
Where do you find a leak in chaos?
Click HERE For Optional Audio Download
Ed.: 080417 – Words: 1680 – Audio: 11:03
One of the big thorns in Trump’s side are the many leaks of inside business being conducted at the White House. The recent release by the Washington Post of the written transcripts of those two early phone calls between Trump and the Mexican president and the Australian PM continues to illustrate the problem.
Now, in one way it’s easy to fall into anti-Trump mode and welcome these leaks as yet another example of the White House in complete chaos and the incompetence of the President. At first even I “welcomed” those leaks. But as an American it’s a bit more than just finding fodder to assign blame to the President. It’s bad enough that the President is a diplomatic buffoon regarding the international community and his credibility is in question constantly… but when leaks occur it places our country in a very questionable situation in being able to assure secrets shared by our allies are kept secret. It’s one thing to be a international political laughing stock and an ill-defined foreign policy government, but to not be trusted to have the capacity to keep a secret is far more serious.
So then that begs the question.. how do you stop the leaks? Well, first you have to determine the “why” there are leaks at all. It’s common knowledge that all administrations suffer from leaks. Some have more, some have less. The current administration has an epidemic. Some administrations aren’t so active in trying to catch those that leak; apparently Obama was pretty aggressive and found a couple.
The interesting thing about White House leaks is that these are not your typical espionage leaks or acquiring secrets like between spies. The person leaking the information is typically leaking to the press… not a foreign power. The person leaking to the press is not necessarily “recruited” to do that by a foreign power. From my vantage point people leak for five reasons…
- They want their five minutes of fame knowing they know a secret and find a need to brag or make themselves important. They share it with a friend, girlfriend… or even directly to the press just to watch the public reaction for bragging rights. Maybe they like emulating the Watergate “Deep Throat” drama.
- Disgruntled employee. Revenge, retribution… getting even.
- Whistleblower wannabe. There is a specific procedure for presenting yourself to be a whistleblower. But some people feel they might be doing a moral public service leaking some apparent information that seems illegal or unconstitutional, outside of the whistleblower process, for fear the process itself can’t be trusted or their personal safety is in question if they use that route.
- Political drama, political sabotage. This is likely the big reason. A staffer falls from loyalty to the president or some other major player, a staffer feels a specific policy is wrong, someone is disenchanted with the mood or environment of certain decision-making… the reasons are endless actually.
- Careless mistake. Sometimes a president himself will accidentally reveal too much inadvertently in a press conference or some speech. People will sometimes share tidbits with friends and family inadvertently.. without vindictiveness or some political agenda.
There might be other reasons more scientific but this seems to cover the motivations most popular. Now from here we might isolate the critical reasons. One obvious explanation for all the leaks in the current administration would be #4, above. The President has done everything possible to alienate himself with his attitude and demeanor; his social abrasiveness and maverick policies. It’s not a stretch to think there are staffers working for the administration that feel the President is not performing to expectations, maybe he tweets too much, maybe it’s all the organizational and personal chaos.
Is it one person or many? One way to try and determine that is to evaluate the nature of the subject of the leaks. Who in the administration might have access to all the stuff that was leaked? Or… were the leaks random in their subject suggesting maybe more than one source. This popular notion among conservatives that the leaks are from left over Obama staff people is pure nonsense. Why is the Trump administration still employing them if that’s the source? More to the point, how many Obama staffers that are truly left over that have “inner sanctum” access to the information released thus far?
Having been a management professional most my life one of the basic rules of managing people is securing their respect by respecting them. That’s the way you achieve a measure of loyalty and job dedication. Very likely Trump has a ton of leaks simply because he socially betrays people… and people feel alienated. Scaramucci said before he left… “There are people inside the administration that think it is their job to save America from this president.”
True or not, that does open up a very real aspect of leaks from the White House. Is a person, or persons, thinking they are saving America from Trump by leaking sensitive information? Again.. loss of loyalty. Here’s another thought… is there someone in the White House thinking they are helping Trump by making certain leaks?
But here’s another aspect to leaks. For a leak to be valuable to the “leaker” it has to be a potential detriment to the one (or many) keeping it a secret. In fact, how valuable would a leak be if we didn’t have a press to leak it to? The whole pretext of leaking at all is to expose someone or something to public scrutiny, ridicule, embarrassment, or legal exposure… or all of the above.
Now, being an American I am also a staunch believer in the First Amendment and the press being part of that freedom. But I do, in fact, have a practical concern over the press being so willing to report leaks.. those “unnamed sources”. The relationship between a leaker and the press is a rather symbiotic relationship. A leaker needs the press to make the leak public, hence the leaker is “using” the press for his/her own advantage. The press loves the leaker because that means a news scoop no other media outlet has; it means a job-well-done for the reporter in his office if he/she can verify the leak content as being authentic (unless they don’t give a damn and report it anyway), increased exposure and prestige for the media outlet who releases it in print or broadcast form, which then translates to increased revenue.
