Senior Trump official describes resistance inside administration - NYT Op-Ed

[webfact]

Senior Trump official describes resistance inside administration - NYT Op-Ed

 

U.S. President Donald Trump holds a meeting with Republican House and Senate leadership in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. Sept. 5, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Many senior officials in the Trump administration have been working from within to frustrate parts of the president's agenda to protect the country from his worst inclinations, an anonymous Trump official wrote in a column published by the New York Times on Wednesday.

 

In the piece, the official described "early whispers" among members of President Donald Trump's Cabinet to take steps to remove him as president, but added they decided against it to avoid a constitutional crisis.

 

The Times took what it called the rare step of publishing an opinion column by the official under an agreement to keep the author's name secret. It said the senior administration's official's job would be jeopardized by its disclosure.

 

Asked about the column during a White House event, Trump called it a "gutless editorial," bashed the New York Times as "failing," and ticked off economic achievements that he said were proof of his leadership. Staring into the cameras, he said: "Nobody is going to come close to beating me in 2020 because of what we've done."

 

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders issued a statement calling the author a coward and demanding the person resign.

 

The opinion piece followed publication on Tuesday of the first excerpts from a damaging book by Bob Woodward of the Washington Post describing chaos in the White House.

 

"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 official wrote in the Times piece.

 

Under the 25th Amendment, adopted in 1967, the vice president and a majority of either Cabinet officials or "such other body as Congress may by law provide" may declare in writing that the president "is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office."

 

It has never been used to strip a president from power and it would be a complicated process.

 

"We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous," the writer said. "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," the author wrote.

 

(Reporting by Steve Holland and Jeff Mason; Editing by Howard Goller)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-09-06

[pegman]

Kelly Ann Conway

[Jingthing]

Here is the op-ed:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/trump-white-house-anonymous-resistance.html
 

Quote

 

I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration
...

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.

 

 

Here is it's response --

 

[SheungWan]

Dr Hunter S Thompson said of Nixon 'He never let me down' And for sheer entertainment value neither is Trump.

[Samui Bodoh]

"...Many senior officials in the Trump administration have been working from within to frustrate parts of the president's agenda to protect the country from his worst inclinations, an anonymous Trump official wrote in a column published by the New York Times on Wednesday..."

 

Few people are more critical of the Trump administration in general and Trump himself in particular than I, but this story gives me the willies. It is scary as hell for someone to sit within an administration showing one public face while secretly showing a different one in private; the arrogance and deceit are truly frightening.

 

Like it or not (and I REALLY don't like it), Trump was elected by the American people (more than 60 million votes), and I have yet to see proper, unequivocal evidence that the election wasn't 'free and fair'. 

 

If this secret 'resister' truly feels that his or her actions are really necessary to stop Trump and protect the country, then they should stand up and say so publicly.

 

Allowing/tolerating people to execute their own agenda secretly might sound good to people (like me) who think Trump is a dangerous menace, but what would have been your reaction if there was a similar column when Obama was President? Would you have been okay with that? I would not have been okay with it. Period.

 

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

 

 

Edited September 5, 2018 by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

[SheungWan]

1 minute ago, Samui Bodoh said:

"...Many senior officials in the Trump administration have been working from within to frustrate parts of the president's agenda to protect the country from his worst inclinations, an anonymous Trump official wrote in a column published by the New York Times on Wednesday..."

 

Few people are more critical of the Trump administration in general and Trump himself in particular than I, but this story gives me the willies.It is scary as hell for someone to sit within an administration showing one public face while secretly showing a different one in private; the arrogance and deceit are truly frightening.

Like it or not (and I REALLY don't like it), Trump was elected by the American people (more than 60 million votes), and I have yet to see proper, unequivocal evidence that the election wasn't 'free and fair'. 

If this secret 'resister' truly feels that his or her actions are really necessary to stop Trump and protect the country, then they should stand up and say so publicly.

Allowing/tolerating people to execute their own agenda secretly might sound good to people (like me) who think Trump is a dangerous menace, but what would have been your reaction if there was a similar column when Obama was President?

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

A Captain Queeg question!

[sirineou]

12 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

If this secret 'resister' truly feels that his or her actions are really necessary to stop Trump and protect the country, then they should stand up and say so publicly.

 because She/He:"truly  believes his or hers actions are are necessary to stop Trump"

[stevenl]

19 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

"...Many senior officials in the Trump administration have been working from within to frustrate parts of the president's agenda to protect the country from his worst inclinations, an anonymous Trump official wrote in a column published by the New York Times on Wednesday..."

