Wall Street Journal - Trump Insiders, Come Out of the Shadows
"Anyone can protect his post-White House reputation with an anonymous hit piece, anyone can rationalize staying in a cushy job. Anyone can shore up his ideological bona fides so he’s not shunned later on by the people who matter to him. The piece seemed written not to expose a problem but to cover the tracks of a self-valorizing staffer who wants both to enjoy the White House and not be tainted by it. It was a career move, not a patriotic one."
Vice-president Pence has the most to gain from Trump being impeached.
There is very strong evidence that shows Pence is the coward who wrote the New York Times op-ed. Only one person in the Trump administration has used the word "Lodestar". It's Pence's favorite word and he used it in the op-ed. Pence has vehemently denied writing the op-ed.
When asked if he believed the anonymous author used “lodestar” to set him up, Pence said he “wouldn’t know.” I saw the fear in his eyes when he denied what is obviously true. Pence wrote the op-ed.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Fortunately for Pence, President Fucktard Trump is too dense to realize who his worst enemy is.
What we have here is a moron president and a moron vice-president. All of Trump's advisers who had a brain have quit or been fired. The entire Trump administration has only stupid fucking assholes who want to destroy the environment, destroy the global economy, and make America a laughing stock.
Showing posts with label LODESTAR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LODESTAR. Show all posts
Sunday, December 30, 2018
Monday, September 17, 2018
In the book I started reading today, "Fear, Trump In The White House", I found something very interesting about Vice President Fucktard Pence.
Everyone except brain-dead Trump knows Pence wrote the anonymous anti-Trump editorial in the New York Times.
In the book "Fear" I found something equally interesting about Pence. This happened a few weeks before the 2016 election for President of the United States. Here it is. I'm betting it's true.
"Stories circulated that Pence had given Bannon a sealed letter urging Trump to drop off the ticket."
Pence's idea was he could be the candidate for President instead of Trump. Pence always sucks up to Trump and he always agrees with everything Trump says no matter how ridiculous it is. He is trying to hide the obvious fact Pence wants to get rid of Trump so he can have the job.
"Fear, Trump In The White House" by Bob Woodward was well done. I recommend it.
In the book "Fear" I found something equally interesting about Pence. This happened a few weeks before the 2016 election for President of the United States. Here it is. I'm betting it's true.
"Stories circulated that Pence had given Bannon a sealed letter urging Trump to drop off the ticket."
Pence's idea was he could be the candidate for President instead of Trump. Pence always sucks up to Trump and he always agrees with everything Trump says no matter how ridiculous it is. He is trying to hide the obvious fact Pence wants to get rid of Trump so he can have the job.
"Fear, Trump In The White House" by Bob Woodward was well done. I recommend it.
Sunday, September 16, 2018
The Shadow President, The Truth About Mike Pence
Yesterday I finished reading "The Shadow President, The Truth About Mike Pence" which was excellent. I recommend it.
Unfortunately the book was published before the "lodestar" thing. See the post I wrote about it at Vice President Pence is a coward, a liar, and a traitor.
Fucktard Pence is an uneducated moron. He's a science denier. Global warming makes him cry. Evolution makes him cry. When he was a congressman he gave a speech about his childish love for magical creationism. I'm not making this up. I have a post about it if people want to listen to an idiot show off his total ignorance of evolution at Vice President Fucktard Pence doesn't know what a scientific theory is. The fucktard doesn't know what science is. He knows nothing about the evidence for evolution. He was dishonest about Charles Darwin. This god-soaked anti-science know-nothing moron could be the next President of United States.
Vice President Pence has been pretending to be President Pence and that's OK with Fucktard Trump because Trump is not interested in his job. Pence visits other countries and does everything else a president would usually do. He really is a "Shadow President". Trump was not interested in selecting most of the members of his cabinet so Pence got that job which is why virtually everyone in the Trump administration is a science denier.
Pence is very good at sucking up to Trump. Pence always says nice things about Trump. No matter what ridiculous thing Trump does, Pence always agrees with him.
Pence has this idea and it might work: He is using Trump to get the president job. He is waiting for Trump to get impeached and thrown out the window. Then Pence would automatically become president without earning it.
That's what the lodestar thing was about. He wrote an anonymous editorial for the New York Times that explains how Trump's cabinet is doing what it can to prevent Trump from destroying this country. The article was an obvious attempt to help get Trump impeached. Trump is so fucking stupid he will probably never realize Pence is his enemy.
Pence is a Christian extremist. He believes all the Christian bullshit including the childish Noah's Ark genocide myth and including the totally insane end times bullshit.
