This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, September 10, 2018:
During and after his speech in Billings, Montana on Wednesday night, President Trump made crystal clear his feelings about the anonymous Op-Ed published by The New York Times earlier that day: “The Times should never have done that because, really what they’ve done is, virtually, you know, it’s treason.” He called the author a “gutless coward” whose name “The New York Times should publish … at once.”
And then the president predicted: “At some point this whole thing is going to be exposed.”
He means business. Personal loyalty is very high on Donald Trump’s list of important characteristics among his people, and when someone betrays that loyalty, the gloves come off. On Saturday Trump said:
We’re going to take a look at what he had, what he gave, what he’s talking about — also where he is right now.
Supposing I have a high-level national security meeting, and he has got a [top secret] clearance — I know we talked about clearances a lot, recently –and he goes into a high-level meeting concerning China or Russia or North Korea or something, and this guy goes in. I don’t want him at those meetings.
So, we’re going to see what happens. We’re looking at it very strongly from a legal standpoint.
On Saturday, Trump’s personal advisor Kellyanne Conway said that, after meetings were cancelled in order to plan the strategy to find the anonymous author, the original list of 12 suspects had been whittled down to three, most likely in the “national security” sector.
Loyalists have stepped to the plate to defend the president and call out not only the anonymous author but the New York Times itself, which allowed the screed to be published. U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley wrote in the Washington Post:
I find it absolutely chilling to imagine that a high-ranking member of my team would secretly try to thwart my agenda. That is not the American way. It is fundamentally disloyal, not just to the chief executive, but to our country and our values.
To Mr. or Ms. Anonymous, I say: Step up and help the administration do great things for the country. If you disagree with some policies, make your case directly to the president. If that doesn’t work, and you are truly bothered by the direction of the administration, then resign on principle. There is no shame in that. But do not stay in your position and secretly undermine the president and the rest of our team. It is cowardly, it is anti-democratic, and it is a disservice to our country.
Vice President Mike Pence’s deputy chief of staff tweeted that the Times should be ashamed for allowing the anonymous editorial to be published: “The Vice President puts his name on his Op-Eds. The @nytimes should be ashamed and so should the person who wrote the false, illogical, and gutless op-ed. Our office is above such acts.” White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote that whoever wrote the article, if he or she is a member of the Trump administration, should resign:
The individual behind this piece has chosen to deceive, rather than support, the duly elected President of the United States. He is not putting [the] country first, but putting himself and his ego ahead of the will of the American people. This coward should do the right thing and resign.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo attacked the Times for publishing the editorial, saying that “they should not have chosen to take a disgruntled, deceptive, bad actor’s word for anything and put it in their paper,” adding:
I come from a place where, if you are not in a position to execute the commander’s intent, [then] you have a singular option: it is to leave.
And this person, instead … chose not only to stay but to undermine what President Trump and this administration are trying to do.
Trump raised the stakes, telling reporters aboard Air Force One on Thursday night that “Jeff [Sessions, Trump’s Attorney General] should be investigating who the author of that piece was because I really believe it’s about national security issues. I don’t want him in those meetings.”
As pressure mounted on the Times to disclose the identity of the op-ed, it refused to back down. In one of the most hypocritical defenses ever launched by this mouthpiece of the Progressive Left, Eileen Murphy, a spokeswoman for the paper, said:
We’re confident that the Department of Justice understands that the First Amendment protects all American citizens and that it would not participate in such a blatant abuse of government power. The president’s threats both underscore why we must safeguard the identity of the writer of this op-ed and serve as a reminder of the importance of a free and independent press to American democracy.
It took nearly 60 years for the leftist rag to admit that it made a mistake in keeping hard-core communist Walter Duranty on its staff long after his support of the Soviet Union’s starvation of the Ukraine – called Holodomor – was revealed. The author of the six-decades late apology, Karl Meyer, wrote this in 1990:
On Christmas Day in 1933, Joseph Stalin conferred this orchid on his favorite Western journalist:
“You have done a good job in your reporting the U.S.S.R., though you are not a Marxist, because you try to tell the truth about our country…. I might say that you bet on our horse to win when others thought it had no chance and I am sure you have not lost by it.”
The reporter was Walter Duranty, then The New York Times’s Moscow correspondent, who is credited with coining the term ‘‘Stalinism.’’ He was fascinated, almost mesmerized by the harsh system he described. And having bet on Stalin’s rise in the 1920s, Mr. Duranty remained loyally partial to his horse. The result was some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper.
The horror of Holodomor is summarized in the link shown in Sources below, for those with the stomach for it. The Times employed Duranty full-time from 1921 to 1934, and part-time thereafter until 1940.
It’s too bad no one has yet written to Murphy asking her about her paper’s support of Duranty and how his pro-Soviet propaganda served “as a reminder of the importance of a free and independent press to American democracy.”
Taking this into account, there is another possibility to consider: that the writer might have been hired by the Times, or even be part of the staff of that paper, to craft this odious piece of journalistic treason. That’s what Dinesh D’Souza thinks. The producer of “Death of a Nation: Can We Save America a Second Time?” tweeted:
Just read the anonymous @nytimes article and it’s blindingly obvious it’s an in-house product written not by any Trump official but by a professional writer at the newspaper itself. This is the very definition of #FakeNews.
Trump is right. The author will be found, and outed. Few should be surprised to learn of his or her ties to the Times, just like Duranty’s. It’s helpful to remember that this is war and the enemy will employ any tactics it thinks will advance its cause.
The Wall Street Journal: Trump Urges Sessions to Launch Probe of Critical Anonymous Opinion Piece
The Wall Street Journal: White House Searches for Anonymous Inside Critic
WesternJournal.com: White House Staffers Reportedly Narrow Down Op-Ed Suspects List to a Few People
The Washington Examiner: White House staffers believe anonymous New York Times op-ed author is one of a few people: Report