Image 01 Image 03

Anti-Trumpers: Anonymous NYT Op-ed Proof of Yet Another Constitutional Crisis

Anti-Trumpers: Anonymous NYT Op-ed Proof of Yet Another Constitutional Crisis

The gazillionth Constitutional Crisis this year, approximately.

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.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Morning Sunshine | September 5, 2018 at 7:08 pm


To paraphrase Bush, in order to save the Constitution they must betray it.

It’s the NYT, an op-ed no less. ‘Nuff said.

    Tom Servo in reply to Coolpapa. | September 5, 2018 at 8:04 pm

    First I very much doubt its true (notice how the last couple of paragraphs are a lament about how great John McCain was? Lets just say that it is a very weird thing for a “whistleblower” to focus on in a piece like this)

    Second, if this did come from someone in the WH, I’d lay odds it’s an Obama holdover, and the “Senior position” they hold is Assistant To the Junior Translator of non-sensitive communications.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Coolpapa. | September 7, 2018 at 8:17 am

    NY Times has been a bad joke for quite a while, only getting worse with time.

How do we even know this anonymous source claims of being a WH official are true and this is not some bit of fictional journalism? Because it wouldn’t be the first time the NYT has published fiction made from whole cloth purporting to be fact.

    oldgoat36 in reply to sheepgirl. | September 5, 2018 at 8:30 pm

    There may be any number of people who work with the administration, including a secretary type, who could loosely make the claim of being senior WH personnel who penned this, just to give cover to the NYT, yet aren’t really part of his administration in the sense the Times is trying to portray.

    This sounds like someone of a low level just given the wording and the claims.

    The left is out of control with the abject hatred, and I wouldn’t put it past the Times of these days to publish something which stretches the truth for pushing their agendas.

    It interestingly coincides with not only the release, but the tenor of Bob Woodward’s latest scribe.

      DanJ1 in reply to MarkS. | September 6, 2018 at 9:47 am

      Clearly this is timed to create some sort of legitimacy to the piece of fiction produced by Mr. Woodward. It was likely produced by his publicist or publisher.

Wars are not antiseptic affairs. This is a war and the Democrats are losing badly. Trump keeps kicking their rumps.

Colonel Travis | September 5, 2018 at 7:20 pm

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.

Huh? Economy is the best it’s been in years, stock market is booming, judge-picking is good, we’re not at war with anyone, we’re not treating our world friends as enemies or our enemies as friends, etc. But your first duty to our country is to overthrow a duly elected president because…what, again?

Oh that’s right, you D-bag elitists lost in 2016 and cannot stop screaming and stomping around like children.

So the plan is to offer an explicit demonstration of what Trump is saying about the corruption of the Deep State to prove why he needs to be removed? Only a crazy person would dare try to root out corruption? There is no way to work that logic into making sense.

That Trump dared to ask “When are we going to win a war?” is the mark of a crazy person?

Add that to the “Every Day is Opposite Day for Liberals” list under the entry threatening to arrest ICE agents for stopping illegal aliens at the border and rescuing the non-related children from their dismal future in the child sex-trafficking trade.

My anonymous source at the NYTimes said their anonymous source is imaginary.

See how this works?

    Tom Servo in reply to amwick. | September 5, 2018 at 8:12 pm

    How could anyone possibly “deny” that a nameless faceless person exists? There’s nothing to “deny”, what an idiotic statement.

    “The NY Times most certainly checked the author’s bona fides.”

    Like the way that CNN checked out Lanny Davis’ story about the Trump Tower Meeting?

      That you can prove? NONE.

      MajorWood in reply to Tom Servo. | September 5, 2018 at 11:46 pm

      I heard that the anonymous source was named Sum Ting Wong.

      “I doubt you have any idea of the leg work that the NY Times did to get the story on the Trump Tower Meeting.”

      Oh, we know how the communist rag works. Just make shit up. It’s all they do. Even birds are now refusing their material. Fish too.

      About 5 more years, they’ll be out of business.

    Geologist in reply to amwick. | September 5, 2018 at 8:19 pm

    How can the White House legitimately deny that this anonymous writer exists? If the White House asks every single person working in the White House, and every single person says “I did not write it”, that does not allow the White House to deny that there is such a person!