Pence, after he gets the President job, will try to make America a Christian theocracy. I'm not making this up.
The Shadow President, The Truth About Mike Pence explains Pence's entire life including when he was governor of Indiana. He fucked up that job numerous times. He probably would not have been reelected if he didn't get the Vice President job.
Pence thinks his Magic Man is using Trump to help Pence become president. I'm not making this up.
Unfortunately the book was published before the "lodestar" thing. See the post I wrote about it at Vice President Pence is a coward, a liar, and a traitor.
Fucktard Pence is an uneducated moron. He's a science denier. Global warming makes him cry. Evolution makes him cry. When he was a congressman he gave a speech about his childish love for magical creationism. I'm not making this up. I have a post about it if people want to listen to an idiot show off his total ignorance of evolution at Vice President Fucktard Pence doesn't know what a scientific theory is. The fucktard doesn't know what science is. He knows nothing about the evidence for evolution. He was dishonest about Charles Darwin. This god-soaked anti-science know-nothing moron could be the next President of United States.
Vice President Pence has been pretending to be President Pence and that's OK with Fucktard Trump because Trump is not interested in his job. Pence visits other countries and does everything else a president would usually do. He really is a "Shadow President". Trump was not interested in selecting most of the members of his cabinet so Pence got that job which is why virtually everyone in the Trump administration is a science denier.
Pence is very good at sucking up to Trump. Pence always says nice things about Trump. No matter what ridiculous thing Trump does, Pence always agrees with him.
Pence has this idea and it might work: He is using Trump to get the president job. He is waiting for Trump to get impeached and thrown out the window. Then Pence would automatically become president without earning it.
That's what the lodestar thing was about. He wrote an anonymous editorial for the New York Times that explains how Trump's cabinet is doing what it can to prevent Trump from destroying this country. The article was an obvious attempt to help get Trump impeached. Trump is so fucking stupid he will probably never realize Pence is his enemy.
Pence is a Christian extremist. He believes all the Christian bullshit including the childish Noah's Ark genocide myth and including the totally insane end times bullshit.
Pence, after he gets the President job, will try to make America a Christian theocracy. I'm not making this up.
The Shadow President, The Truth About Mike Pence explains Pence's entire life including when he was governor of Indiana. He fucked up that job numerous times. He probably would not have been reelected if he didn't get the Vice President job.
Pence thinks his Magic Man is using Trump to help Pence become president. I'm not making this up.
Thursday, September 13, 2018
After Trump chose him to be his running mate, and before Trump became the President, Vice President Fucktard Pence wished there was some way to get rid of Trump so he could be president.
As everyone who has been paying attention knows, Vice President Fucktard Pence wrote the anonymous anti-Trump article for the New York Times. The evidence shows this is obviously true. Fortunately for Pence, President Fucktard Trump is so fucking stupid he doesn't know what's going on.
I have been reading the new book, "The Shadow President, The Truth About Mike Pence". Today I found something in it that's very interesting. After Trump chose him to be his running mate, and before Trump became the President, Vice President Fucktard Pence wished there was some way to get rid of Trump so he could be president.
"In private, Pence and GOP chairman Reince Priebus were said to have considered ways to force to Trump to resign as the presidential candidate, leaving Pence to take his place."
Pence wants Trump's job. This has been true every since Trump chose him to be the Vice President. The anonymous New York Times article was written by Pence to encourage Democrats to impeach Trump in 2019 so Pence could be president without earning it.
My favorite New York Times columnist, Gail Collins, called Pence a "twit".
"I don’t think most Americans are comfortable with the idea of impeachment. And the country’s divided enough as it is now without having a huge chunk of voters feeling that their president was robbed of his office. So I wouldn’t want to see the Democrats spending all their capital on driving Trump out — just so we can spend two years being led by a twit like Mike Pence. The voters need to do the deed themselves."
It would be so nice if our moron president figured out Pence is his worst enemy, and demands that Pence resign. Then in 2019 the Democrats could impeach Trump, making America an almost normal country again.
I have been reading the new book, "The Shadow President, The Truth About Mike Pence". Today I found something in it that's very interesting. After Trump chose him to be his running mate, and before Trump became the President, Vice President Fucktard Pence wished there was some way to get rid of Trump so he could be president.
"In private, Pence and GOP chairman Reince Priebus were said to have considered ways to force to Trump to resign as the presidential candidate, leaving Pence to take his place."
