I know … everyone and their dog have opinions on who authored the NYT OpEd. And, more importantly, who wrote it is much less important than what it says. Perhaps more importantly, it’s a distraction from the damning testimony coming from Kavanagh and could even be cynically planted for that purpose.
All that said, it’s hard not to look at the OpEd and ponder. Why? Presuming it isn’t an intentional distraction, then to what end?
Some have called it a cry for help- but It doesn’t read like a cry for help. It’s too self-assured. It’s more like “don’t worry, we’ve got it… mostly at least.” If it were a cry for help, you would expect it to trigger something other than rage tweets from Trump. This isn’t triggering the “Steady State” to be bolder, or to start leaking en-masse to force the inevitable. This person didn’t ask for help, or suggest they were faltering. Then why write this at all?
It also seems that the reaction from the White House is almost too muted. So I’m not convinced the OpEd wasn’t planted intentionally. But, presuming it’s legit, who wrote it? To me, the best way to answer that comes by analyzing who gains from it. How will anyone gain by it? They gain when, eventually, they reveal who they are. They become politically cleansed of complicity, and even position themselves as a silent American hero. Who would benefit from this “stain removal”?
When Trump is gone…
Pence will either be caught up in Trump’s crimes, or he will be president. This OpEd doesn’t help him escape liability, nor help him gain the presidency in any way. It won’t stop him from being a crippled lame duck. It also really doesn’t fit Pence’s style, as far as I can tell. I highly doubt it came from Pence.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders won’t be running for any office, and this OpEd is not going to make a difference in her employability. Does she gain anything by saying she was being a good guy all along? I don’t think this is enough to resurrect the person who lies for Trump daily.
This applies to Kellyanne Conway as well. There is that really interesting angle that Kellyanne’s husband seems to be a semi-vocal NeverTrumper, and it’s conceivable this is Kellyanne sprouting a conscience and wanting us to know. But in the circles she runs in, with her skills, she’ll be employable regardless. She doesn’t need this. In fact, in her field, her complicit loyalty is her currency.
Some have suggested Dan Coats. He surely has a legit axe to grind. But would an intelligence official really do something this public, without any followup? What would he gain, if he wasn’t actually triggering a regime change? Does he need a post-Trump career? Would this help him achieve that? I don’t think see it.
The same can be said of Pompeo, Mattis and Kelly. I would not be surprised if any of them were actively part of this resistance, doing everything suggested in the OpEd and in Woodward’s book. In fact I assume they are. But these people play in shadows, not in NY Times OpEds. They don’t need this.
Who needs it? Who wants to have a political career post-Trump and needs to be cleansed of his stain in the public eye? Who has even been identified as a “moderate” GOP rising star and even a potential 2020 primary challenger to Trump? Who, even publicly, has on occasion taken principled positions contrary to Trump?
Only one person fits that I know of… Nikki Haley.
In this case the OpEd is a political ploy, designed to resurrect a GOP presidential candidate so they can keep screwing us in 2020.
Even in this case, though, there’s one positive to be taken from it: The timing. I don’t think the timing is coincidental. It would suggest that things are coming to a head sooner rather than later. This person needs to get their career-saving OpEd out, to get on the right side before the walls cave in.
It’s gotta be Nikki.
