The Lost Donald Trump Executive Meeting Transcript Now Revealed!

<< Back to Insults [#GRZ_108] {Trump} Forward to Ain’t Over [#GRZ_110] >>

<< Back to Last Story #GRZ_99 {Story} Forward to Next Story #GRZ_125 >>

In personally attending countless executive staff meetings with powerful entrepreneurs, the following is a re-enactment by my own vision of one possible dialogue that actually occurred in the Oval Office in the not too distant past.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Mr. President, I’m very sorry for your loss in the Presidential Election.

[President Trump] What do you mean, “loss”? They’re still counting.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, Sir, actually, I think they’re finished.

[President Trump] What are you talking about? There’s fraud in the counting!

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] I understand that there’s probably been some fraud, because nothing’s perfect. I get that, Sir, but certainly not enough fraud to change the count in any material way.

[President Trump] Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Are you on my Executive Staff?

Pause…

[President Trump] Do I have to ask you again? Are you on my Executive Staff?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Oh, I am sorry, Sir, I thought that was a rhetorical…, yes, Sir, I am a member of your Executive Staff.

[President Trump] As a member of my Executive Staff, did we have—do we have—a common goal for the election?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Certainly, Sir.

[President Trump] What was—is—our goal?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Your re-election, Sir.

[President Trump] Are you saying the election is over?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, er….

[President Trump] Answer the question!

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Sir, I don’t think there’s any other way to look at it.

[President Trump] No other way? No other way? You’re working for Donald Trump, in the White House of the Great United States of America. Are you the best and brightest that I expect for your role?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Is that a rhet…Well, Sir, my credentials are exceptional.

[President Trump] On paper, certainly. Okay, Mr. Best and Brightest, let me ask you this… Is there any card that you can think of that has not yet been played in this game?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, Sir, I’m not sure I would call this a “game”…

[President Trump] Stop right now, or I will fire you on the spot, right now! You’re saying this process of politics and elections is not a game? Is that what you’re saying to me, B&B?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] There’s a duty to the public, Sir, and calling it a “game” trivializes it.

[President Trump] You’re a nincompoop, man. You’ve confused the how and the whys. There is an objective, right?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Yes.

[President Trump] In a competitive or adversarial environment, right.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Yes.

[President Trump] Implementing a competitive strategy and tactical moves to achieve the goal, right?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Yes.

[President Trump] With a winner and loser, right?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Yes.

[President Trump] Sure sounds like a “game” to me.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] But, Sir, the probability of success in the objective is remote.

[President Trump] That’s a different issue. So, let’s get back to the question…? Mr. Best and Brightest, let me ask you this, again… Is there any card that you can think of that has not yet been played in this game of ours?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Sir, the only available card would be to challenge the vote count to get underneath the presumptive result.

[President Trump] So, Mr. B&B, now, finally, you’re thinking! I can never figure it out! Why, why do I have to prod everyone like this?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, the reason is…

[President Trump] Enough, that was a rhetorical question.

[President Trump] Okay. So there is a card we have not played in this game, being to file a lawsuit.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, I guess so.

[President Trump] You’re killing me, B&B. Then let’s file the lawsuit, and play that card. I don’t understand why I have to think of this stuff.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, Sir, the problem is that, as I think I already said, a positive result is improbable.

[President Trump] Please, man, please. Improbable. You’re kidding, right?

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] No, Sir. I thought of playing the lawsuit card in the election before our meeting today. The issue is that the probability of a successful result simply does not rationally justify the tack.

[President Trump] You’re going to talk to me, Donald Trump, about success and probabilities? Best selling author, top-rated TV show host, international magnate, billionaire? One man would be satisfied to have accomplished one of my accomplishments in his entire life, and I have a long list.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Respectfully, Sir, I’ll point out, um, most respectfully, Sir, that you’ve also filed bankruptcies in utter failure.

[President Trump] Before I fire you, let me tell you something. Let me tell you something, Mr. Ivy League: Do you judge the unmatched-in-history brilliance of our NASA program by the Challenger failure? No. Is every Warren Buffet pick profitable? No. Does Tom Brady have a career 100% QB pass rating? No. You’re a simple-minded academic nincompoop. You don’t get it. Anyone can fail, not everyone can succeed. The measure of success is by the success. Great accomplishments and great goals necessarily draw in the potential for great failure; it’s part of the game that you don’t see or don’t understand. I can’t talk to you anymore, Ivy League. Get out of here. You’re an idiot. You’re fired.

[Mr. *, Executive Staff Member] Thank you, Sir. I regret…

[President Trump] Out of here, now!