Pence wants Trump's job. This has been true every since Trump chose him to be the Vice President. The anonymous New York Times article was written by Pence to encourage Democrats to impeach Trump in 2019 so Pence could be president without earning it.
My favorite New York Times columnist, Gail Collins, called Pence a "twit".
"I don’t think most Americans are comfortable with the idea of impeachment. And the country’s divided enough as it is now without having a huge chunk of voters feeling that their president was robbed of his office. So I wouldn’t want to see the Democrats spending all their capital on driving Trump out — just so we can spend two years being led by a twit like Mike Pence. The voters need to do the deed themselves."
It would be so nice if our moron president figured out Pence is his worst enemy, and demands that Pence resign. Then in 2019 the Democrats could impeach Trump, making America an almost normal country again.
Tuesday, September 11, 2018
This is the 1st time a New York Times columnist used the word "lodestar".
At the New York Times the columnist Gail Collins was asked "Who do you think it is?" The question was about who wrote the anonymous anti-Trump New York Times article. The New York Times has never talked about this year's most important story (who did it?) because they promised the author they would not reveal his name. As far as I know this is the first time anyone at the New York Times used the word lodestar.
This is comment I wrote there:
"Gail: I’m so glad I don’t know because I am terrible with secrets. I do love all the speculation about Mike Pence and 'lodestar,' though."
Gail Collins calls "lodestar" speculation. I call it a smoking gun. Pence wrote the anonymous New York Times Op-Ed because he wants President Trump to be impeached. Then Pence can get the president job without having to earn it.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••
New York Times - Ms. Collins and Mr. Stephens are opinion columnists. They converse every other week.
September 11, 2018
Gail Collins: Bret, we’ve had such a wild week and soon I’ll ask you about all things Trumpian. But first, any thoughts on the Supreme Court? Are you a Brett Kavanaugh fan or foe?
Bret Stephens: I’m a fan. For starters, we Brets need to stick together, whether it’s one T or two.
Gail: Two seems a little excessive. Like he’s trying to drive home a point.
Bret: My general principle is that presidents are entitled to their Supreme Court picks, provided the nominee is intellectually qualified. That’s one of the things presidential elections are about. That’s why I supported President Barack Obama’s picks, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, irrespective of my ideological differences with them. And it’s why I didn’t support Harriet Miers, the unqualified nominee George W. Bush picked in 2005 and was soon forced to drop.
Kavanaugh has been a highly regarded judge on the second-highest federal court for a dozen years. The American Bar Association unanimously agreed he was “well qualified” to serve. He should be confirmed 100-0.
Gail: Sorry, the theory about president-gets-to-pick was demolished by Mitch McConnell in 2016 when he refused to allow President Obama’s nominee, the totally qualified Merrick Garland, to even come up for a vote — or even, really, a discussion. In fact McConnell bragged that telling the president “you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy” was one of the proudest days of his life.
Bret: The G.O.P.’s refusal to consider Judge Garland’s nomination was a disgrace. No argument from me there. Although I would point out that the hyper-politicization of these confirmation hearings began in 1987 with the disgraceful Democratic mistreatment of Robert Bork, the Reagan nominee who should have been confirmed. Sorry, please continue.
Gail: Brett Kavanaugh seems to be a competent jurist but there’s every reason to believe that if he’s on the bench he’ll vote to limit abortion rights. That’s a very big deal to me. And it should be for people like Susan Collins, whose reputation as a champion of reproductive rights is absolutely going to go down the drain if she votes for this nominee.
Bret: I honestly don’t believe that Kavanaugh will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Democrats said the same thing about Anthony Kennedy when Ronald Reagan nominated him in 1987, yet he ended up being one of the justices (along with the Republican appointees David Souter and Sandra Day O’Connor) who reaffirmed the central holdings of Roe in the Casey decision. I’m confident Kavanaugh will respect 45 years of abortion precedent even if he’s more traditionally conservative on other issues.
Gail: So, we’ve got a disagreement! Doesn’t happen all that often these days, what with the big guy in the White House bringing liberals and conservatives together in bipartisan gaping horror. There’s been some feeling that this last week was the beginning of the end for Trump, but I see no evidence whatsoever that anybody in his party who’s planning to run for re-election is prepared to call him out. What do you think happens next?
Bret: I suspect we are going to move into a more acute phase of White House paranoia. Richard Nixon comparisons seem apt, if a little unfair to our 37th president.
Gail: Yeah, amazing how we’re suddenly getting nostalgic for Richard Nixon. Sure, he had his faults, but at least he didn’t tweet.
