Anonymous White House official: I’m working to stop Trump’s agenda
By Bob Fredericks
September 5, 2018 | 5:08pm | Updated
Modal Trigger
Getty Images
SEE ALSO
Trump calls anonymous White House official's op-ed 'a disgrace'
A “senior” Team Trump official published an anonymous opinion column in the New York Times on Wednesday revealing the “quiet resistance” against the president inside the White House.
The tell-all claims there’s a “two-track presidency” in place, and that some of Trump’s aides “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,” the author wrote.
“We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.”
The column says that Trump’s “instability” led to “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 column carries the headline: “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration” — and the unknown author’s unflattering description of the White House under Trump in part mirrors the chaos depicted in Bob Woodward’s bombshell book “Fear: Trump in the White House,” which the president has called a work of fiction.
MORE ON:
DONALD TRUMP
White House aides on hunt for anonymous official who wrote op-ed piece
Bookies place odds on anonymous White House official
Trump demands NY Times reveal identity of anonymous official
'TREASON?': Trump responds to White House official's op-ed
“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 stunning piece began.
“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.”
But the column also says the job of reining in Trump can’t be accomplished by his inner circle alone.
“There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first,” it says.
“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.”
Amazingly, the official claimed that White House resisters want the administration to succeed.
“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,” the writer continued.
“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.
SEE ALSO
Aides took orders off Trump's desk to stop him from signing them: Woodward
“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 official then zooms in on what he or she perceives to be the president’s core problem.
“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,” the writer declared.
“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.”
Trump, according to the column, has little regard for US institutions and longstanding GOP policies.
“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,” the official said.
The administration has significant accomplishments under its belt — but they have little to do with Trump, according to the column.
“But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective,” the writer said.
“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.”
Trump, according to the column — and Woodward’s book — is an unhinged leader who can’t maintain focus on issues at hand.
“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,” the officials said.
SEE ALSO
Trump wants to 'change libel laws' in wake of Woodward book
“ ’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 column continued.
Trump, according to the column, likes autocrats like Vladimir Putin more than traditional US allies.
“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,” the writer said.
But other administration officials keep Trump’s preference for strongmen in check.
“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,” the column continued.
“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 official said.
“This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.”
The author also said: “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.”
The Times in a preface said it was 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,” the paper said.
“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.”
The White House issued a statement Wednesday in response, as did Trump.
“Someday when I’m not president — which hopefully will be in about 6 and half years from now — the New York Times and CNN and all of these phony media outlets will be out of business, folks,” Trump said, speaking to reporters in Washington.
“They’ll be out of business because they’ll be nothing to write and they’ll be nothing of interest,” he added. “They don’t like Donald Trump and I don’t like them because they’re very dishonest people. And remember this also about the New York Times: When I won, they were forced to apologize to their subscribers. They wrote a letter of apology. It was the first time anybody has ever done it because they covered the election incorrectly. So if the failing New York Times has an anonymous editorial — can you believe it, anonymous — meaning gutless, a gutless editorial.”
In a separate statement, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said: “Nearly 62 million people voted for President Donald J. Trump in 2016, earning him 306 Electoral College votes – versus 232 for his opponent. None of them voted for a gutless, anonymous source to the failing New York Times. We are disappointed, but not surprised, that the paper chose to publish this pathetic, reckless, and selfish op-ed. This is a new low for the so-called ‘paper of record,’ and it should issue an apology, just as it did after the election for its disastrous coverage of the Trump campaign. This is just another example of the liberal media’s concerted effort to discredit the President.”
Sanders added, “The individual behind this piece has chosen to deceive, rather than support, the duly elected President of the United States. He is not putting country first, but putting himself and his ego ahead of the will of the American people. This coward should do the right thing and resign.”
By Bob Fredericks
September 5, 2018 | 5:08pm | Updated
Modal Trigger
Getty Images
SEE ALSO
Trump calls anonymous White House official's op-ed 'a disgrace'
A “senior” Team Trump official published an anonymous opinion column in the New York Times on Wednesday revealing the “quiet resistance” against the president inside the White House.
The tell-all claims there’s a “two-track presidency” in place, and that some of Trump’s aides “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,” the author wrote.
“We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.”
The column says that Trump’s “instability” led to “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 column carries the headline: “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration” — and the unknown author’s unflattering description of the White House under Trump in part mirrors the chaos depicted in Bob Woodward’s bombshell book “Fear: Trump in the White House,” which the president has called a work of fiction.
MORE ON:
DONALD TRUMP
White House aides on hunt for anonymous official who wrote op-ed piece
Bookies place odds on anonymous White House official
Trump demands NY Times reveal identity of anonymous official
'TREASON?': Trump responds to White House official's op-ed
“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 stunning piece began.
“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.”
But the column also says the job of reining in Trump can’t be accomplished by his inner circle alone.
“There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first,” it says.
“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.”
Amazingly, the official claimed that White House resisters want the administration to succeed.
“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,” the writer continued.
“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.
SEE ALSO
Aides took orders off Trump's desk to stop him from signing them: Woodward
“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 official then zooms in on what he or she perceives to be the president’s core problem.
“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,” the writer declared.
“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.”
Trump, according to the column, has little regard for US institutions and longstanding GOP policies.
“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,” the official said.
The administration has significant accomplishments under its belt — but they have little to do with Trump, according to the column.
“But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective,” the writer said.
“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.”
Trump, according to the column — and Woodward’s book — is an unhinged leader who can’t maintain focus on issues at hand.
“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,” the officials said.
SEE ALSO
Trump wants to 'change libel laws' in wake of Woodward book
“ ’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 column continued.
Trump, according to the column, likes autocrats like Vladimir Putin more than traditional US allies.
“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,” the writer said.
But other administration officials keep Trump’s preference for strongmen in check.
“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,” the column continued.
“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 official said.
“This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.”
The author also said: “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.”
The Times in a preface said it was 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,” the paper said.
“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.”
The White House issued a statement Wednesday in response, as did Trump.
“Someday when I’m not president — which hopefully will be in about 6 and half years from now — the New York Times and CNN and all of these phony media outlets will be out of business, folks,” Trump said, speaking to reporters in Washington.
“They’ll be out of business because they’ll be nothing to write and they’ll be nothing of interest,” he added. “They don’t like Donald Trump and I don’t like them because they’re very dishonest people. And remember this also about the New York Times: When I won, they were forced to apologize to their subscribers. They wrote a letter of apology. It was the first time anybody has ever done it because they covered the election incorrectly. So if the failing New York Times has an anonymous editorial — can you believe it, anonymous — meaning gutless, a gutless editorial.”
In a separate statement, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said: “Nearly 62 million people voted for President Donald J. Trump in 2016, earning him 306 Electoral College votes – versus 232 for his opponent. None of them voted for a gutless, anonymous source to the failing New York Times. We are disappointed, but not surprised, that the paper chose to publish this pathetic, reckless, and selfish op-ed. This is a new low for the so-called ‘paper of record,’ and it should issue an apology, just as it did after the election for its disastrous coverage of the Trump campaign. This is just another example of the liberal media’s concerted effort to discredit the President.”
Sanders added, “The individual behind this piece has chosen to deceive, rather than support, the duly elected President of the United States. He is not putting country first, but putting himself and his ego ahead of the will of the American people. This coward should do the right thing and resign.”
