Yesterday the New York Times achieved another milestone in the decline of American Journalism and demonstrated how that paper has functioned as nothing more than the official communications organ of the Democratic Party.
The Times published an Op-Ed written by an individual whom we are told is a “senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure.”
The gravamen of the op-ed is that the writer and other officials in the Administration are baby sitting the president in order to insure that his impulsive behavior doesn’t cause harm to the Republic.
The tone of the article seems to reflect in general, the sentiments of the neverTrump faction of the Republican Party, who argued that Trump was unfit for the presidency due to his debauchery and refusal to embrace traditional conservative values.
The writer arrogantly implies that without his tutelage and guidance, the country would be in grave peril. He provides further clues as to his identity as a member of the neverTrump wing of the Republican Party, with his lavish praise for John McCain — perhaps the most stalwart of the anti-Trump Republications.
The author rejects his role as a member of the “Resistance”, instead characterizing his role and that of others similarly inclined as the “Resistance inside the Trump Administration.” Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept, calls the writer and his co-conspirators, White House ‘Coward’ Behind Anonymous Op-ed Part of ‘Unelected Cabal.’
The article gives us no clue as to the Administrative position of the writer. “Senior official”, could be any individual within the federal bureaucracy, including holdovers from the Obama administration.
While the writer credits the Trump Administration with notable accomplishments, his claim is undermined by his failure to identify the reasons for the successes.
“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.”
In spite of his vacuous assertion that the successes of Trump are purely accidental and not incidental to his serving as president, the writer offers no explanation or clues as to exactly who is responsible for Trump’s accomplishments. He and his fellow inside resistance guardians? Congress? He doesn’t say, perhaps because giving Trump credit would undermine his entire argument that the man is simply a reckless and unmoored figurehead, guided inadvertently by his watchdogs, who are indispensable for maintaining stability.
The article is rife with ironies, one of which is noted by Charles C.W. Cooke at National Review,
“That some people think that Trump is insane or unstable or unable to fulfill his duties in no way alters the fact that this, by the author’s own admission, is subversion. There are mechanisms in place to deal with an unfit president in the White House. This was not one of them.”
The obvious question for this anonymous author is that if Trump’s management style is so reckless and he believes that, “The root of the problem is the president’s amorality”, he should resign and comment in the public arena, rather than trying to undermine the goals of a duly elected president.