Bret: The threat to turn the Justice Department loose on our editorial pages because of the Op-Ed article we published by an anonymous senior administration official is the sort of thuggish tactic Tricky Dick might have fantasized about. (Say what you will about the Pentagon Papers, they were actual secrets being revealed there, not the common knowledge of every sane person in Washington.)
Again, it’s depressing that the Republican reaction has been to denounce The Times or accuse the author of treason or cowardice, rather than acknowledge the simple truth of the situation. But anyway … who do you think it is?
Gail: I’m so glad I don’t know because I am terrible with secrets. I do love all the speculation about Mike Pence and “lodestar,” though. Do you think the president’s going to take Pence up on that lie detector offer? Or tell Jeff Sessions to tap his phones?
By the way, about Jeff Sessions. A lot of people feel that even though he was a weasel throughout his career, they’re glad he’s attorney general right now. I know you’re definitely not a fan, so what’s your take?
Bret: I think Sessions should lie in the flea-ridden bed he’s made with the president. He was the first senator to endorse Trump and now he’s getting exactly what he deserves. What’s worse, he’s chosen to accept public abuse and humiliation from Trump so that he can make good on his real ambition, which is to abuse and humiliate immigrants in a manner that’s a national disgrace.
In that connection, I’m generally of the view that people in the administration who think — as that anonymous author does — that they’re saving us from Trump are really just enabling him. My only exception to this rule is Jim Mattis and anyone else in the national security apparatus, since they make me sleep better at night.
Gail: I do love the way you talk about Jeff Sessions. So glad I asked.
We’re all grateful to anybody who’s staying with the administration in order to keep things from blowing up. Whoever they are, I say, stick with it, guys.
But there’s a heck of a lot more going on than the road to Armageddon. Trump is also delivering on a very traditional conservative wish list — tax cuts for the rich, the attempt to undermine public education in favor of private schools and charters, the assaults on Obamacare and organized labor.
That’s why I’m so eager to see the Democrats take control of Congress. I don’t think it’ll lead to impeachment — unless the president starts wandering around in his underwear babbling about space alien takeovers. But I want them to put the brakes on his assaults on environmental protection, health care and the safety net for the poor. Am I right in guessing you don’t look at the elections the same way?
Bret: Under any other president, I’d want a Republican Congress to do precisely the things you oppose. Cut the top rate? For it. Broaden school choice? Bring it. End Obamacare? Absolutely. And can we please open up more federal lands for mining, drilling and logging?
But this isn’t a normal presidency, so I’m rooting for a Democratic Congress as a check on a dangerous and lawless president. I also think Trump is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors for conspiring with Michael Cohen to violate campaign-finance laws and that he ought to be impeached, convicted and removed from office. Conservatives should be delighted by the prospect: They would get a more typical Republican, Mike Pence, as president.
The big question, of course, is whether pursuing an impeachment strategy is politically wise for House Democrats. Republicans remember that it didn’t exactly serve them well in 1998, when they managed to make themselves look extreme and Bill Clinton appear comparatively sympathetic. What do you think? How should Democrats use a House majority, if they get it?
Gail: I don’t think most Americans are comfortable with the idea of impeachment. And the country’s divided enough as it is now without having a huge chunk of voters feeling that their president was robbed of his office. So I wouldn’t want to see the Democrats spending all their capital on driving Trump out — just so we can spend two years being led by a twit like Mike Pence. The voters need to do the deed themselves.
My prediction, for what it’s worth, is that the Democrats will retake control of the House and possibly the Senate in November. That we’ll then manage to stagger through two more years of craziness during which everybody but the Trump kids gradually abandons ship. And I’m not even totally sure about Jared.
And then finally in 2020, we elect a new president who is hopefully both a Democrat and kind of boring. What say you?
Bret: I say boring is the new black. I envision someone like Tim Kaine without the charisma; Gerald Ford without the malice; George H.W. Bush without the vicious hatred of broccoli. Basically, anyone smart and responsible and good at making you forget he’s even there. Or rather, she. It’s past time.
Gail: Amen.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion).
Gail Collins is an Op-Ed columnist, a former member of the editorial board and was the first woman to serve as Times editorial page editor, from 2001 to 2007. @GailCollins • Facebook
Bret L. Stephens has been an Opinion columnist with The Times since April 2017. He won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary at The Wall Street Journal in 2013 and was previously editor in chief of The Jerusalem Post. @BretStephensNYT • Facebook
Jimmy Kimmel Knows Who Wrote NY Times Op-Ed on Trump
This is comment I wrote there:
"Gail: I’m so glad I don’t know because I am terrible with secrets. I do love all the speculation about Mike Pence and 'lodestar,' though."