 

Few people are more critical of the Trump administration in general and Trump himself in particular than I, but this story gives me the willies. It is scary as hell for someone to sit within an administration showing one public face while secretly showing a different one in private; the arrogance and deceit are truly frightening.

 

Like it or not (and I REALLY don't like it), Trump was elected by the American people (more than 60 million votes), and I have yet to see proper, unequivocal evidence that the election wasn't 'free and fair'. 

 

If this secret 'resister' truly feels that his or her actions are really necessary to stop Trump and protect the country, then they should stand up and say so publicly.

 

Allowing/tolerating people to execute their own agenda secretly might sound good to people (like me) who think Trump is a dangerous menace, but what would have been your reaction if there was a similar column when Obama was President? Would you have been okay with that? I would not have been okay with it. Period.

 

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

 

 

Trump " is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. ", Obama was able.

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

"...Many senior officials in the Trump administration have been working from within to frustrate parts of the president's agenda to protect the country from his worst inclinations, an anonymous Trump official wrote in a column published by the New York Times on Wednesday..."

 

Few people are more critical of the Trump administration in general and Trump himself in particular than I, but this story gives me the willies. It is scary as hell for someone to sit within an administration showing one public face while secretly showing a different one in private; the arrogance and deceit are truly frightening.

 

Like it or not (and I REALLY don't like it), Trump was elected by the American people (more than 60 million votes), and I have yet to see proper, unequivocal evidence that the election wasn't 'free and fair'. 

 

If this secret 'resister' truly feels that his or her actions are really necessary to stop Trump and protect the country, then they should stand up and say so publicly.

 

Allowing/tolerating people to execute their own agenda secretly might sound good to people (like me) who think Trump is a dangerous menace, but what would have been your reaction if there was a similar column when Obama was President? Would you have been okay with that? I would not have been okay with it. Period.

 

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

 

 

The sunshine is coming.

 

But I think you underestimate what it takes to openly oppose a tyrant, and Trump is every bit a tyrant.

 

I’ve seen, and I’m sure many of us have seen, people buckle under the threat of losing their pay check when faced with abusive managers in the work place.

 

Imagine now facing up to Trump holding the most powerful office on the planet.

 

What frightens me is hearing the discussion of enacting the 25th but this not happening for fear of a constitutional crisis.

 

So let’s leave a psychotic malignant narcissist in the Oval Office - that’s terrifying, more so that the whole oh the Republican administration knows but refuses to act.

[Chomper Higgot]

20 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

A Captain Queeg question!

Precisely this.

[Proboscis]

Just now, SheungWan said:

Dr Hunter S Thompson said of Nixon 'He never let me down' And for sheer entertainment value neither is Trump.

But while Clown Trump is keeping the masses entertained, a large number of changes are being made to the institutions of the country, including the rights of citizens, the powers of corporations and the lack of investment in infrastructure that will have to be paid sometime when the bridges fail and the highways become impassible or have to have very low speed limits because of surface conditions.

[mtls2005]

49 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

A Captain Queeg question!

 

 

The strawberries went missing on day one.

 

This editorial will only fuel his already raging paranoia.

 

His bizarre, rambling, ranting "response" to this editorial, during an event (Sheriffs) at the White House for which he was 30 minutes late, was alarming. If anything, this "performance" only reinforces the 'meat' of the editorial.

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by mtls2005

[mtls2005]

These paragraphs, from the editorial, caught my eye...let this sink in.

 

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.

 

 

[ThreeEyedRaven]

This really is a terrible, though totally predictable situation. Those with cognitive thought have long known that Trump was unstable and not fit for the position. It is tragic, that they are so caught up in politics that no one has the guts to stand up and do what is right by getting rid of him. He is bad for America and bad for the world.

[neeray]

1 hour ago, pegman said:

Kelly Ann Conway

I can't for a second fathom Kelly Ann Conway being the writer of the anonymous opinion column and to be party to, or head of, the resistance movement (to protect the country). Not unless of course, her husband has successfully swayed her. Although having always viewed Conway as one of great intelligence and skill, even though she has defended the indefensible Trump, maybe you are right !!!