    Of course, the NYT citing an anonymous source is not credible to many of us. My fictitious anonymous sources tell me that the true author of this editorial is not a White House employee, but is really a former Hillary campaign worker.

    What do your fictitious amonymous sources say?

    tom_swift in reply to amwick. | September 5, 2018 at 9:08 pm

    The NY Times most certainly checked the author’s bona fides. That is how that they work.

    I’m sure Santa Claus will reward you handsomely for your faith in imaginary creatures.

      You’re FOS commie. You don’t know anything about inner workings of the Trump administration. You don’t even know anything about the Obama administration. You come here with your pathetic list of talking points, earning minimum wage.

      And your still overpaid.


Nobody in a position to actually do any of this stuff, like play “hide-and-seek” with the paperwork, would ever alert his victim that he’s doing it. He would’t screw around with success as long as it was working.

Ergo, this was written by someone who has no such access, or does but is too chickenshit to actually do it. Most likely someone with no connection to the White House at all.

And, of course, Pravda-on-the-Hudson naturally snapped at the chance to publish a hand grenade with the President’s name on it, even a logically obvious fake hand grenade.

Fake, fake, fake. But if the President has been looking for an excuse to fire somebody, he now has a good one.

MSM trying to unseat a sitting President. It’s really despicable and yes, even treasonous.

4th armored div | September 5, 2018 at 7:55 pm

Fusion GPS and Ohr + wife, muller etc all belong in the hoosegow with the clintons of course!

DieJustAsHappy | September 5, 2018 at 7:56 pm

The New York Times is right down there in the sleaze with Stormy.

    Walker Evans in reply to DieJustAsHappy. | September 6, 2018 at 3:50 am

    Okay, Stormy is a porn star, one tiny step away from an average prostitute, but that is no reason to defame her by comparing her to the NYT. Shame on you!

Unfortunately, Sarah’s non-denial/denial: “This coward should do the right thing and resign”, would indicate to some, the belief that the author might even be on the WH staff.

For better or worse (worse) the FEVER PITCH is being ramped up more and more every day – as evidenced by “some crazy guy” driving his truck into a Fox News Station in Texas today – because “Sleepy Eyed Chuck Todd” has put out a call to “fight back” against Roger Ailes (Fox News).

While I still consider myself “reasonably safe” here in So Florida – the promise of an incredibly ugly race between Gillum and DeSantis (with a robo-caller thing alleging to be from a right-wing org, making jungle sounds in the background and mocking black people, already setting the tone for what this race is going to turn into).

As evidenced by the behavior of the lunatic fringe at the opening of the Kavanaugh, and some of their followers in the audience (see what I did there?), we’ve got a helluva long way to go, until November…


Can you imagine the NYT publishing a piece like this on Obama during his presidency? Of course not. Anybody who suggested it would have been laughed out of the room, and not just because the NYT loved Obama sexually. No, they never would have published outrageous accusations like this, which can’t be independently verified, from an anonymous source because it’s grossly irresponsible. They would never have deliberately harmed the presidency of another U.S. president, and potentially harmed the interests of the U.S. itself, by publishing garbage like this.

But since it’s Trump, and they despise him, it’s totes okay.

The NYT has a long documented history of flat out lying through their editorial teeth. This “anonymous opinion piece” has all the credibility of what you hear on the other side of the buss station bathroom stall,–none.

Does this Op-Ed rise to the level of sedition. Could not the DOJ force them as A Natioal Security issue to reveal the source.

I’m going to stick my neck out and call bullsh–t on this.

In decreasing order of probability, I’m guessing the source is:
1) A fraudster trolling the NYT, who can not bear to check their source. Said fraud may have worked for the previous administration but has since departed.
2) A NYT reporter writing fanfiction with the knowledge of the editors.
3) A NYT reporter writing fanfiction *without* the knowledge of the reporters, and using a fake email address to pretend it came from somebody in the administration.
4) Some lower-level apparatchik who works within a block of the White House who has puffed his credentials up to look good.
5) The tooth fairy.
6) A real upper-level Trump administration, presently serving employee.

