The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet.

 

Beck Dorey-Stein, former White House stenographer under Presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama, penned a blistering op-ed for the New York Times in which he took aim directly at the current president for his incessant dishonesty.

“This was my first transition, but my boss had said every new administration she’d worked in since the 1980s was grateful for our help,” she explained of the transition from Obama to Trump.

But Trump’s real feelings about the stenographers became quickly apparent.

“We have a problem,” her colleague reportedly announced the Monday after the president’s inauguration.

Then deputy press secretary Stephanie Grisham told Dorey-Stein’s colleague that they “wouldn’t be needed often” and should keep the microphones away from the president’s face.

Dorey-Stein also recounted a situation in which Bill O’Reilly was invited into the Oval Office during working hours with no one to document the discussion:

Weeks later, when I recorded the president’s interview with Bill O’Reilly, I watched with disbelief as the White House communications director Hope Hicks summoned Mr. O’Reilly to the Oval Office so he could speak with Mr. Trump privately. In my five years with President Barack Obama, off-the-record discussions with reporters happened after work hours — not for an hour in the middle of the work day, and certainly not before an interview.

“It’s clear that White House stenographers do not serve his administration, but rather his adversary: the truth,” Dorey-Stein wrote.

“I quit because I couldn’t be proud of where I worked anymore,” she later told CNN. “I felt like President Trump was lying to the American people … he wasn’t even going the extra mile to have the stenographers in the room”

Chris Sosa is the Senior Editor at AlterNet. His work also appears in Mic, Salon, Care2, Huffington Post and other publications. Follow him on Twitter @ChrisSosa.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

U.S. SUPREME COURT

YouTube Screenshot

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade, ending the constitutional right to an abortion after almost 50 years, some conservatives and mainstream media outlets have suggested that anti-abortionists may be willing to support more generous family welfare programs to offset the financial burden of forced birth. These suggestions, whether made in bad faith or ignorance, completely misunderstand the social function of prohibiting abortion, which is to exert control over women and all people who can get pregnant.

In adopting or replicating the right’s framing of anti-abortionists as “pro-life,” these outlets mystify the conservative movement’s history and current goals. Conservatives have sought to dismantle the United State’s limited safety net since the passage of the New Deal. Expecting the movement to reverse course now is absurd, and suggesting so serves primarily to obfuscate the economic hardship the end of Roe will inflict on people forced to carry a pregnancy to term.

Keep reading... Show less

Arizona Republican Senate candidate Blake Masters

YouTube Screenshot

Donald Trump's hand-picked candidate Blake Masters is the latest to endorse the unpopular idea.

The front-runner in the GOP primary to run for Senate in Arizona in November against Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Kelly suggested on June 23 that Social Security should be privatized, an approach to the popular government program that experts say could jeopardize a vital financial lifeline for retired Americans.

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}