Signed, Anonymous

Eva Vitanovec, Current Events Editor

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

The “resistance,” a small group of senior White House officials working against the President, have disclosed their agenda through a New York Times op-ed piece published anonymously last week. The author and his colleagues have “vowed to thwart parts” of Trump’s agenda, calling his actions “detrimental to the health of our republic.”

He even goes on to call Trump “anti-democratic”, citing his foreign policy preferences towards North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and President of Russia Vladimir Putin, rather than the US’s like-minded allies. Although these descriptions are revealing of Trump’s character (or rather just affirming public views), the real shockers in this article are bold comments about Trump’s irrational behavior, because, honestly, his leadership style is worse than we thought.

The author cites the president’s “amorality,” lack of “discernible principles,” and his “impetuous, adversarial,” “petty,” “half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions” which the “resistance” is constantly working against. The author’s brazen comments, however, are not so earth shattering when coming from an anonymous source, within the “quiet resistance” working behind the scenes of the administration.

One may wonder if the release of this article may stoke the President’s impulsive behavior even more, causing an eruption of consequences that will only make the author’s job harder. It would be common sense to think that Trump will become less trusting of his top officials, throwing the resistance on the offensive and blocking last ditch efforts to try and right the President’s wrongs. So, it really comes down to the question of why the author would publicly expose this “quiet resistance” when the seemingly essential work they have been doing has only succeeded in secrecy?

Putting aside the author’s controversial intended outcome of the article, it is safe to assume the White House isn’t exactly happy. Reporters have questioned every top official, including Don McGahn, Nikki Haley, Mike Pompeo, and even Melania Trump (personally, my money’s on her); all have denied any connection to the cowardly article and everything it stands for.

VP Mike Pence declares it a “new low in American journalism” and that “whoever ever wrote this anonymous editorial should be ashamed as well.” The President also had some very choice words for the “gutless” editorial and the “failing New York Times,” claiming that “if I weren’t here, the New York Times probably wouldn’t even exist.” Trump has also accused the Times of committing “treason” by publishing this anonymous article, and he is even calling on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to open an investigation.

Does this op-ed really speak the truth? Although the fact that it was published anonymously does not exactly help its credibility, I think a lot of Americans are relieved to hear that there is an adult in the room. After all, in the minds of the “quiet resistance,” this “two track presidency” is the only technique that seems to be effectively pushing an actual republican agenda behind the scenes. You may disagree on whether to believe the “failing New York Times” or the “very stable genius,” but I think we can all agree on the fact that if Melania wrote this, Michael Cohen isn’t the only lawyer President Trump is going to need. See you in divorce court.

Read the full New York Times Op-Ed here:


Watch Mike Pence’s and Trump’s reactions to the Op-Ed: