Trump insider sets off guessing game
President livid after bombshell from a ‘senior official’ claiming to be part of the ‘Resistance’
The New York Times set off an international guessing game by publishing an explosive opinion column — written by someone described only as “a senior official” in the Trump Administration.
It said that top government officials are actively working to “frustrate” US President Donald Trump’s agenda and “worst inclinations”.
“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,” wrote the unnamed author. “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 column drew immediate and extraordinary attention from the news media and a public rebuke from the President, who called it “gutless” during a ceremony at the White House and on Twitter. A statement from press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders called the column “just another example of the liberal media’s concerted effort to discredit the President”.
Trump later tweeted a one-word, allcaps reaction: “TREASON?” Trump questioned whether the official was a “phony source,” and wrote that if “the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!”
The White House has not denied that it was written by someone in his Administration.
It marked the second consecutive day in which Trump was on the defensive over a critical piece of writing. He spent part of Wednesday and yesterday on Twitter trashing a new book by author Bob Woodward, excerpts of which made claims similar to those made by the anonymous New York Times op-ed writer. The column — headlined “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration” — was unusual both because of its insider perspective and because the newspaper published it anonymously.
The article said, among other things, that there were “early whispers” among Cabinet officials of invoking the 25th Amendment, a complex, never-before-used process for removing a president because he is deemed impaired and unable to fulfill his duties.
The notion was rejected, wrote the author, because “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.” Newspapers, and the New York Times in particular, rarely allow people to write opinion pieces without attaching their names. The primary issue is transparency; readers are entitled to know who is opining, so that they can more fully judge the author’s motives, intentions and possible vested interests.
However, the New York Times has permitted it previously. It published a piece in June by a woman from El Salvador who recounted her treatment in US detention; she was granted anonymity because she and her family faced gang violence in her native country.
In an unsigned note attached to the column, the newspaper said it took “the rare step” of publishing the essay at the author’s request. It said his or her identity is known to the editors, but that the writer’s job would be jeopardised by its disclosure. “We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers.” New York Times editorial-page editor James Bennet declined to provide further information about the writer’s position or identity, but said the newspaper received the article before news about Woodward’s book broke. He said the newspaper “would not have been able to publish” the article if it had not granted anonymity to its author. “We thought it was an important perspective to get out. The writer believes in the President’s accomplishment but is very concerned about the President’s mercurial behaviour.”
The anonymous nature of the column is likely to intensify a persistent suspicion among Trump’s supporters — that a “deep state” within the federal government is actively working against him and his agenda. The column suggests that the notion isn’t entirely far-fetched.
“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,” the column said.
In a meeting with law enforcement officials, Trump said: “If I weren’t here, I believe the New York Times probably wouldn’t exist. And someday when [he’s out of office], the New York Times
and CNN will be out of business.”
The anonymous column immediately raised memories of “Deep Throat,” the high-ranking government source who helped Woodward in his reporting on President Nixon’s Watergate crimes in 1972 and 1973. Speculation about Deep Throat’s identity persisted for decades until Deep Throat himself — former FBI official Mark Felt — unmasked himself in an article in Vanity Fair in 2005.
A similar guessing game surrounded Primary Colours, a satirical novel based on Bill Clinton’s first presidential campaign. The Washington Post
cracked the riddle in 1996, identifying Newsweek and CBS commentator Joe Klein as the author.— Washington Post