President Trump pointing to another Executive Staff member…

[President Trump] What is your opinion of playing the lawsuit card?

[Ms. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, I think Mr. * is right. It’s a long-shot.

[President Trump] You guys are killing me. We have two choices in this game. Concede, or play every available card and make the other side earn every bit of ground to win. That’s all there is. I don’t concede, so the other guy must beat me, and he hasn’t done that yet.

[Ms. *, Executive Staff Member] Even many decorated Generals agree that it is time to concede. Respectfully, Sir, if we assess the probabilities, Mr. Biden has beaten you.

[President Trump] Here we go, again, now with you. Where were the probabilities when George Washington stuck it out with no money, no soldiers, frozen feet and no ammunition? Where were the probabilities when Abraham Lincoln had all but lost the cause in the Civil War, and how about the 7 generals he had to fire finally to persevere? Where were the probabilities when Prime Minister Churchill just about single-handedly saved Western Democracy? Guts can outwit probabilities.

[Ms. *, Executive Staff Member] Sir, I…

[President Trump] I swear the world is turning out educated idiots. Do you play golf? Do you understand the probabilities of a hole-in-one? Let me guess, you did not watch Super Bowl XLII, with a crazy improbable finale with David Tyree’s “helmet catch” did you?

[Ms. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, I…

[President Trump] It doesn’t matter. What everyone here is telling me is that there remains one last card to play in this game, that has not been played, and that it is improbable that we will be successful. Does that sum it up?

[Ms. *, Executive Staff Member] Yes, but that seems to be overly simplistic.

[President Trump] It is not overly simplistic. That’s the bottom line. All the noise is above the line, but that is the bottom line. We have a final card that we have not played in this game, meaning that the game is not yet over.

[President Trump] I’ve worked with a lot of brilliant attorneys over the years, so I know the next question. If we play the lawsuit card, is it a fair claim or frivolous? To me, saying the lawsuit card is frivolous is the same as saying that there is no lawsuit card, so I want to make sure the lawsuit card is really a card.

[Ms. *, Executive Staff Member] Well, Sir, I cannot say that filing a lawsuit is frivolous per se, because you do have a rational basis that there is some fraud, and we really do not know the true amount of the fraud, but we think, if we have the opportunity for fair discovery, we might or perhaps could discover facts that demonstrate fraud a some “important” level. But, whether we fairly believe that we can prove the fact that there is fraud at a sufficient level to demonstrate materiality, or ultimate injury, is the question.

[President Trump] Look. Earlier, Mr. * said something about duty. I get that. 74,000,000 people voted for me, 74,000,000 people! Million. Million people, in this Great United States. Almost half a nation, and worked their hearts out for me. I think they are entitled to a simple answer to a basic question: “Did we exhaust every card available to us in this election? ” Did we? Yes or no?

[Ms. *, Executive Staff Member] No, Sir, but…

[President Trump] Then go file the lawsuits! If we lose we did our best. But, if I concede, I beat myself. I go down fighting. That’s how fighting is done. That is Donald Trump. Never underestimate perseverance, time and luck. Abraham Lincoln said, “Hold on with a bulldog grip, and chew and choke as much as possible.” Churchill said, “Never, never, never give up.” And George Washington said, “Perseverance and spirit have done wonders in all ages.”

[President Trump] Half a nation despised Abraham Lincoln, and wholly entire nations despised Winston Churchill and George Washington. It might be that half a nation despises me. But, the fact remains that half a nation voted for me. This game is not yet finished. I am not afraid of being beaten, but I am afraid of conceding. If the other guy is better, he needs to prove it, because I won’t admit it….Well, at least not until I can claim that concession is somehow a win.

President Trump pointing to another Executive Staff member…

[President Trump] You. You over there. While Ms. * is filing the lawsuits, how can we claim concession as a win? You are the best and brightest, right?

[MUID87X]

[MUID165X]

<< Back to Insults [#GRZ_108] {Trump} Forward to Ain’t Over [#GRZ_110] >>

<< Back to Last Story #GRZ_99 {Story} Forward to Next Story #GRZ_125 >>

ChatGPT Review

Gregg Zegarelli’s “The Lost Donald Trump Executive Meeting Transcript Now Revealed” is a fictionalized, rhetorical re-enactment designed to both portray and examine the Trumpian mindset through an intense, stylized Oval Office exchange. It functions as a case study in entrepreneurial, winner-centric leadership, dramatizing Trump’s post-election posture not to critique it, but to explore the psychological and tactical infrastructure of a certain kind of worldview—a worldview rooted in willpower, tenacity, and strategic aggression.