    Actually, now that I think of it, could this be Omarosa?

      Yackums in reply to georgfelis. | September 6, 2018 at 7:42 am

      An online acquaintance of mine speculated that it came from Pence, citing textual clues. He was met with rejoinders that it was probably someone who knows how Pence talks/writes and was trying to throw any investigation in that direction.

      Although come to think of it, the VP has been awfully quiet…

Fake news from an openly racist paper.

What’s wrong with you people?

False flag, straight up. No one benefits more from this than DJT.

Is Frum that desperate for clicks…? A constitutional crisis is when there is misbehavior from someone who cannot be fired except through exceptional, nation-shattering means. This is misbehavior by an inferior official who can be fired in a heartbeat if Trump finds him or her, if the person actually exists (something I will not take on faith).

Whatever it is, good, bad or just plain ugly, it is plainly not a constitutional crisis, and hardly a crisis of any sort. It is just another day at the office.

My stock portfolio loves this kind of crazy.

Author, or it’s fan fiction.

If (a big if) this person is actually an upper-level White House employee, he’s revealed that he is actively working against the executive branch of the government while employed by it. When did weasels suddenly become heroes? Ms. Sanders is right. If this person exists, he should resign.

Note to the NYT and other progressive idiots: Trump won the election. He is the head of the executive branch. These people work for him.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | September 5, 2018 at 10:02 pm


100% FAKE.

Note how they did this on purpose during Kavanaugh hearings.

Chuckin Houston | September 5, 2018 at 10:16 pm

As many have said here, I don’t believe this person exists. First his tactics wouldn’t work for very long. Presumably critical documents, executive orders, etc. are drafted by, or at least sponsored by high level people who would follow-up with the President if they didn’t see any action on their document. The actions of this ‘hero’ would be delaying tactics at best.

However, I think the NYT has an ulterior motive that is timed to interfere with the Kavanaugh hearings. What relatively senior official would be in a position to intercept documents coming from all over the executive branch? The Whitehouse Staff Secretary, a position that Kavanaugh had for 3 years under G. W. Bush. The documents that crossed Kavanaugh’s desk during that time were not provided to the Judiciary committee. If the Dems want to contrast Kavanaugh’s behavior with that of this ‘hero’ they will demand to see these documents.

All this editorial does is confirm to President Trump voters that any election the Ruling Class doesn’t like will be nullified, “legal process” be damned.

If that’s the case, why not go extra legal? They may not win, but the elites will lose.

Warning signs from the NYT?

It trades reporting real events with layers of political fiction each exposing the “Deep State” that led us to this global instability. On what planet would Mattis share your view of reality given his ring side seat of the Bush-Obama years?

Let’s return us to the old crap led again by the people who think what three things are the most important to the citizens of this country?

Let’s count the hit jobs, each cheap shot exposing itself in the collective memory like some raincoat clad pervert. Journalism?

The NYT delivers sedition with farce and ties this undue influence on American voters to the McCain theme of civility. The NYT takes us all as idiots with short memories.

Here’s something the New York Times can do. It can translate for all to see, the original Russian documentation that Browder falsely translated into English and which served as evidence for the Magnitsky Act. The NYT can’t even do basic research anymore.


The Browder-Nekrasov movie uncovers the beginning of the Trump Collusion Conspiracy. The movie itself begins by Browder stating that Magnitsky was a lawyer. The NYT repeats this. The best lawyer Browder says he could find. Magnitsky wasn’t a lawyer or an auditor. He was accountant Browder had known for some time that was working for him on accounts being investigated by the Russian government for tax fraud.

Nekrasov wasn’t amused by discovering this out later in the movie.

Wow NYT, does that matter to you? Is that fit to print?

The NYT takes Browder’s evidence and uses it to refute a movie financed by Browder that refutes Browder’s evidence. What genius. That is called journalism.

Why would anyone believe the NYT? They support the banning of a film Browder made with an anti-Putin Russian filmmaker that much to Browder’s horror reveals his fake claims and questions his role in the theft of $250,000,000. 60 MInutes would win a Pulitzer for such reporting.