Gail Collins calls "lodestar" speculation. I call it a smoking gun. Pence wrote the anonymous New York Times Op-Ed because he wants President Trump to be impeached. Then Pence can get the president job without having to earn it.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••
New York Times - Ms. Collins and Mr. Stephens are opinion columnists. They converse every other week.
September 11, 2018
Gail Collins: Bret, we’ve had such a wild week and soon I’ll ask you about all things Trumpian. But first, any thoughts on the Supreme Court? Are you a Brett Kavanaugh fan or foe?
Bret Stephens: I’m a fan. For starters, we Brets need to stick together, whether it’s one T or two.
Gail: Two seems a little excessive. Like he’s trying to drive home a point.
Bret: My general principle is that presidents are entitled to their Supreme Court picks, provided the nominee is intellectually qualified. That’s one of the things presidential elections are about. That’s why I supported President Barack Obama’s picks, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, irrespective of my ideological differences with them. And it’s why I didn’t support Harriet Miers, the unqualified nominee George W. Bush picked in 2005 and was soon forced to drop.
Kavanaugh has been a highly regarded judge on the second-highest federal court for a dozen years. The American Bar Association unanimously agreed he was “well qualified” to serve. He should be confirmed 100-0.
Gail: Sorry, the theory about president-gets-to-pick was demolished by Mitch McConnell in 2016 when he refused to allow President Obama’s nominee, the totally qualified Merrick Garland, to even come up for a vote — or even, really, a discussion. In fact McConnell bragged that telling the president “you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy” was one of the proudest days of his life.
Bret: The G.O.P.’s refusal to consider Judge Garland’s nomination was a disgrace. No argument from me there. Although I would point out that the hyper-politicization of these confirmation hearings began in 1987 with the disgraceful Democratic mistreatment of Robert Bork, the Reagan nominee who should have been confirmed. Sorry, please continue.
Gail: Brett Kavanaugh seems to be a competent jurist but there’s every reason to believe that if he’s on the bench he’ll vote to limit abortion rights. That’s a very big deal to me. And it should be for people like Susan Collins, whose reputation as a champion of reproductive rights is absolutely going to go down the drain if she votes for this nominee.
Bret: I honestly don’t believe that Kavanaugh will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Democrats said the same thing about Anthony Kennedy when Ronald Reagan nominated him in 1987, yet he ended up being one of the justices (along with the Republican appointees David Souter and Sandra Day O’Connor) who reaffirmed the central holdings of Roe in the Casey decision. I’m confident Kavanaugh will respect 45 years of abortion precedent even if he’s more traditionally conservative on other issues.
Gail: So, we’ve got a disagreement! Doesn’t happen all that often these days, what with the big guy in the White House bringing liberals and conservatives together in bipartisan gaping horror. There’s been some feeling that this last week was the beginning of the end for Trump, but I see no evidence whatsoever that anybody in his party who’s planning to run for re-election is prepared to call him out. What do you think happens next?
Bret: I suspect we are going to move into a more acute phase of White House paranoia. Richard Nixon comparisons seem apt, if a little unfair to our 37th president.
Gail: Yeah, amazing how we’re suddenly getting nostalgic for Richard Nixon. Sure, he had his faults, but at least he didn’t tweet.
Bret: The threat to turn the Justice Department loose on our editorial pages because of the Op-Ed article we published by an anonymous senior administration official is the sort of thuggish tactic Tricky Dick might have fantasized about. (Say what you will about the Pentagon Papers, they were actual secrets being revealed there, not the common knowledge of every sane person in Washington.)
Again, it’s depressing that the Republican reaction has been to denounce The Times or accuse the author of treason or cowardice, rather than acknowledge the simple truth of the situation. But anyway … who do you think it is?
Gail: I’m so glad I don’t know because I am terrible with secrets. I do love all the speculation about Mike Pence and “lodestar,” though. Do you think the president’s going to take Pence up on that lie detector offer? Or tell Jeff Sessions to tap his phones?
By the way, about Jeff Sessions. A lot of people feel that even though he was a weasel throughout his career, they’re glad he’s attorney general right now. I know you’re definitely not a fan, so what’s your take?
Bret: I think Sessions should lie in the flea-ridden bed he’s made with the president. He was the first senator to endorse Trump and now he’s getting exactly what he deserves. What’s worse, he’s chosen to accept public abuse and humiliation from Trump so that he can make good on his real ambition, which is to abuse and humiliate immigrants in a manner that’s a national disgrace.
