Yes, it's a big deal that there was a meeting in the White House Situation Room to talk about keeping the lid on the Epstein Files.
And yes, it's just as big a deal that reporters were able to get details of that very secret discussion.
Nobody likes the secrecy - though governments do have to do some things out of sight of public scrutiny.
But we have the right to know what our government is up to in most cases, and when the government is actually plotting to go on breaking the law by not releasing the files, that's a big fuckin' deal.
I want answers, and I want heads on pikes at the city gate.
Top White House officials believe New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan obtained audio recordings of Situation Room meetings for their forthcoming book, "Regime Change."
Why it matters:
Such a taped leak would be a shocking breach of one of the most secure settings on Earth. Independent recording devices in the Situation Room are forbidden.
- "We're afraid some of our most sensitive conversations were being recorded," an administration source told us. "And we have no idea which ones."
The authors conducted more than 1,000 interviews for "Regime Change," which covers Trump's second term.
- Tellingly, White House officials haven't disputed verbatim dialogue from the top-secret Sit Room talks, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying about Bibi's regime-change scenarios for Iran: "In other words, it's bullshit."
- Haberman and Swan refused to comment.
Haberman and Swan didn't need audio recordings. Bob Woodward pioneered contemporary historical political journalism by including dialogue in his books that was reconstructed from the memories of people in the rooms where things happened.
The big picture:
The big picture:
Audio recordings or not, the speculation about them, and the extensive coverage of the book's juicy excerpts, mean more buzz, more book sales ... and the making of a classic.








