A guess at identifying the NYT's infamous anonymous Trump insider

The New York Times published an anonymous op-ed, purportedly penned by a "senior White House official" in the Trump administration.

Read the missive, and note that there are several clear "tells" in the piece – clues that indicate the motivations and leanings of the author, whoever the coward is.  And I will use that word, as someone with the character and fortitude claimed by the author would never write an anonymous piece, nor would he remain employed within an administration he so clearly despises.  The Times has called the author "he," so I will assume a male is the person responsible

This first clue tells me that it is a member of the swamp, coming from the position that government is an entitlement belonging to an elite, never meant to be sullied by the hands of an "outsider."

He is also among those who oppose Trump's use of tariffs and opposed his taking NATO and the E.U. to task for their looting of our goodwill.

He grudgingly admits that good things have happened but immediately assigns credit to himself, not to the man who drove the initiatives, which is the hallmark of the committed "NeverTrump" and the spurned Obama holdover.

He further reveals himself by the use of such bromides as "rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels," along with petty and unsubstantiated shots at the president, apparently claiming psychic abilities, as he claims to know that Trump "fears such honorable men as McCain."

He ascribes to himself an admirable stoicism, never missing an opportunity to inform the reader of the terrible sacrifice he is making to save us all from our evil natures, as personified in the hulking frame of Donald Trump, whom we foolishly elected, knowing not what we do – a position echoed endlessly by the self-righteous Obama apparatchiks tossed unceremoniously by the will of the people last November.

"So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until – one way or another – it's over."

These words are the linchpin of the author's sentiments...and, when taken in totality with the earlier admissions of "working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations," and "[having] 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," constitute coordinated acts of sedition cloaked in sullied robes of "patriotism."

The author clearly idolizes McCain and denies the existence of a "Deep State," preferring instead to describe the cabal responsible for the slow-motion coup conducted through the increasingly brazen "special counsel" as the "steady state" – an apt descriptor of the permanent government bureaucracy that has been weaponized against the president since early 2016.

There is one further "tell" in the ballyhooed NYT anonymous op-ed – one that indicates that this is even less newsworthy than I first thought.

The author says in his second paragraph:

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 emphasis is mine. A Republican would likely not say "his party," but rather "our party" or "my party."

I am of the opinion that this is likely an Obama holdover (of which there are still more than a hundred in the employ of the White House alone) writing as if he were in fact a disaffected member of the Trump inner circle when he is in truth a bitter refusenik still stinging from the rejection of November last.

I think I know why the NYT kept it anonymous.  "Disgruntled Obama holdover" doesn't carry the same cachet as "anonymous senior member of the administration."

So, in the final analysis, who is this mysterious, self-aggrandizing, honor-challenged "senior official"?

After reading his ramblings, I really don't care, and I doubt that anyone who isn't already ideologically enslaved to the icons of the NeverTrump right and the unhinged, establishment-royalty left will care, either.  He's just another flack.

The New York Times published an anonymous op-ed, purportedly penned by a "senior White House official" in the Trump administration.

Read the missive, and note that there are several clear "tells" in the piece – clues that indicate the motivations and leanings of the author, whoever the coward is.  And I will use that word, as someone with the character and fortitude claimed by the author would never write an anonymous piece, nor would he remain employed within an administration he so clearly despises.  The Times has called the author "he," so I will assume a male is the person responsible

This first clue tells me that it is a member of the swamp, coming from the position that government is an entitlement belonging to an elite, never meant to be sullied by the hands of an "outsider."

He is also among those who oppose Trump's use of tariffs and opposed his taking NATO and the E.U. to task for their looting of our goodwill.

He grudgingly admits that good things have happened but immediately assigns credit to himself, not to the man who drove the initiatives, which is the hallmark of the committed "NeverTrump" and the spurned Obama holdover.

He further reveals himself by the use of such bromides as "rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels," along with petty and unsubstantiated shots at the president, apparently claiming psychic abilities, as he claims to know that Trump "fears such honorable men as McCain."

He ascribes to himself an admirable stoicism, never missing an opportunity to inform the reader of the terrible sacrifice he is making to save us all from our evil natures, as personified in the hulking frame of Donald Trump, whom we foolishly elected, knowing not what we do – a position echoed endlessly by the self-righteous Obama apparatchiks tossed unceremoniously by the will of the people last November.

"So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until – one way or another – it's over."

These words are the linchpin of the author's sentiments...and, when taken in totality with the earlier admissions of "working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations," and "[having] 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," constitute coordinated acts of sedition cloaked in sullied robes of "patriotism."

The author clearly idolizes McCain and denies the existence of a "Deep State," preferring instead to describe the cabal responsible for the slow-motion coup conducted through the increasingly brazen "special counsel" as the "steady state" – an apt descriptor of the permanent government bureaucracy that has been weaponized against the president since early 2016.

There is one further "tell" in the ballyhooed NYT anonymous op-ed – one that indicates that this is even less newsworthy than I first thought.

The author says in his second paragraph:

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 emphasis is mine. A Republican would likely not say "his party," but rather "our party" or "my party."

I am of the opinion that this is likely an Obama holdover (of which there are still more than a hundred in the employ of the White House alone) writing as if he were in fact a disaffected member of the Trump inner circle when he is in truth a bitter refusenik still stinging from the rejection of November last.

I think I know why the NYT kept it anonymous.  "Disgruntled Obama holdover" doesn't carry the same cachet as "anonymous senior member of the administration."

So, in the final analysis, who is this mysterious, self-aggrandizing, honor-challenged "senior official"?

After reading his ramblings, I really don't care, and I doubt that anyone who isn't already ideologically enslaved to the icons of the NeverTrump right and the unhinged, establishment-royalty left will care, either.  He's just another flack.