In that connection, I’m generally of the view that people in the administration who think — as that anonymous author does — that they’re saving us from Trump are really just enabling him. My only exception to this rule is Jim Mattis and anyone else in the national security apparatus, since they make me sleep better at night.
Gail: I do love the way you talk about Jeff Sessions. So glad I asked.
We’re all grateful to anybody who’s staying with the administration in order to keep things from blowing up. Whoever they are, I say, stick with it, guys.
But there’s a heck of a lot more going on than the road to Armageddon. Trump is also delivering on a very traditional conservative wish list — tax cuts for the rich, the attempt to undermine public education in favor of private schools and charters, the assaults on Obamacare and organized labor.
That’s why I’m so eager to see the Democrats take control of Congress. I don’t think it’ll lead to impeachment — unless the president starts wandering around in his underwear babbling about space alien takeovers. But I want them to put the brakes on his assaults on environmental protection, health care and the safety net for the poor. Am I right in guessing you don’t look at the elections the same way?
Bret: Under any other president, I’d want a Republican Congress to do precisely the things you oppose. Cut the top rate? For it. Broaden school choice? Bring it. End Obamacare? Absolutely. And can we please open up more federal lands for mining, drilling and logging?
But this isn’t a normal presidency, so I’m rooting for a Democratic Congress as a check on a dangerous and lawless president. I also think Trump is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors for conspiring with Michael Cohen to violate campaign-finance laws and that he ought to be impeached, convicted and removed from office. Conservatives should be delighted by the prospect: They would get a more typical Republican, Mike Pence, as president.
The big question, of course, is whether pursuing an impeachment strategy is politically wise for House Democrats. Republicans remember that it didn’t exactly serve them well in 1998, when they managed to make themselves look extreme and Bill Clinton appear comparatively sympathetic. What do you think? How should Democrats use a House majority, if they get it?
Gail: I don’t think most Americans are comfortable with the idea of impeachment. And the country’s divided enough as it is now without having a huge chunk of voters feeling that their president was robbed of his office. So I wouldn’t want to see the Democrats spending all their capital on driving Trump out — just so we can spend two years being led by a twit like Mike Pence. The voters need to do the deed themselves.
My prediction, for what it’s worth, is that the Democrats will retake control of the House and possibly the Senate in November. That we’ll then manage to stagger through two more years of craziness during which everybody but the Trump kids gradually abandons ship. And I’m not even totally sure about Jared.
And then finally in 2020, we elect a new president who is hopefully both a Democrat and kind of boring. What say you?
Bret: I say boring is the new black. I envision someone like Tim Kaine without the charisma; Gerald Ford without the malice; George H.W. Bush without the vicious hatred of broccoli. Basically, anyone smart and responsible and good at making you forget he’s even there. Or rather, she. It’s past time.
Gail: Amen.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion).
Gail Collins is an Op-Ed columnist, a former member of the editorial board and was the first woman to serve as Times editorial page editor, from 2001 to 2007. @GailCollins • Facebook
Bret L. Stephens has been an Opinion columnist with The Times since April 2017. He won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary at The Wall Street Journal in 2013 and was previously editor in chief of The Jerusalem Post. @BretStephensNYT • Facebook
 |
| Vice President Mike Pence, who's fond of the word "lodestar," with President Trump at the White House last month. |
Monday, September 10, 2018
At another news website I wrote this about Vice President Fucktard Pence.
As you probably already know, Mr. Pence wrote the anonymous anti-Trump article at the New York Times. The keyword is "lodestar". Pence has used this word frequently and he used it in the New York Times article. Nobody else in the Trump administration used that word. Pence wants Trump to be impeached so he can be president without earning it. People can see the evidence here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjKyiDmRl4I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjKyiDmRl4I
I wrote a comment at the New York Times about Vice President Fucktard Pence. It will probably not be published.
I thank the New York Times for publishing this Op-Ed because voters need to understand what is going on in the White House.
Unfortunately the New York Times now has a problem. The Op-Ed was written by the Vice President. The evidence is overwhelming. The keyword is "lodestar". The New York Times doesn't want to talk about it because they promised to not reveal the name of the author.
Mr. Pence wrote the Op-Ed because he wants Trump to be impeached in 2019. Then Pence can get the job without earning it.
If what I wrote is true, and I'm certain it is true, then this is the most important news this year. I wish I didn't have to visit other news websites to read about it.
