Given all the negative books about Trump that’s been published so far one might think Trump was so low that he himself could be the best cellar  -Me

Post#: 298-19 – Words: 1750 – Audio: N/A

“Anonymous” is looking very ominous.

This blog had its origins on my perceptions (and the citing of many, many others more experienced than myself) of Trump’s psychological issues and social misbehaviors, and because of these issues his inexperience and incompetence in the job he was elected to perform is just amplified all the more.  While I certainly could not predict what he’s done so far that fits into a behavioral deficiency (not likely a problem in the real world to the point where a real psyche diagnosis is necessary, but certainly reveals itself when assuming the most powerful, highly visible position in the world) what he has displayed thus far certainly fits into the expectations of expecting the unexpected from him.  Although there have been very predictable behavioral patterns.  As the political and personal pressure has built up, so have his confusing and nearly illiterate diatribes to the press, and actions in addressing governmental business and policy… and his constant, yet impossible, quest in trying to surround himself  with loyalists.

Which leads us to the person currently named, “Anonymous”, who garnered much attention last year with a New York Times op-ed…  (presented in its entirety for reader reference at the end of this post).  This person describes themselves as being in Trump’s inner circle, present at most meetings and therefore a very credible witness (presumably).  The op-ed presented a warning about Trump’s behaviors and most notably suggesting behind-the-scenes talk of invoking the 25th Amendment, that there was a growing “resistance” to Trump inside the administration; “There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first.”  One insider said Trump went “volcanic” (although many phrases have been part of labeling his angry rhetoric… “melt down”, “off the rails”, etc.).

The New York Times typically does not print anonymous op-eds, but apparently this person was not anonymous to the Times.  They did their own reasonable homework to determine reasonable credibility.  According to Wiki…

The New York Times has said that they were working with a single author, not a group of officials, and that the text was lightly edited by them, but not for the purpose of obscuring the author’s identity. They said that the definition of “senior administration official” was used in regular practice by journalists to describe “positions in the upper echelon of an administration, such as the one held by this writer”.

The newspaper’s editorial page editor, op-ed editor, and publisher know the identity of the author. Patrick Healy, the newspaper’s politics editor, said that no identifying information has been leaked to The New York Times‘s newsroom. The agreement between the newspaper’s editorial department and the author does not prevent the newspaper’s news department from investigating the identity of the author.

Over 30 administration officials declared in writing they were not this anonymous person.. and over time this op-ed was largely relegated to the background of the ever-increasing chaotic news cycles.

Well, as it turns out, “Anonymous” is back again.  This time with a new book, of all things.  Titled ominously, A Warning“.

Cover to watch for Nov. 2019

According to a CNN report… (HERE)

According to Axios, which first reported that the conversations will be recounted in the book, the anonymous official was a frequent participant in meetings with the President and had access to internal notes they plan to include in their new book on Trump, “A Warning.”
“In these pages, you will not just hear from me. You will hear a great deal from Donald Trump directly, for there is no better witness to his character than his own words and no better evidence of the danger he poses than his own conduct,” the book’s back cover reads.
“A Warning” will be released November 19, and the author’s intent is to convince the nation to not reelect Trump in 2020, CNN previously reported.


The Critics, and Pundits, and Doubters, Oh My!

While the first op-ed seemed to be a curious, and to many a politically damning, piece of inside reporting against Trump, it also had its level of fearsome castle intrigue behind-the-scenes smacking of some kind of coup.  Yet doubters at the time, generally Trump supporters, voiced the author as being in the least a coward not to mention a traitor; which we all know Trump and his supporters want to know the identity in order to provide a negative nickname and besmirch the person’s character… rather than defend the allegations.  This time around is notably different.  Even the anti-Trump pundits are suggesting that the value of this book as being true “revelations” about the Trump administration is suspect unless the identity of the author is revealed.  Even they are suggesting some cowardice in not coming forward.


Well.. There Is A Broader Picture To All This “Surface Pre-Posturing”.  Let’s Explore.

