President Donald Trump is speaking out against a terribly-written op-ed piece suggesting the POTUS is ‘anti-democratic,’ ‘petty and ineffective’ that was published in the New York Times earlier in the week. The scalding editorial accuses the President of acting in a manner detrimental to the Republic and amoral behavior unbecoming of a leader. Trump blasted the anonymously-written accusations as being “gutless,” dishonest and “really a disgrace.”
• We weren’t able to identify who wrote the piece. In fact, part of Trump’s problem with the op-ed is that the New York Times refuses to publish who penned such salacious words. All we know so far is that whoever put pen to paper is, in fact, working for the White House and the President, making them an insider with access to unique information.
• The writer claims to be a part of a growing “Trump resistance,” but it isn’t entirely clear exactly what that means. The op-ed states only that, “Trump appointees have vowed to do what [they] can to preserve [their] democratic institutions,” making it a mission to thwart “Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses” until he is no longer in office.
• Trump, who is more sensible about his position and efforts, had a lot to say on the subject. “We have somebody,” he said, “…that’s talking about he’s part of the resistance inside the Trump administration.”
• The POTUS is also questioning whether the author even exists, or whether the NYT is simply taking advantage of fake news to get attention. “Does the so-called ‘Senior Administration Official’ really exist, or is it just the Failing New York Times with another phony source?” he tweeted.
• Which raises another important point: if someone in the White House is going to the press with fake news, isn’t that a serious national security risk? “If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!”
• The entire situation raises the question of media in an age when news is so easily manipulated. At what point does freedom of the press turn into freedom to incite hate and jeopardize the safety of our country, the White House, and the President? “This is what we have to deal with,” the President explained. “And you know the dishonest media … But it’s really a disgrace.”
• Inflammatory in nature, the op-ed’s timing seems suspicious, having been published just a short time after Bob Woodward’s book, “Fear: Trump in the White House.” The book shares many of the same sentiments, accusing the President of being incapable, inflammatory, hateful, and untrustworthy.
• Sarah Sanders summed up many of our thoughts nicely in a statement released shortly after the news broke. “The individual behind this piece has chosen to deceive, rather than support,” she said. “He is not putting country first, but putting himself and his ego ahead of the will of the American people.”
• Mike Pompeo also agreed, stating that, “…they should not well have chosen to take a disgruntled, deceptive, bad actor’s word for anything and put it in their newspaper.” He also suggested that, if such bad actors were not in a “position to execute the commander’s intent,” the correct action would be to resign.
• The New York Times, for its part, claims it granted anonymity “at the request of the author,” who believed their position would be “jeopardized by its disclosure.” But ultimately, until we have proof of who wrote it, it’s just another brick in the wall of fake news against the President. Not everyone likes Trump’s hard-hitting decisions, and that’s okay. He’s still getting the job done.