well-timed part full of socially offensive complaints about the president’s front-runner, Donald Trump.
I emailed Schmidt to see if he had any more remarks about the conversation between him and Kelly, but I was unsuccessful in reaching out to him.
Schmidt stated at the beginning of the podcast episode that he had been” trying to get John Kelly to speak and allow me to report it.” Because I think his tale is key to the Trump tale, I made an extraordinarily difficult effort to do this. It created the impression that Schmidt was only journalistically wondering as to what Kelly, as Trump’s longest-serving chief of staff, might have to say. However, the recording mentioned above suggests that there was something more certain that the couple was trying to accomplish.
Just two weeks before Election Day, voters were certain to receive a more precise beat part crammed with unwarranted accusations. Michael Schmidt and The New York Times both agreed to support the work.