••••••••••••••••••••••
UPDATE: I didn't think my comment would be published but I was wrong. It was accepted.
Unfortunately the New York Times now has a problem. The Op-Ed was written by the Vice President. The evidence is overwhelming. The keyword is "lodestar". The New York Times doesn't want to talk about it because they promised to not reveal the name of the author.
Mr. Pence wrote the Op-Ed because he wants Trump to be impeached in 2019. Then Pence can get the job without earning it.
If what I wrote is true, and I'm certain it is true, then this is the most important news this year. I wish I didn't have to visit other news websites to read about it.
••••••••••••••••••••••
UPDATE: I didn't think my comment would be published but I was wrong. It was accepted.
Vice President Fucktard Pence has one thing going for him, the extreme stupidity of President Fucktard Trump.
It's obvious Vice President Pence wrote the New York Times anti-Trump article. It's obvious Pence is a liar. In an interview I could see the fear in his face. But Pence has one thing going for him, the extreme stupidity of President Fucktard Trump.
Trump chose Pence to be his running mate for two reasons, to win the votes of Christian morons and because Pence, more than anyone else, sucked up to Trump. Pence continues to suck up to Trump even though his anti-Trump article was written to get Trump impeached in 2019.
Pence still has a chance to be president despite his obvious dishonesty. What Pence has going for him is the breathtaking stupidity of Trump. Trump loves suck-ups like Pence. Trump is so fucking dense he might never realize Pence is his enemy. Trump could demand the Pence's resignation but then he would be admitting his favorite suck-up was trying to get his job.
What we have here is the most stupid President and most stupid Vice President in American history. That's quite a feat.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
President Fucktard Trump, do you see what's going on here? You better think Mr. Trump. Read this:
There has been unrelenting speculation about the author’s identity since the op-ed’s publication last week. Some readers have suggested Pence wrote the piece, which includes the word “lodestar” ― an uncommon term frequently used by the vice president.
Pence has vehemently denied writing the op-ed. When asked Sunday if he believed the anonymous author used “lodestar” to set him up, Pence said he “wouldn’t know.”
Trump chose Pence to be his running mate for two reasons, to win the votes of Christian morons and because Pence, more than anyone else, sucked up to Trump. Pence continues to suck up to Trump even though his anti-Trump article was written to get Trump impeached in 2019.
Pence still has a chance to be president despite his obvious dishonesty. What Pence has going for him is the breathtaking stupidity of Trump. Trump loves suck-ups like Pence. Trump is so fucking dense he might never realize Pence is his enemy. Trump could demand the Pence's resignation but then he would be admitting his favorite suck-up was trying to get his job.
What we have here is the most stupid President and most stupid Vice President in American history. That's quite a feat.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
President Fucktard Trump, do you see what's going on here? You better think Mr. Trump. Read this:
There has been unrelenting speculation about the author’s identity since the op-ed’s publication last week. Some readers have suggested Pence wrote the piece, which includes the word “lodestar” ― an uncommon term frequently used by the vice president.
Pence has vehemently denied writing the op-ed. When asked Sunday if he believed the anonymous author used “lodestar” to set him up, Pence said he “wouldn’t know.”
Sunday, September 9, 2018
Vice President Pence, fuck you asshole.
When Pence wrote the anonymous Op-Ed article for the New York Times he was obviously trying to do his bit to get Trump impeached. He thought he could get away with it but he made a stupid mistake when he used the now famous word "lodestar" which is Pence's favorite word.
Pence wants Trump to be impeached because this way he becomes president without having to be elected. Pence knows if Trump is defeated in 2020 then it's very unlikely Pence could win in 2024 because he would first have to win the nomination and then the election. The odds are hopeless for Pence and he knows it.
Pence thinks that after he gets the president job without earning it, he has a chance to win the 2020 election to get another 4 years as president.
Pence is a know-nothing science denier. He's a Christian extremist who wants to throw out the Establishment Clause to make America a Christian theocracy. Pence is a world-class stupid fucking asshole. He's also a liar. He will do whatever he has to do to be the president.
Fuck you Pence.
Pence wants Trump to be impeached because this way he becomes president without having to be elected. Pence knows if Trump is defeated in 2020 then it's very unlikely Pence could win in 2024 because he would first have to win the nomination and then the election. The odds are hopeless for Pence and he knows it.
Pence thinks that after he gets the president job without earning it, he has a chance to win the 2020 election to get another 4 years as president.