[mtls2005]

3 minutes ago, neeray said:

I can't for a second fathom Kelly Ann Conway being the writer of the anonymous opinion column and to be party to, or head of, the resistance movement (to protect the country). Not unless of course, her husband has successfully swayed her. Although having always viewed Conway as one of great intelligence and skill, even though she has defended the indefensible Trump, maybe you are right !!!

 

It doesn't "sound" like her. Maybe her husband wrote it for her?

 

People's writing skills often eventually reveal the author. Joe Klein was, I think, discovered rather than revealed, in this manner as the author of True Colors.

 

 

[neeray]

26 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

It doesn't "sound" like her. Maybe her husband wrote it for her?

 

People's writing skills often eventually reveal the author. Joe Klein was, I think, discovered rather than revealed, in this manner as the author of True Colors.

 

 

Good point. The thought had occurred to me that this person could easily be identified by their writing style, thus, being a good subversive, they probably had it authored (or at least edited) by a shadow writer. Trump would know all about this type of subversive activity and will probably accuse sooner or later. For greater knowledge, he can always consult Vlad (for obvious reasons,can't consult his own FBI though).

As I recall, Theodore John Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber was identified via his writing style, by his own brother. Bro alerted the FBI after reading the published manifestos.

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

These paragraphs, from the editorial, caught my eye...let this sink in.

 

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.

 

 

 

must be quite interesting to work in the WH, never a dull day at the office

 

could maybe grow some strawberries on the WH lawn, may his lass has green fingers

 

[klauskunkel]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Many senior officials in the Trump administration have been working from within to frustrate parts of the president's agenda to protect the country from his worst inclinations

That's got to be a 24 hour job

[Berkshire]

2 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

If this secret 'resister' truly feels that his or her actions are really necessary to stop Trump and protect the country, then they should stand up and say so publicly.

 

If he/she stood up publicly, he/she would be gone in a nanosecond.  And the person would not only end up in a trash heap of "conscientious objectors" that no one remembers, but he/she would no longer be in a position to stop Trump.  And they would be mercilessly trolled by Trump crazies.  Keep in mind, this has already happened.  The ethics guy, scientists in the EPA, State Dept officials, DHS officials, and countless other personnel fed-up with Trump have left.  Some made statements, some did not.  Remember them?  Of course not.  

 

Let's say this person is Mattis.  Would Mattis be able to stop Trump more effectively as SECDEF, or as the former SECDEF? 

 

This anonymous person believes that he/she can still work for America, not Trump.  I applaud this individual. 

[Spidey]

2 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Like it or not (and I REALLY don't like it), Trump was elected by the American people (more than 60 million votes), and I have yet to see proper, unequivocal evidence that the election wasn't 'free and fair'. 

There's unequivocal evidence that Hillary got more votes than Trump.

[mtls2005]

17 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

And the person would not only end up in a trash heap of "conscientious objectors" that no one remembers,

 

 

We like to think that we appreciate whistle-blowers, but in Reality we do not; the "laws" protecting them are useless, and most end up in prison.

 

 

One would have thought that we'd appreciate hearing about how Russians hacked state voting machines, but evidently not?

 

One would have thought we'd appreciated hearing about Iraq war crimes. Survey says, "No".

 

Daniel Ellsberg is about the only whistle-blower I remember who escaped incarceration, and that was a close call.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by mtls2005

[Spidey]

3 hours ago, pegman said:

Kelly Ann Conway

Can't be anyone else. She's the absolute epitome of a dumb blonde. Makes Marylin Munroe look like a brain surgeon.

[wayned]

John Kelly due to the language!  "off the rails" and terms that indicate military experience.

[Samui Bodoh]

27 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

If he/she stood up publicly, he/she would be gone in a nanosecond.  And the person would not only end up in a trash heap of "conscientious objectors" that no one remembers, but he/she would no longer be in a position to stop Trump.  And they would be mercilessly trolled by Trump crazies.  Keep in mind, this has already happened.  The ethics guy, scientists in the EPA, State Dept officials, DHS officials, and countless other personnel fed-up with Trump have left.  Some made statements, some did not.  Remember them?  Of course not.  

 

Let's say this person is Mattis.  Would Mattis be able to stop Trump more effectively as SECDEF, or as the former SECDEF? 

 

This anonymous person believes that he/she can still work for America, not Trump.  I applaud this individual. 

