[ad_1]
Gutless. Loose. Amateur. Ridiculous.
These are the words chosen by senior officials on Thursday to denounce the author of an anonymous platform claiming there was a "resistance" within the Trump administration – and to make sure the president knew that they did not do it. do not write it.
Yet, if the endless parade of denials aimed to quell the speech of an uprising, it could have had the opposite effect, propelling history to new heights and apparently ravishing the Democrats who were reveling in the uprising. the paranoia of Trump supporters in Washington. beyond.
"It will probably not be long before we find out who wrote it," said Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader (D-Calif.), In response to a question about the New York Times. press conference.
"The vice president – that was my first thought. So, Coats, Pompeo, they denied writing it, "she said, referring to Trump's national intelligence director and secretary of state. "I guess by process of elimination, it will go down to the hotel master."
The editorial, published online Wednesday afternoon, was written by a senior Trump administration official, according to the Times. It depicts a "two-way presidency" in which Trump acts on his own whim while many of his principal collaborators, in the words of the author, strive to counteract his "more mistaken impulses" until he be absent ".
In addition to painting a disastrous picture of Trump's decision-making process, the editorial also states that some senior administration officials discussed early in the Trump presidency whether he was seeking to remove him from the 25th amendment. .
Trump himself burst out angrily at the announcement of the play Wednesday night, denouncing him first as "anonymous – meaninglessly" then a charge of treason and finally calling the Times to hand over the author "for purposes of national security."
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders issued an equally harsh denunciation and called on the paper to apologize.
That could have been the end of the story, with regard to the Trump administration's response – a dismissal without a call followed by a pivot to larger business. However, in the face of allegations that he would have lost control of his administration, the president seemed to be losing control of the narrative itself.
In the midst of frenzied speculation about who was hiding behind a cloak of anonymity, Vice President Pence was the first to assert that he had not written the text.
[‘The sleeper cells have awoken’: Trump and aides shaken by ‘resistance’ op-ed]
"The vice president inscribes his name on his editions," Pence spokesman Jarrod Agen said in a morning tweet. "The @nytimes should be ashamed, as well as the person who wrote the editions wrong, illogical and without courage. Our office is above such amateur acts. "
Speculation about Pence had been widespread on social media and cable television because of the editorialist's use of "lodestar," an archaic word used by the vice president in his speeches.
Pence's refusal opened the floodgates for other administration officials to do the same. Among them were National Intelligence Director Daniel Coats, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who denied traveling to India.
Some experts had suggested that Coats was a possible perpetrator in part because at age 75 he was probably in his last job in government. But Coats rebuffed in a statement stating that any speculation that the editorial would have been written by himself or his senior deputy, Susan M. Gordon, was "patently false" and arguing that his goal has always been better possible. "
At noon, Sanders spoke again on Twitter, reprimanding the media for what she called a "wild obsession" – even as government officials rushed to denounce the project – and urging citizens to call the office wanted to learn the identity of a "loser without
Yet denials continued to happen – some were expected, others less so.
These included US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and US Ambassador to Russia Jon Huntsman, who denied having written the article in a statement.
The first lady, Melania Trump, also spoke of the controversy by saying in a statement that if "a person is bold enough to accuse people of negative actions, they have the responsibility to publicly defend their words."
[Melania Trump decries ‘cowardly’ anonymous author, but also cites press freedom]
More than two dozen senior officials had disavowed the opinion Thursday night. Some have proposed word denials tended through the intermediary of a spokesman. Others echoed Trump. Still others, like Energy Secretary Rick Perry, took the opportunity to declare their loyalty to the president in the kind of exaggerated and flattering language that has become synonymous with Trump's meetings.
"I'm not the author of the New York Times OpEd, and I do not agree with his characterizations," Perry tweeted. "Hiding behind anonymity and dirtying the President of the United States does not make you an" unsung hero ", it makes you a coward, unworthy to serve this nation."
[These Trump officials have denied writing NYT ‘resistance’ op-ed]
As denials continued to escalate, a clipping of a 1974 Wall Street Journal article about the riddle game surrounding Watergate's secret source, Deep Throat, began to circumnavigate social media. The author writes that former FBI leader Mark Felt, who manifested himself decades later under the name of Deep Throat, "says that he is not not now, nor has it ever been, Deep Throat ".
"Of course," said the former FBI associate director, "if he was really Deep Throat, you would not expect him to admit it, now you would?"
Congressional Republicans had a lot to say on Thursday about the hubbub, including reflections on the question of whether they should investigate the identity of the anonymous author.
"I'm proud to have a vivid imagination, but I can not build a model of facts under which a congressional committee would look at the source of an editorial," said Rep. Trey Gowdy (RS.C .). .
The President of the House, Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), Told reporters that he considered the author to be "a patently dishonest person."
"It does not help the president, so if you're not interested in helping the president, you should not be working for the president as far as I'm concerned," Ryan said.
Ryan has also downplayed the allegations contained in the editorial and in a forthcoming book by Bob Woodward, which offers a heartbreaking portrayal of Trump's presidency.
"My concern is the government's results and the government's results are good," he said. "I know the president is very unconventional. I know that his tweet tactics and unconventional methods disturb people. But the results of the government are good results.
Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), A frequent critic of the president who is stepping down at the end of his current term, has rejected furious speculation about the letter, which he says has not revealed anything that n & # 39; 39; was not yet known about Trump style leadership.
"I do not know why there is a great tumult. I think people at the White House have understood the situation from day one. It was not news to me, "said Corker.
Other lawmakers, meanwhile, have suggested that the publication of the letter only serves to increase Trump's paranoia.
"This reinforces his view that the world is ready to reach it," said Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).
While answering reporters' questions about the letter, Rep. Lee Zeldin (RN) spoke of the author's identity.
"I do not know what position they currently hold," he said before Representative Louie Gohmert (R-Tex) answered the question.
"I think the job is called" spy, "Gohmert said.
Mike DeBonis, Karoun Demirjian and Gabriel Pogrund contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link