Again, why is this important?

It was the Magnitsky Act that had Holder expedite Veselnitskaya into the US in the first place. In essence, the NYT participates in an organized crime (RICO) that accuses Trump of making an agreement with Putin for his help to rig the 2018 election in exchange for ending the Magnitsky Act which has elevated Magnitsky to Saint in Russia. This Putin desire to reverse that Act was what the Democrats imagined could be used to get dirt on Trump.

And yet the NYT is intellectually and politically unable to actually print the news that’s fit to print and instead faithfully disseminates propaganda in the name of Plutocrats and Transnationalists.

Instead they try to remove and obstruct Trump using undemocratic and illegal means. Who is actually conspiring to influence American voters with slander, fake journalism, and sedition? I guess the “Stable State” votes for Americans. I suppose there’s no campaign law against that.

I’m a Liberal and none of my “Liberal” friends disagree with the sentiment stated. Many are walking away.

    Yackums in reply to maxtrue. | September 6, 2018 at 7:55 am

    *encounters reference never heard of – Magnitsky Act…

    *reads some Wikipedia…

    *jaw drops* What the AF is this? Barack Obama signed a bill into law in 2012 NORMALIZING TRADE WITH RUSSIA!?!?!?!?!?


Money talks, Bullshit walks. If things were this bad, then the stock market would be going in the opposite direction. The biggest objection to Trump is that social programs, from which 10-20% at a minimum is skimmed off the top, are becoming more a thing of the past. The era of the great society is starting to disappear and the parasites who have lived off of it are panicking. And the ponzi scheme of higher education is starting to get exposed as not paying off for the majority who signed on. Believe it or not, but not every job requires a college education, and not every student is college material.

ImperatorRex is under the impression that someone at the NYT wrote this, and his candidate is Charles M Blow.

Click-free link

Original link

ImperatorRex Threadreader unroll

I have grown thoroughly sick of reading Charles Blow so I cannot compare the writing styles completely.

…..technicalities…..’The NY Times most certainly checked the author’s bona fides. That is how that they work.’

Hahaha…oh my sides…my sides….lololol????

    Heh, yea, I got a good laugh from that one. These progs aren’t even self aware.

    Sure they did. Just like they checked and double-checked the veracity of Jayson Blair’s fabricated and plagiarized articles before they published his crap as facts.

    Some lefties have very short memories.

If this unelected jackass wants to save us from ourselves and our votes, he can resign, run for office and curse our stupidity when he loses. This jerk is the kind of political hack that got Trump elected in the first place. He’s that irritating co-worker who spends all his time telling everyone else what they’re doing wrong while producing absolutely nothing of value for his organization.

Anyone who thinks McCain is a model of civility is a little unbalanced themselves. Let them show their face in the light of day, instead of lurking in the shadows, and deal with the consequences of their betrayal.

Keep in mind also – this was an OpEd – which means, any crazy using any pseudonym, can write any crazy/unverified crapola.

Remember – OpEd IS NOT “NEWS” (for the sake of journalistic integrity – of which, there IS NONE LEFT in this country), so the level of verifiable scrutiny required to publish, is LESS THAN ZERO.

IT IS AN OpED – not some Carl Bernstein byline (Carls name has been reduced to GARBAGE now anyways). The timing lends credence to WOODWARDS BOOK – meaning, it’s simply an ADVERTISEMENT to assure that the new book makes it to the top of, no, wait for it:


Nah – couldn’t be – COULD IT?

There’s yet another option here – that had me sitting straight up in the middle of the night, whereupon I scribbled four words, so I would remember.


All this crap – Woodwards book, the Left “going to crazytown” (good troll by the GOP, they learn from the MASTER ), this OpEd could be the “trigger” for DJT to have his:




This could be a false flag troll – by THE MASTER TROLL HIMSELF, knowing the NYT would GOBBLE IT UP. It brings everything to a FEVER PITCH, and forces Trump to GO NUCLEAR and just being the ENTIRE THING CRASHING DOWN ON THEIR HEADS. They’ve been DARING HIM TO DO IT, using the “exposing sources and methods” bullshit. Obviously, they’ve forgotten (or have no idea) what DJT is capable of, when his back is against the wall.