I understand all that. But given we are all patriotic Americans I have a slight conflict with the idea that a press person, generally an American, knowing full well a leak is revealing a state secret of some sort, is so willing to be part of making the leak… a leak. In effect the press person is an accomplice toward making the leak… a leak. For example, you sharing with your spouse during a bit of “innocent” pillow talk some evening of some event or decision made in the Oval Office that day is, in fact, a leak. But generally it ends there if your spouse understands your level of secrecy in your position. But if you are releasing a leak to the press because of some personal agenda.. then I submit that each person along that route to expose the leak content bears a moral responsibility for leaking it. As Americans we tend to accept the press’s role in repeating leaks publicly because we think of the secret information as somehow keeping government and government employees honest; kind of the end-justifies-the-means perception. In fact, not all leaks have that somewhat “positive” effect.

This should not have been made public.
Take the recent phone call transcript released between Trump and the Mexican President and Aussie Prime Minister back in the beginning of the presidency. By releasing that, what exactly was achieved? The leaker obviously wanted to expose Trump as being inept at diplomacy, overbearing and uncompromising, petty and self-absorbed. Well.. we all knew that. It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon or brain scientist to just imagine how Trump handles diplomatic phone calls with foreign leaders. What it does seem to confirm to other world leaders is that Trump’s general demeanor and approach to world diplomacy is not constructive.. so why include the U.S. at all in future endeavors. It confirms to other world leaders our “new” preference toward isolationism and protectivism. But of greatest importance is that foreign dignitaries visiting then White House will not be confident of our ability to keep a secret. Release of those transcripts very much continues to embarrass Americans who give a damn about how the world perceives us and our ability to be a world leader. In this case I don’t necessarily hold the leaker in contempt but the Washington Post for thinking this was a leak worth reporting to Americans. It certainly was a leak to make the Post money.
Now, that being said… there’s seems to be a drift of over-classification of what exactly constitutes a leak that is a classified security risk. For example, the phone call transcripts I would consider a major leak… but hearing today that new Chief of Staff Kelly now keeps the Oval Office door closed to deter wandering visitors, is hardly a state secret, although one might assign that a “private business” thing, it likely has no legal recourse if exposed.
Anyway you look at White House leaks, it’s tough to control. But we do know one thing for sure. Trump always seems to reap what he sows.
Carry On America
***
Leaks seem to be a real problem in modern politics. But are they really a problem? If only we had enjoyed such whistle-blowers in 1914, and 1938, we may well have avoided two disastrous wars.
Best wishes, Pete.
One has to assume your government has leaks as well. How prevalent are leaks over there, Pete?
Since Mrs May took over, there have been many leaks from her own cabinet. Mostly from the people who wanted her job at the time. Interestingly, many of these ‘leaks’ are delivered in public, on news programmes, or political opinion TV shows. Even the ‘secret leakers’ are easily identified, as by divulging details only known to so few people, they have narrowed down the possibilities.
Best wishes, Pete.
Does the government bother to prosecute leakers?
Only if it involves issues of national security. Most of it is simple back-biting and point-scoring.
Doug
If you are example of someone who is against the leaks, who needs someone who is for them?
I really didn’t suggest I was against leaks. I was making the point (or trying to) that leaks can be a double-edged.. or even triple-edged, if that’s even possible. On one hand we tend to celebrate leaks in order to monitor government. On the other hand, leaks generally don’t do the running of the government any good (if government is not involved in hanky-panky). Still, on the third hand, the press is considered part of our freedom of speech and it is the focal point of all leaks; it’s the whole reason leaks exist… leaks go to the press for public dissemination. But the press pays little or no attention to whether it SHOULD release a leak to the public. The most they do is verify it for accuracy.. maybe. To the press a leak is a “scoop” and scoops result in revenue.
In my opinion, the phone call leaks didn’t need to be leaked… or even published by the press, as an example.
It seems to me that someone could easily understand you to mean that it is okay for someone to leak on the Trump Administration if because they, like you, think poorly of the Trump Administration.
Frankly, I think leaks are unethical. They are not whistle-blowing. They are a betrayal of trust. If when the people in charge leak with the permission of the guy in charge they are betraying the trust of the people by setting a foolish example.
We have whistle-blower laws. If they are not sufficient, then advocate their improvement. Otherwise, we all need to come down hard upon people who betray the public trust, and that includes the news media who is both profiting from and encouraging this behavior.
I can agree in the morality (and ethical-ness) in leaking secrets. After all, a secret is a secret. But here’s my big “IF”, Tom… would you have the same opinion if Obama were President or would you welcome leaks from his administration with open arms?
By the way.. not everything I post is designed to be anti-Trump. There is a human side to everything that many times contrasts with the laws to guard against being human. You were the guy just the other day proclaiming the virtues of comparing politics to fighting a battle with spears and shields and maintaining formation. There is also having faith and respect for your commander and he having respect for his fighters. That defines loyalty. My point was that it might help if Trump had a better attitude with his staff and show respect. That can help with garnering loyalty from the troops.
This is free country. When they succeed in demonstrating the law has been broken, we actually reward whistle blowers. Because it is cowardly, I detest anonymous sources.
This post is not anti-Trump? You means the swipes at him were gratuitous? The leaks had nothing to with his administration? Is not the assertion that Trump needs to have a better attitude with his staff and show respect an anti-Trump attack?
BTW. You asserted Trump does not treat the people who work for him well without ever demonstrating the truth of that statement.
Wellll…. ok. I will admit you got me on that when I said I wasn’t being anti-Trump. I was indeed focused on the concept of the leaks and suggesting he might be part of his own problem. You got me there. Life has been such a blur since the 60’s. 🙂
Regarding your last paragraph… the truth of my statement likely rests with whomever is leaking. Would true Trump loyalists leak?
There’s reported in-fighting, clashes of egos, and high drama in the White House. Not a good environment for positive behavior in general. He sets the mood. Lots of folks being thrown under the bus. Lots of firings.
Put yourself in the shoes of any president. You have to appoint literally thousands of people starting from the first day on the job. Meanwhile, you have to contend with the fact that you have thousands of holdovers from the previous administration plus all the civil servants who may have voted for the other guy.
If you look into it, you will find two things about the civil service that makes it awkward to deal with. Firing a civil servant is difficult, at best. When the previous administration leaves town, it will nest some of its appointees into civil service jobs.
Barack Obama was in office eight years. I detested his desire to transform our country, but I did not think him stupid. That man left all kinds of trouble for Trump, and that is much of what you and I have seen. For example, as Obama was going out the door, his minions unmasked the intel they were incidentally collecting on Trump’s people. Then Obama change the rule so that that could be widely shared.
Because Trump is an outsider, he has his advantages, but he also has severe disadvantages. The Establishment, both Democrat and Republican don’t want him to succeed, and these are the people with the most obvious political experience. That is one of the reasons it has taken so long for Trump to get his people in place. In addition, when he appoints someone, he has to be careful about the guy loyalties. He probably won’t get much personal loyalty, particular if he appoints an Establishment Republican. In fact, such may obstruct his agenda. I suspect that’s one reason he has had to replace some people, including his Chief of Staff.
So what is Trump doing? He is recruiting lots of business and military people, and that takes time. Many of these people never considered working the types of positions Trump needs to fill.
I have to admit, Tom.. you do like the man. 🙂
Grudgingly, I do like Trump. If you check my earliest posts on Trump, I was mystified. Who is going to vote for this guy? Yet he was catching fire, and Cruz, the guy I wanted, could not quite overtake him.
When the primaries were over, the news media went after Trump with all the stuff they had been holding back. It seems they thought Trump would be easy to take down. He wasn’t. He didn’t back down. He refused to act like he was guilty of anything. He just grew more angry and determined.
Look carefully at what is going on. Look at what Trump is trying to do. Look at what the opposition is trying to do. Look at the Constitution. Read the Declaration. Consider the Federalist Papers. Read a book by a Frenchman, Alexis De Tocqueville. That man was so taken by the idea of America that he spent two years riding around our country on horseback trying to understand it.
We are slowly losing what made America unique and wonderful to that Frenchman. What is replacing it? We are slowly becoming more like the rest of the world. Our elites want control. So they are doing what it takes to make the rest of us ignorant and docile.
A grand conspiracy? No. Just politicians seeking ever more power. They think the rest of us are stupid. We are just the ignorant, unwashed masses. So they are buying us off with our own money and putting a portion in their own pockets. Meanwhile, we educate our children more poorly every year. Our infrastructure is falling apart. We have an opioid epidemic initiated by doctors, The mass media peddles sex, violence, and godlessness. The middle class piles on debt. And so forth.
Because Trump has other ideas, he threatens their control. Is Trump the solution? No, He still probably thinks he is, but the rest of us have to be the solution. Now matter how talented and determined Trump may be, he is still only one man. So we each have to understand the problem that the Framers of the Constitution were trying to solve and make the Constitution work as they intended.