The New York Times took the rare step, today, of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay.<\/a> The author, an unnamed, senior White House official, delivers an astonishingly honest account of how other senior officials are “working diligently from within to frustrate parts of Trump’s agenda and his worst inclinations.” Coming just one day after we began hearing excerpts from Bob Woodward’s new book about the Trump administration, the op-ed offers a timely confirmation of Woodward’s accounts.<\/p>\n Of course, it would be more satisfying–and morally much more courageous–if\u00a0 the senior official had the temerity to come out of the closet. But, given his\/her contention that the only way to save the presidency [and, perhaps, America] from the autocratic demagoguery of Donald Trump is to work from within, the anonymity is understandable.<\/p>\n It’s a sure bet that Trump is going to go ballistic over this, and launch his own internal “witch hunt” aimed at purging whoever wrote this. Undoubtedly, too, everyone who might be suspected of authoring this op-ed will deny that he\/she wrote it–just as virtually everyone quoted by Woodward has already issued a denial [possibly a scenario they pre-arranged with Woodward as a condition of speaking to him on tape.]<\/p>\n Obviously, there’s going to be a big media kerfuffle over the author’s identity–trying to match the style of writing, the use of language, etc., to people closely associated with Trump. Eventually, we may learn his\/her identity–everybody leaks everything in D.C.– and\u00a0 he\/she could be deemed a “hero” [whatever that means].\u00a0 But the issues raised by this White House insider are more important than media speculation as to his\/her identity<\/strong>. Kudos to the Times for recognizing the value of publishing this op-ed, and to the author for speaking out [ish]. That’s worth something.<\/p>\n Here is the full text of the op-ed:<\/a><\/p>\n The New York Times today is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers. We invite you to submit a question about the essay or our vetting process <\/em>here<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump\u2019s leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hellbent on his downfall.<\/p>\n The dilemma \u2014 which he does not fully grasp \u2014 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.<\/p>\n I would know. I am one of them.<\/p>\n To be clear, ours is not the popular \u201cresistance\u201d of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can<\/a> to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump\u2019s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.<\/p>\n The root of the problem is the president\u2019s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.<\/p>\n Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.<\/p>\n In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the \u201cenemy of the people,\u201d President Trump\u2019s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.<\/p>\n Don\u2019t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.<\/p>\n But these successes have come despite \u2014 not because of \u2014 the president\u2019s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.<\/p>\n From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief\u2019s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.<\/p>\n Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,\u201d a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he\u2019d made only a week earlier.<\/p>\n The erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren\u2019t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.<\/p>\n It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what\u2019s right even when Donald Trump won\u2019t.<\/p>\n The result is a two-track presidency.<\/p>\n Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea\u2019s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.<\/p>\n Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.<\/p>\n