The Dems (and most of US, but sadly not most of the LoInfo’s) know that THIS NOVEMBER IS FOR ALL THE MARBLES. Notice how they ALREADY HAVE TWO BATSHIT SOCIALISTS THAT WILL GET INTO CONGRESS pretty much UNOPPOSED?

During his campaign, he frequently remarked that “this November will decide the fate of this great nation”, (remember) and WE BROKE THE GAME and VOTED HIM IN.

This mid-term election IS LITERALLY FOR ALL THE MARBLES – LITERALLY. Dems LOSE – the violence by the left GOES THRU THE ROOF. Dems win, and two years of REAL PROGRESS goes right down the shitter – and they call it “A MANDATE FROM THE PEOPLE”, and take this country to hell (continuing what Obama started and Killery would have finished), with NO CHANCE OF EVER COMING BACK (and the violence STILL goes through the roof).

I gots more – but I’ll save it for another time (LOL)…


The mole’s most shocking revelation? “Trump is amoral!”

Got it. Now, everybody who voted for Donald Trump for moral guidance, please raise your hand.

Ha. Didn’t think so.

Unknown3rdParty | September 6, 2018 at 8:25 am

Anybody have expertise in comparing writing styles?

Between the Woodward book and the NY Times hit piece the Democrats are throwing a lot of ammunition at the wall to hurt Trump. If they cannot keep this up then October is going to belong to the Trump campaign. My gut feeling is that the Democrats are so anxious that they are releasing their anti-Trump blasts too early. If the last six weeks of this campaign season belongs to Trump there will be a Red Wave.

The letter is fake, made up out of thin air like all of Trumps “scandals”

About as credible as the Steele Dossier. And remember a USA Today article was used to legitimize the Steele Dossier. Here a NY Times Op-Ed is legitimizing Woodward’s screed. Trend? I wonder if Mueller is going to subpoena the Times to get to the source>

Fake or not, we are not the target audience. Obama holdovers are. Fire them all, the FISA abuses as well as the current clown show hearings prove Democrats place party over nation.

How is this not treasonous? Is the coward obstructing nuclear disarmament negotiations with North Korea? Trade deals with Europe? Compel the NYTs to identify the writer for investigators, they know who it is.

Fake or not, we are not the target audience. Obama holdovers are. Fire them all, the FISA abuses as well as the current clown show hearings prove Democrats place party over nation.

How is this not treasonous? Is the coward obstructing nuclear disarmament negotiations with North Korea? Trade deals with Europe? Compel the NYTs to identify the writer for investigators, they know who it is.

Republican donor on Twitter is offering $50k for the identify of this traitor.

The NYT, a banner carrier of the Rainbow Cult, is required to chant division, exclusion and inequity, and manufacture yet another anonymous piece of propaganda. Ignore it and see it for what it is, utter demented desperation in the knowledge that the DEMS have quite literally nothing to offer the people, the nation or the world.

News flash. He’s been identified. He’s Assistant Communications Coordinator and Administrative Liaison to the Under Assistant Deputy Director of Communications Dissemination and Duplication Materials Procurement.

It’s Jimmy from the mail room.

It’s not the first time members of an administration worked against the president. The following is from ‘Those Angry Days’, a history of the period between June 1940 and Dec 1941 when whe Pearl Harbor ended a national debate between the isolationists and those who supported FDR moving the country towards war.

The upper reaches of the Roosevelt administration, including the president’s cabinet, were also riven with deep divisions about which direction the country should take. Many high-ranking officers in the Army, Navy, and Air Corps fiercely opposed FDR and his proposals to help the British. Convinced that America should stay clear of the war, a number of them worked to sabotage the policies of their commander in chief, leaking top-secret information to isolationist members of Congress and to Lindbergh and other key leaders in the antiwar movement. Just before Pearl Harbor, Hap Arnold, the Air Corps chief of staff, was implicated in the leak of one of the administration’s most closely guarded military secrets—a contingency plan for all-out war against Germany.