As to credibility of “Anonymous” (likely soon to be called “Deep Throat 2.0”)… I’m am very ok with the idea that the Times, and likely the publisher, has vetted this person as being a true person of Trump’s inner circle.. whether I know the ID or not, matters not at this juncture.

This person is a coward?  Why, for guarding their personal safety, like some whistleblower?  The Times asserts this person is real, as advertised.  Well, we assume a person with legitimate information they feel is true or reflects their own opinion should be honor-bound to put their name behind what they say.  Duh?  How many people sign off on authored manuscripts who absolutely and knowingly lie on those pages, and it goes to press anyway?  People want to know for one main reason… assign some level of credibility in order to validate/judge (or not) what has been written.  There are two lesser reasons… to celebrate in agreement or to degrade, defame, and dismiss in defense.

I see much more to all this.  Yet now a book?  This is the “Anonymous” version of an insider’s Mueller Report.  This person, knowing how they might be doubted for their character, has already made it public that they took no 7-digit book advance… and that sales would go to a press charity.  The idea that this person was given an offer of a 7-digit book advance from the publisher should in itself affirm someone somewhere understands this person identity value.

Also.. if the book is going to be as volatile to Trump as it’s claiming to be with notes and documents there’s a very probable chance that Congress might take up some of it for further investigation.  This means the author could very well be subpoenaed at a later date… thus broadening his/her identity exposure, and leaks abound in D.C. as we all know.  I would venture to say that there will be no book “sequel”.

As I said, I find something more here.  This person has established in the op-ed in 2018 that they, and some others in the “circle” were members of some kind of resistance to Trump.  This person could have provided his/her own identity in the op-ed.. then likely immediately fired by Trump.. or even have legal charges files against them.  Then they are gone from public view.. their message fading with them.  This person has set the context that they are not anonymous to protect themselves… they are anonymous to stay in position and report as long as they can.  This person is mission-focused, and the mission is, in effect, ratting out Trump.  No question this person sees himself as a patriot in the truest sense… a spy save the country.  Keep in mind, that even after all this reaches some conclusion.. this person may be hailed the hero that defied Trump but they will never hold a government position, regardless of administration, ever again, and this person knows this.  No one likes the idea of a traitor, or ideological turncoat in their ranks  This person is not out for fame and fortune.. and may very well have a remaining life of threats of violence against them… and their family.  This person is risking a fair amount of personal safety here.  So we might want to think twice before waving about the label of “coward” to assign to someone feeling a duty to their country to do something most of us would never do, fearing the consequences.  He’s marking himself to accept the consequences of his actions, not to have his/her face on Mt. Rushmore.

What we should do as this person’s fellow Americans is read the words… understand where the debates and discussions to follow are coming from on what’s in the book… then make our own individual judgement calls as to whether we allow it to affect our vote or not in 2020.  To dismiss it simply because the person didn’t identify themselves means you have a personal fear that teeters on the edge of it’s own cowardice.


So, Do I Have A Guess On Who It Might Be?

Nope.  I can surmise a profile perhaps.  This person knows their life and the lives of their family might be in jeopardy.. especially down the line if Trump loses in 2020.  This person is either single with no immediate family… or an older person who’s family is grown up and on their own.  I am leaning toward “the older person”, as I am also “old” and have the associated  perspective on legacy and relevancy… and wouldn’t object to making an argument on principle and putting my life on the line if that situation ever arose.

This “Anonymous” is also educated enough to have some concept of the bigger picture on things.  BUT.. and this is a big BUT… if I were hiding my identity in prose I would have someone else write in their words as I might dictate, or they re-word what I’ve written, in their words, to avoid my phraseology nuances.  If this is the case… I would not presume to be accurate for even as far as I can speculate.



Trump will be affected by this book (he will never read it, by the way) in ways we cannot even fathom at this point.  November 19 is just under a month away.  In this Trump Era that’s a lifetime of daily slamming, ramming, and cramming of chaotic news.  It will be a big Thanksgiving this year… with a lot of prayers.


(Below is the New York Times Op-Ed of “Anonymous”, Sept. 5, 2018)

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.

Sept. 5, 2018

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.



My other sites… if you’re interested…