A Disloyal Coward Condemns Trump

According to the NYT, whose credibility is shot, a dishonest, disloyal member of the Trump administration has attacked his boss in an anonymous editorial.

This came out just after Bob Woodward released a book basically pitching the same story as the editorial and based entirely on anonymous sources whose claims have already been shot down by the people the anonymous sources talk about.  When, within hours of the book coming out, two of the people who supposedly said things about Trump have gone on record saying Woodward's anonymous sources are wrong, the credibility of Woodward has to be in doubt.

Because this editorial is clearly going to help Woodward sell books and give him credibility even though on-the-record sources are denying his anonymous claims, the NYT, which has made it clear that it hates Trump and the people who voted for him, has every reason to make up this supposed source or at least inflate the source's position in the administration.

We know that the fake news media have been lying to the people ever since Trump won the election.  Note that CNN is still standing by a story that its anonymous source has gone public to repudiate.  Further, CNN lied to us by saying its source didn't tell the network anything. 

Hence, it's likely that either the editorial writer doesn't exist or he's simply a low-level disgruntled NeverTrump.  The writer's praise for Republican policies that Republican voters rejected in the primary is another sign that despite his claims, he's probably more interested in sabotaging Trump than advancing the agenda that got Trump elected.

Even if, by some miracle, the NYT is not completely fabricating this story, the charges are mostly that the coward doesn't like Trump's management style.

A key complaint by the possibly fictional author is that Trump lacks a moral compass based on how Trump makes decisions.  But if we're going to talk about moral compasses, let's look at our past presidents:

Obama:

Intentionally and repeatedly lied to the American people about Obamacare letting them keep their doctors and save money.
Supported infanticide.
Destroyed the government of Libya and sentenced the Libyan people to anarchy.
Protected Iran's development of nuclear weapons.
Hated Israel.
Weaponized the IRS, the FBI, and the DOJ to attack his political opponents.
Told the Russians that after the election, he could give them more of what they wanted but purposely hid that from the voters.
Said implementing DACA would be unconstitutional and then implemented it anyway.
Refused to enforce laws he didn't personally approve of.

Bush: From a conservative perspective, Bush did have a good moral compass, but here's what the left – the folks who are applauding this editorial – said about him.
Lied about Iraq and got thousands of Americans killed in order for oil companies to make profits.

Clinton:
Was accused of rape.
Cheated on his wife.
Sexually harassed subordinates.
Lied under oath to avoid in relation to a #MeToo lawsuit against him.
Compromised on every issue but abortion in order to get re-elected.

Nixon:
Lied to protect his subordinates from criminal charges.

LBJ:
Escalated the Vietnam war and conducted it in a way that led to lots of innocents dying.
Established a welfare system that destroyed black families.

JFK:
Cheated on his wife extensively.

To date, the only evidence we have that Trump has done anything remotely like any of this is that he's cheated on his wife, though that seemed to stop at least a few years ago.

Keep in mind that the same folks who are attacking Trump's moral compass said Clinton sexually harassing subordinates was irrelevant to his ability to be president and that Obama's IRS targeting political opponents was nothing of importance.

Similarly, they condemned Bush for getting us involved in Iraq while condemning Trump for not wanting to drastically escalate tensions with Russia – which, unlike Iraq, has thousands of nuclear weapons.

We can all agree that Trump hasn't been a choir boy, but how has that hurt the American people?

So rather than depend on a possibly fictional, disloyal, and cowardly source, let's look at Trump's record and see what sort of moral compass he has based on what he's done as president.

Why would the people care about how the sausage of Trump policy is made so long as the sausage is great?  Does anyone really believe that Obama or any previous president was always serenely right and presided over some dispute-free staff?

The cowardly "source" says Trump's advisers have steered him away from bad things.  Given that the president has the last word, that means that Trump's moral compass includes listening to others and being willing to admit he's made mistakes and take actions to fix the mistakes.  It's unclear how that's a bad thing.

Trump promised the American people he'd nominate judges who would interpret the law, not make it, and he's done precisely that.  Is a politician keeping his promises a sign of a missing moral compass?  It probably is to Deep-Staters and NeverTrumps who believe in the right of the elites in D.C. to rule over the people, but it's not to the average American.

Trump promised to get the economy moving, get jobs back to America, and reduce taxes.  He's done all of that and shown that the NYT and the rest of the left were wrong when they said that 2% GDP growth was the new normal.  If that's a sign of a missing moral compass, then we should have more presidents with missing moral compasses.

Even if the coward is credible, and even if he's not lying, nothing he said really shows any major moral flaw on the part of Trump, and certainly no moral flaw worse than the massive moral flaws Obama demonstrated.

All this "editorial" proves is that the Deep State includes both Republicans and Democrats whose primary concern is nullifying the 2016 election and retaining the corrupt structure that lets politicians rule over the people.  Obama said elections have consequences, but the Deep State is working hard to prove Obama wrong by annulling the 2016 election.

You can read more of Tom's rants at his blog, Conversations about the obvious, and feel free to follow him on Twitter.