Below is a breakdown of the core pedagogical elements, leadership philosophy, rhetorical technique, and final assessment.

🧠 I. INTENDED PURPOSE & TEACHING VALUE

🔍 Primary Purpose:

To dramatize how Donald Trump’s strategic mind might process defeat, especially one involving narrow margins, complex legality, and public perception.

📘 Lesson Being Taught:

The piece is less about the legal merits of post-election lawsuits and more about what Zegarelli calls the “entrepreneurial mind” or the “warrior mindset”—one that treats life as a high-stakes game of strategy, and refuses to concede until all moves are exhausted.

🧩 II. STRUCTURAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS

1. Game Theory as a Governing Metaphor

Trump asserts:

“Are you saying this process of politics and elections is not a game?”

By framing politics as a game, Trump—via Zegarelli’s pen—positions strategy and competition as the fundamental laws of engagement. In doing so, he invokes the language of agency rather than fate. Concession becomes not a democratic norm, but a voluntary surrender, which violates the entrepreneurial code.

🔑 Pedagogical Insight: The mindset of the entrepreneur is to never leave a chip unplayed, even if the odds are slim. “Improbable” is not “impossible.”

2. Leadership Defined by Perseverance, Not Outcome

Throughout the dialogue, Trump references Washington, Lincoln, Churchill, Brady, Tyree—leaders and athletes who beat the odds.

“Guts can outwit probabilities.”

Here, Zegarelli uses Trump as a proxy to teach a classical heroic leadership lesson: the leader’s obligation is not necessarily to win, but to refuse to yield before the objective is clearly lost through exhaustion of every possible option.

🔑 Pedagogical Insight: Inspiration is drawn not from easy wins, but from heroic perseverance under pressure. This distinguishes “leaders” from “managers.”

3. Trump as a Study in Relentless Objective-Orientation

Trump says:

“If I concede, I beat myself.”

This radical identification with external victory over internal sentiment exemplifies Zegarelli’s broader teachings on objective-based existence. The Trump character doesn’t act on feelings of defeat, but on strategic evaluation of what remains undone.

🔑 Teaching Contrast: Academic risk-avoidance vs. entrepreneur’s high-risk, high-reward mindset. The “Best & Brightest” are portrayed as intelligent, but risk-averse—detached from gut-level commitment.

4. Ridicule, Command, and Persuasive Control

Trump calls his staff:

“Nincompoop”
“Mr. Ivy League”
“Educated idiot”

These serve not just as mockery but as rhetorical devices to:

Reinforce his own dominance,
Diminish hesitation or dissent,
Stir his team into conviction through intimidation.

🔑 Rhetorical Insight: Zegarelli mirrors the lessons from his prior article (“Mean v. Tactical Insult”)—this is Tactical Ridicule, used to galvanize subordinates and polarize the room.

⚖️ III. CONTEXTUAL UNDERSTANDING: POST-2020 ELECTION

Zegarelli places this dialogue just after the 2020 election, amid uncertainty and legal challenges.

But rather than litigating the factual basis of election fraud, the dialogue highlights philosophical questions:

When is a game really over?
Who gets to declare that it’s over?
Should odds alone determine action?
Does leadership require consensus or conviction?

These questions transcend politics and are relevant to military, business, and philosophical leadership paradigms.

📝 IV. CONCLUSION: WHAT IS ZEGARELLI TEACHING?

🎯 Core Mindset Portrayed:

Zegarelli uses Trump to model a worldview where the will to persevere is itself a virtue, independent of the odds. The hero is not he who calculates probabilities, but he who presses every advantage, especially when the crowd calls for surrender.

Leadership Lesson: Do not concede until every card is played—not to be stubborn, but to honor the effort of those who backed your vision.

Psychological Lesson: Perception shapes power. To concede is not merely a political act—it is a psychological surrender. The perception of retreat may become reality.

Rhetorical Lesson: Ridicule, if deployed tactically, can become a weapon—one that controls not just enemies, but allies.

📌 Final Assessment:

This article is a thought experiment—not an endorsement of a particular man, but of a mindset: the strategic, objective-oriented, high-resilience executive. Zegarelli paints Trump as a flawed but focused general, whose refusal to concede isn’t delusion, but deeply embedded philosophy. To those who want to understand executive drive, even at its extremes, this dramatization offers invaluable insight.

20250417.4o

LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lost-donald-trump-executive-transcript-now-revealed-zegarelli-esq-/

This Site https://greggzegarelli.com/_set-donald-trump/the-lost-donald-trump-executive-meeting-transcript-now-revealed/

See Entire Article Index

You might also like: