The media world is dedicated to taking all kinds of “rare steps” so long as they are detrimental to Trump.

Wednesday, the New York Times took the “rare step” of publishing an anonymous opinion piece by someone claiming to be a senior White House official.

John Doe claims he’s part of an active “resistance” within the White House working to thwart Trump’s agenda.

The op-ed:

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.

All reads like a trite, concern trolling Never Trump screed. Like some kind of psychological operation meant to unnerve Trump whose had difficulties with staff allegiance from the get-go and to shift the conversation back to the Trump Is Unfit to be President™ mantra, one progressives won’t give up.

I’m sure it’s purely coincidence that the op-ed was published after it was clear attempts to #BlockBrett were squashed quickly and embarrassingly so, but I digress.

That said, it doesn’t mean the assertions in the op-ed are false, but the manner and timing of the release are certainly worth scrutinizing. We don’t have an opportunity to dig into the source or the veracity of the source’s claims, thanks to the NYT.

We don’t know how many are part of this alleged insurrection. Could be 2 or 3 or 15. All of these things are relevant facts, none of them are included.

Half the internet is in full-on freak-out mode, claiming the contents of the op-ed are evidence of a “Constitutional Crisis.” Given that these are the same people who’ve moved from one Constitutional Crisis to the next since Trump was elected.

See also, David Frum and the like:

(Frum has spent the afternoon tweeting about the proper way to remove a President from office.)

Trump took it all in stride:

The White House released this statement:

It’s just another day and another attempt to foil Trump, or at least that’s how it will look to Trump supporters.

Because as the all-knowing “they” like to say, “this is why we have Trump.” Repeated attempts to undermine his presidency, particularly those based on anonymously sourced hearsay only galvanize Trump’s support. A very basic truth the media absolutely refuses to acknowledge.