Donald Trump and I finally agree on something: yesterday’s (September 5th) anonymous New York Times op-ed heralding the “quiet resistance” within the White House is “gutless”.
The “unsung hero” behind the op-ed has definitely stirred President Trump’s angst. Suspicion within the White House is reportedly heightened. Trump declared the piece “gutless” and tweeted the possibility that it is treasonous.
Obviously, the President does not know the definition of treason (no surprise there). A personal affront to the President is not treason. According to the United States Constitution, treason against the United States “shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.” Penning a tell-all editorial about the President is a betrayal, but it does not constitute treason, and despite President Trump’s demand that his betrayer immediately surrender to the government, it is unlikely Trump will personally take the secret scribe to task.
So who wrote the scandalous editorial? Some jokesters have suggested Melania Trump is the clandestine scribe (doubtful); others have posited Mike Pence is behind it (possible, but unlikely), due to the inclusion of “lodestar” (a guiding star) in the piece, a word commonly used by Pence. The more savvy amateur sleuths regard “lodestar” as a diversionary tool designed to throw the vengeful Trump off the scent of the true trail. After all, if Mike Pence is the author, would he have been dumb enough to use his personal lexicon, or is he hiding in plain sight, concealing his identity behind the “too obvious” scenario, playing victim to cover his tracks? That such convoluted possibilities are considered proves the anonymous resistor is a clever, highly skilled writer.
Does it matter who wrote the revealing op-ed? Yes, it does. The writer’s proximity to the President is telling. He/she has firsthand information vital to our nation’s security. Going public, however shadily done, is a clear signal something is definitely wrong in the White House (again, no surprise there). However, rather than emerging a heroic voice for the “quiet resistance” guarding America’s interests from within, as the op-ed author suggests, his/her anonymity reveals cowardice. Heck! Even Omarosa Manigault Newman had guts enough to stand behind her own words!.
“Quiet resistance” is a bit of an oxymoron. How passionately are you resisting if you remain quiet? Real heroes will not be silenced! They take risks where necessary. They put the needs of others before their own. They take real action. Employing a go-between to arrange for publication of a White House expose in The New York Times is not admirable. Hiding behind your words is not brave. Revealing that White House officials considered invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Donald Trump from office is not heroic. Actually invoking the 25th Amendment would be! Standing before the world, revealing your identity and “owning” your accusations is the only thing that will make the author of the Times op-ed an American hero.
One thing is alarmingly clear in all this: where there’s smoke there’s fire. There are far too many corroborating stories about chaos in the White House and Donald Trump’s instability for it all to be dismissed as a “witch hunt”, or the work of the Democrats, or “crooked Hillary”. The New York Times op-ed should be a wake-up call for all Americans. Trump supporters, open your eyes and see the truth! Trump detractors, take action; vote blue in November!
And to the author of the opinion piece that has so shaken the country, you may speak truthfully, but you are no hero. You are part of the problem. If you want to fight for Americans, put the gloves on, get in the ring, and fight. Resist! Challenges are not won from the sidelines.
Anonymity is cowardice. To be silent is to be complicit.