You make some valid points, but I don't believe that it is that clear cut.

 

If s/he stood up and spoke publicly, she'd be gone in a nanosecond. Perhaps. On the other hand, if s/he stood up and spoke at a Congressional hearing (a la John Dean), it may well instigate serious consideration of the problem (or, the Repubs might continue to cower like twelve year old girls at the sight of a spider).

 

Again, you make a valid point of past officials. However, what if Gary Cohen spoke up? It is hard to silence the former head of Goldman Sachs. What if H.R. McMaster spoke up? He was one of the most respected Generals in the US? These are very public, very serious people. Where the hell are they?

 

My biggest concern with your post is the idea that nothing would be done about this; the status quo is not a serious, long-term option for the future of the US. Do you think Trump will sit back and NOT search for this person? That there will not be a government-wide hunt? That people will simply say "oh, that was interesting!". Trump's term has another 2 years; if you believe that the problem is so serious that it justifies an anonymous editorial, do you not think it needs some kind of resolution?

 

Trump is President for another 2 years, possibly 6.

 

Are you seriously advocating a solution of having underlings secretly sabotage (in a good way!) his actions for all that time? That will not happen.

 

The proverbial cat is out of the bag; it will not go back in again.

 

If the author of the editorial sincerely cares and believes what they wrote, they need to speak up. If not, they are cowards who do not have the courage of their convictions.

 

PS Remember, I am one of Trump's biggest critics on this forum; please feel free to disagree, but please do not make the mistake of thinking I am defending TRUMP. I am not.

 

My point is that inaction isn't really a possibility anymore...

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

[mtls2005]

17 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

If the author of the editorial sincerely cares and believes what they wrote, they need to speak up. If not, they are cowards who do not have the courage of their convictions.

 

Well, they did "speak up". I think what you're asking is that they reveal their identities? And then suffer the consequences?

 

This is of course quite easy for us to say/think, given we are removed from the dilemma of serving an incompetent President, and being in a position to protect the Country.

 

I think there will be more people speaking the truth on-the-record, even though they will suffer personally.

 

Eventually, his family will need step in, get Power-of-Attorney, take the car keys away from him - something many of us with aging parents have had to do - and figure out a way to peacefully transition him out of office and back to Trump Tower or Mar-a-Lago.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by mtls2005

[Tug]

Strangely or perhaps not this is the most comforting and positive thing I’ve read since trump took office after the midterms I think we will see something perhaps an article 25 or similar or maybe a(you to brutis)if you get my drift not that I’m advocating that god what a wreck

[mtls2005]

10 minutes ago, Tug said:

after the midterms I think we will see something perhaps an article 25

 

Can't see this happening unless the president is physically incapacitated (some severe medical condition, trauma, and not some early stage dementia).

 

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

 

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

[Spidey]

59 minutes ago, wayned said:

John Kelly due to the language!  "off the rails" and terms that indicate military experience.

Or a train driver.

[spidermike007]

3 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

"...Many senior officials in the Trump administration have been working from within to frustrate parts of the president's agenda to protect the country from his worst inclinations, an anonymous Trump official wrote in a column published by the New York Times on Wednesday..."

 

Few people are more critical of the Trump administration in general and Trump himself in particular than I, but this story gives me the willies. It is scary as hell for someone to sit within an administration showing one public face while secretly showing a different one in private; the arrogance and deceit are truly frightening.

 

Like it or not (and I REALLY don't like it), Trump was elected by the American people (more than 60 million votes), and I have yet to see proper, unequivocal evidence that the election wasn't 'free and fair'. 

 

If this secret 'resister' truly feels that his or her actions are really necessary to stop Trump and protect the country, then they should stand up and say so publicly.

 

Allowing/tolerating people to execute their own agenda secretly might sound good to people (like me) who think Trump is a dangerous menace, but what would have been your reaction if there was a similar column when Obama was President? Would you have been okay with that? I would not have been okay with it. Period.

 

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

 

 

 

He really wasn't. Clinton won by over 3 million votes. There was no mandate. The rigged electoral college was the reason why he was installed. Many of us knew he would be a terrible president, without any of the qualities necessary for leadership. But, few realized he would be this bad, this incompetent, this hateful, divisive, partisan, and ridiculous.

 

So, I applaud these people for doing what they can do, to expose the charlatan huckster.