I assume everyone by now knows that the New York Times just published an anonymous Op Ed piece by ”a senior
government official” alleging that senior White House officials, including
him/herself, are deliberately and systematically sabotaging President Trump.
The news is hardly new – the Washington establishment, Republican as well as
Democratic, has been trying its best to bring down Trump since he first won the
Republican nomination - their hardball efforts are visible every day. Nor is
the piece very flattering to the anonymous writer, whose poor writing style, aggrandizing
self-righteousness and inflated ego are all too apparent.
But it does seem to me dangerous in at least two dimensions. First , that a major newspaper would publish an
anonymous piece attacking a sitting president. Since we don’t know who wrote
it, we have no way of judging how likely it is to be true, and what the motive
of the writer might be. Or, for that matter, the motive of the newspaper
itself.
Second, that the White House staff might harbor a person (or
perhaps more than one) actively sabotaging the efforts of a duly elected President
of the United States. I’m no fan of
Trump, but if we are worried about Russian interference in our elections, we
ought to be far more worried about active sabotage among our own high
government officials. It’s fine to disagree with the president. It’s fine to
try to convince him to change his policies, It’s fine, if all else fails, to
resign in protest. It’s not fine to steal
papers from his desk so he can’t sign them, or indulge in other active sabotage.
That is, not to put too fine a point on it, outright treason. Of course this person (or persons) may feel
justified by their political views – just as traitors usually are. But it doesn’t
make it right.
It seems to me the New York Times has put itself in a very dangerous position, actively abetting a self-confessed traitor.
No doubt it makes good copy, but it makes terrible politics
Posts