According to the NYT, whose credibility is shot, a dishonest, disloyal member of the Trump administration has attacked his boss in an anonymous editorial.

This came out just after Bob Woodward released a book basically pitching the same story as the editorial and based entirely on anonymous sources whose claims have already been shot down by the people the anonymous sources talk about.  When, within hours of the book coming out, two of the people who supposedly said things about Trump have gone on record saying Woodward's anonymous sources are wrong, the credibility of Woodward has to be in doubt.

Because this editorial is clearly going to help Woodward sell books and give him credibility even though on-the-record sources are denying his anonymous claims, the NYT, which has made it clear that it hates Trump and the people who voted for him, has every reason to make up this supposed source or at least inflate the source's position in the administration.

We know that the fake news media have been lying to the people ever since Trump won the election.  Note that CNN is still standing by a story that its anonymous source has gone public to repudiate.  Further, CNN lied to us by saying its source didn't tell the network anything. 

Hence, it's likely that either the editorial writer doesn't exist or he's simply a low-level disgruntled NeverTrump.  The writer's praise for Republican policies that Republican voters rejected in the primary is another sign that despite his claims, he's probably more interested in sabotaging Trump than advancing the agenda that got Trump elected.

Even if, by some miracle, the NYT is not completely fabricating this story, the charges are mostly that the coward doesn't like Trump's management style.

A key complaint by the possibly fictional author is that Trump lacks a moral compass based on how Trump makes decisions.  But if we're going to talk about moral compasses, let's look at our past presidents:

Obama:

Intentionally and repeatedly lied to the American people about Obamacare letting them keep their doctors and save money.
Supported infanticide.
Destroyed the government of Libya and sentenced the Libyan people to anarchy.
Protected Iran's development of nuclear weapons.
Hated Israel.
Weaponized the IRS, the FBI, and the DOJ to attack his political opponents.
Told the Russians that after the election, he could give them more of what they wanted but purposely hid that from the voters.
Said implementing DACA would be unconstitutional and then implemented it anyway.
Refused to enforce laws he didn't personally approve of.

Bush: From a conservative perspective, Bush did have a good moral compass, but here's what the left – the folks who are applauding this editorial – said about him.
Lied about Iraq and got thousands of Americans killed in order for oil companies to make profits.

Clinton:
Was accused of rape.
Cheated on his wife.
Sexually harassed subordinates.
Lied under oath to avoid in relation to a #MeToo lawsuit against him.
Compromised on every issue but abortion in order to get re-elected.

Nixon:
Lied to protect his subordinates from criminal charges.

LBJ:
Escalated the Vietnam war and conducted it in a way that led to lots of innocents dying.
Established a welfare system that destroyed black families.

JFK:
Cheated on his wife extensively.

To date, the only evidence we have that Trump has done anything remotely like any of this is that he's cheated on his wife, though that seemed to stop at least a few years ago.

Keep in mind that the same folks who are attacking Trump's moral compass said Clinton sexually harassing subordinates was irrelevant to his ability to be president and that Obama's IRS targeting political opponents was nothing of importance.

Similarly, they condemned Bush for getting us involved in Iraq while condemning Trump for not wanting to drastically escalate tensions with Russia – which, unlike Iraq, has thousands of nuclear weapons.

We can all agree that Trump hasn't been a choir boy, but how has that hurt the American people?

So rather than depend on a possibly fictional, disloyal, and cowardly source, let's look at Trump's record and see what sort of moral compass he has based on what he's done as president.

Why would the people care about how the sausage of Trump policy is made so long as the sausage is great?  Does anyone really believe that Obama or any previous president was always serenely right and presided over some dispute-free staff?

The cowardly "source" says Trump's advisers have steered him away from bad things.  Given that the president has the last word, that means that Trump's moral compass includes listening to others and being willing to admit he's made mistakes and take actions to fix the mistakes.  It's unclear how that's a bad thing.

Trump promised the American people he'd nominate judges who would interpret the law, not make it, and he's done precisely that.  Is a politician keeping his promises a sign of a missing moral compass?  It probably is to Deep-Staters and NeverTrumps who believe in the right of the elites in D.C. to rule over the people, but it's not to the average American.

Trump promised to get the economy moving, get jobs back to America, and reduce taxes.  He's done all of that and shown that the NYT and the rest of the left were wrong when they said that 2% GDP growth was the new normal.  If that's a sign of a missing moral compass, then we should have more presidents with missing moral compasses.

Even if the coward is credible, and even if he's not lying, nothing he said really shows any major moral flaw on the part of Trump, and certainly no moral flaw worse than the massive moral flaws Obama demonstrated.

All this "editorial" proves is that the Deep State includes both Republicans and Democrats whose primary concern is nullifying the 2016 election and retaining the corrupt structure that lets politicians rule over the people.  Obama said elections have consequences, but the Deep State is working hard to prove Obama wrong by annulling the 2016 election.

You can read more of Tom's rants at his blog, Conversations about the obvious, and feel free to follow him on Twitter.