Pence is a know-nothing science denier. He's a Christian extremist who wants to throw out the Establishment Clause to make America a Christian theocracy. Pence is a world-class stupid fucking asshole. He's also a liar. He will do whatever he has to do to be the president.
Fuck you Pence.
"Trump Wants Attorney General to Investigate Source of Anonymous Times Op-Ed."
Mr. President, your traitor is your Vice President, Mr. Pence. The keyword is "lodestar". Pence is the only person in your administration who uses that word. He has used "lodestar" numerous times including in the New York Times Op-Ed.
That's your smoking gun Mr. President. So for fuck's sake get rid of that fucking asshole. If Pence refuses to resign then do not let him in the White House and just ignore his existence.
Your fans (aka fucking idiots) will never let Pence win an election again.
You need to understand, Mr. President, your Vice President thinks God wants him to be president and God is using you, Mr. President, to help get the job done. I'm not making this up. Pence is almost as fucking stupid as you are sir.
That's your smoking gun Mr. President. So for fuck's sake get rid of that fucking asshole. If Pence refuses to resign then do not let him in the White House and just ignore his existence.
Your fans (aka fucking idiots) will never let Pence win an election again.
You need to understand, Mr. President, your Vice President thinks God wants him to be president and God is using you, Mr. President, to help get the job done. I'm not making this up. Pence is almost as fucking stupid as you are sir.
Saturday, September 8, 2018
Vice President Pence is a coward, a moron, a liar, and a traitor. He wrote the anonymous Op-Ed article in the New York Times that insulted the President. The evidence is overwhelming.
What we have here is a Vice President, while hiding behind "anonymous", who repeatedly insults the President of the United States.
Nobody else in the Trump administration would be stupid enough to do what Pence did. Nobody else in the Trump administration would write the moronic bullshit that Pence likes to write. Nobody else in the Trump administration has ever used the word "lodestar" but Pence has used the word repeatedly and he used it in the anti-Trump article while hiding behind the word "anonymous".
Vice President Pence is a coward, a moron, a liar, and a traitor.
Pence fucked up. He has destroyed his career. Good riddance.
An alert lady who has a New York Times subscription found this YouTube video that explains the whole thing. She provided the link in the comments.
She wrote "I don't know why I haven't seen many people picking this up, but Jimmy Kimmel nailed it. The editorial included the obscure word lodestar. Kimmel then shows 6 clips of Pence using the word lodestar."
This is the entire anonymous Op-Ed New York Times article written by Vice President Mike Pence:
New York Times - "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.
September 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.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion).
Nobody else in the Trump administration would be stupid enough to do what Pence did. Nobody else in the Trump administration would write the moronic bullshit that Pence likes to write. Nobody else in the Trump administration has ever used the word "lodestar" but Pence has used the word repeatedly and he used it in the anti-Trump article while hiding behind the word "anonymous".
Vice President Pence is a coward, a moron, a liar, and a traitor.
Pence fucked up. He has destroyed his career. Good riddance.
An alert lady who has a New York Times subscription found this YouTube video that explains the whole thing. She provided the link in the comments.
She wrote "I don't know why I haven't seen many people picking this up, but Jimmy Kimmel nailed it. The editorial included the obscure word lodestar. Kimmel then shows 6 clips of Pence using the word lodestar."
This is the entire anonymous Op-Ed New York Times article written by Vice President Mike Pence:
New York Times - "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.
September 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.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion).
Wednesday, September 5, 2018
In 2016 American voters chose a celebrity clown to be the President of the United States and the Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces.
New York Times - "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.
September 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.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion).
•••••••••••••••••••
This article has 15,041 comments. Most of the comments were written by liberal crybabies. This is what I wrote for these children:
Some people here don't realize this "senior official in the Trump administration" is doing what he has to do to protect America from our deranged president. We should thank this person instead of complaining about him.
•••••••••••••••••••
"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."
I agree with this. The liberal crybabies think all this stuff is wrong even though America has the strongest economy in the world.
I'm voting for Democrats because the Republicans want to destroy the environment but the Republicans get some things right.
I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
September 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.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion).
•••••••••••••••••••
This article has 15,041 comments. Most of the comments were written by liberal crybabies. This is what I wrote for these children:
Some people here don't realize this "senior official in the Trump administration" is doing what he has to do to protect America from our deranged president. We should thank this person instead of complaining about him.
•••••••••••••••••••
"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."
I agree with this. The liberal crybabies think all this stuff is wrong even though America has the strongest economy in the world.
I'm voting for Democrats because the Republicans want to destroy the environment but the Republicans get some things right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)