Thread: I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration

OP-ED Column: NYT

I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration

I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

Sept. 5, 2018

The Times today is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers. We invite you to submit a question about the essay or our vetting process here.

President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.

It’s not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump’s leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hellbent on his downfall.

The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

I would know. I am one of them.

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.

That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.

The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.

Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.

In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,” President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.

Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.

But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.

From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief’s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.

Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.

“There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.

The erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren’t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.

It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.

The result is a two-track presidency.

Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.

Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.

On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.

This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.

Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.

The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.

Senator John McCain put it best in his farewell letter. All Americans should heed his words and break free of the tribalism trap, with the high aim of uniting through our shared values and love of this great nation.

We may no longer have Senator McCain. But we will always have his example — a lodestar for restoring honor to public life and our national dialogue. Mr. Trump may fear such honorable men, but we should revere them.

There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first. But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans.

The writer is a senior official in the Trump administration.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/o...esistance.html

Oh my God, there's a loon loose in the Administration.

And we are supposed to take the word of the NYT that "Gutless", as President Trump has named him, is a "a senior official in the Trump administration." This practice of quoting "unknown" or "anonymous" sources needs to be ended. It allows them to make any allegation as fact without having to substantiate it.

Unfortunately I find a lot in this Op-Ed very believable. Furthermore, I seriously doubt the New York Times would risk their reputation, not to mention commit a criminal act, unless the individual who submitted the Op-Ed was fully vetted and his position in the White House verified.

A few of the things I find very believable:

- The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

- The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.

- But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.

- Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.

- “There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.

- Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.

- On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.

- The writer is a senior official in the Trump administration.

With the above noted, I'm making no excuses for the author of the Op-Ed. I do believe the identity of this person needs to be found and revealed because he is undermining the presidency and acting as a traitor to the man that hired him. The writer shows a dismal lack of integrity and represents the United States in a very poor light to the rest of the world!

There is no one in this government who has a better grasp on what needs to be done and how it should be done than Trump. Any egghead who thinks they've got a better grasp has a cracked shell and a dried up egg inside, as in useless.

Trump is right on Mueller.

Trump is right on North Korea.

Trump is right on Russia.

Trump is right on trade.

Trump is right on immigration.

The asshat who wrote this stupid article is an open borders, free trade, war hawk and needs the BOOT!!

Originally Posted by jtdc

And we are supposed to take the word of the NYT that "Gutless", as President Trump has named him, is a "a senior official in the Trump administration." This practice of quoting "unknown" or "anonymous" sources needs to be ended. It allows them to make any allegation as fact without having to substantiate it.

Exactly!! This could be a made up person for all we know. No one should be quoted as anonymous, unless they have the balls to use their name when saying it. The media can make up all kinds of lies and say that an anonymous person said it. The NYT should lose all credibility from now on for doing this, something so sneaky and conniving.

Originally Posted by MW

Unfortunately I find a lot in this Op-Ed very believable.

There are many things that we find "believable" that are false. That is why courts require an oath to the validity of testimony and evidence. We can get all sorts of lies from lawyers and many other when they are not under oath.

Originally Posted by MW

Furthermore, I seriously doubt the New York Times would risk their reputation, not to mention commit a criminal act, unless the individual who submitted the Op-Ed was fully vetted and his position in the White House verified.

I have seen misleading headlines and stories in the NYT, and have seen much evidence that they have implied a lie, if not out and out lied! AND I "BELIEVE" THEY LIED!

Originally Posted by MW

A few of the things I find very believable:

- The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

In business, a boss may hire and fire many before they have people, especially at the top, that they feel they can trust. Yet people like Michael Cohen were trusted for many years before it was revealed that he was corrupt. Taking over an organization as complicated as the Federal Government, where you did not hire most of the people running its departments until you have been in office for several years, can frustrate just about anybody. It is a matter of whether or not you can function despite such frustration. Thus far President Trump has show he is up to the task.

Originally Posted by MW

- The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.

As compared to who? Obama, Al Sharpton? The Bush's? Nancy Pelosi? Chuck Schumer? Al Gore? He is certainly not at the bottom of the pit of immorality in Washington!

Originally Posted by MW

- But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.

So you give credit to "Gutless" and his cohorts for the many successes of this Administration?

Originally Posted by MW

- Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.

- “There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.

And you find that he didn't stick with a bad idea, out of ego if nothing else, is a bad trait?

Originally Posted by MW

With the above noted, I'm making no excuses for the author of the Op-Ed. I do believe the identity of this person needs to be found and revealed because he is undermining the presidency and acting as a traitor to the man that hired him. The writer shows a dismal lack of integrity and represents the United States in a very poor light to the rest of the world!

Finally, a little bit of common sense. This "Gutless" boasts of undermining the President Of The United States Of America. At the very least he should be identified and terminated immediately. We have elected representatives in Congress to keep the President in line, above board. Some anonymous, unelected self appointed mole could do something truly damaging to the United States by his/her treacherous clandestine activities!

MW wrote:

Furthermore, I seriously doubt the New York Times would risk their reputation, not to mention commit a criminal act, unless the individual who submitted the Op-Ed was fully vetted and his position in the White House verified.

It was reported tonight that it was delivered to the NYT by an "intermediary" who told them who wrote it.

Everything in that letter is what's been reported or discussed in the media over the last 2 years by the Trump Haters. I think a woman wrote it. I think Meghan McCain wrote it and had someone deliver it. It was John McCain's last instruction. McCain had some hack in the administration somewhere, who let him use their name for the stunt on the basis their name would never be revealed. McCain's last bad joke on America and his last swipe at Trump.

That's my guess, and I'm sticking with it.

Originally Posted by Judy

That's my guess, and I'm sticking with it.

Ooh, conspiratorial!

Yes, very conspiratorial, but also, quite likely. Remember who the "intermediary" was who delivered the "dossier" to the FBI? Yep, John McCain. McCain has a "senior official" he was working with on that stunt, so he's just using that person's name. McCain is a free trader, free markets, free people (open borders) guy. No one admires or reveres John McCain more than John McCain so of course he had to have himself in his own letter. Look closely at the words chosen for the letter, all media words straight off of CNN, and of course, there is no bigger war hawk than McCain, so of course, he doesn't want peace with "Moscow", he wants punishment, he doesn't want peace with North Korea, he wants war or at least the chance of it. And there is no bigger self-egotist than Songbird McCain to think that sedition is "country first".