CommentsCONSIDER THIS-For an administration adept at peddling conspiracy theories, here is one that would surely impress the president because it involves his favorite subject.
What if the writer of the anonymous op-ed in the New York Times was not a genuine resister committed to derailing the Trump agenda? What if the writer was actually ordered to write the piece by the president himself?
If that were the case, it is plausible that the New York Times would have no idea. They could have gone ahead with publishing under the impression that they were dealing with a real leak. In other words, the person who submitted the article could have convinced The Times that they were doing it for all of reasons disclosed in the article. The Times, eager for a bombshell story that would presumably give Trump a major black eye, would have every reason not to ask the tough questions. The incentive was just too great.
For Trump's part, having this story leaked in this fashion accomplishes several goals. For starters, it actually takes away from the real reporting of Bob Woodward and his soon to be released exposé on the Trump White House. Everyone in Washington and across America is asking who wrote, "I am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump White House." The headline is no longer about Woodward's investigation, even if the two stories appear to be intermingled. Clearly the better headline for Trump is the one about the hunt for leakers who compromise national security, which has been a theme of his administration from day one.
Just look at what is happening. Trump is already cleverly taking advantage of the New York Times article in ways that should not be surprising to his adversaries. At a rally in Montana, he declared the leak to be not only "gutless and cowardly" but also a threat to democracy. Again, the story line this week should be about Trump's dismal performance as an administrator and moral leader, at least according to numerous eye witness accounts inside the White House. Instead, Trump is making the story about the integrity and patriotism of a mainstream news outlet, the loyalty of his base, and the reason he was elected in the first place. Either Trump is a genius at manipulating bad news or he was the one who helped manufacture this bad news in the first place.
Furthermore, the article helps Trump achieve another goal that has been a steady feature of his management style for decades. Trump feeds off chaos. The more his underlings feel the pressure of not knowing who they can trust and who they can ultimately turn to, the more they are apt to relinquish personal responsibility and cede power to the strongman leader. Now that everyone is suspicious of everyone, chaos predominates. The victor of this chaos is Trump. He gets to look like the only one who has the ability to regain control; in the meantime, everyone else is scrambling to protect themselves at all cost. In most offices this management style would be a disaster, but in Trump's world it is the only way that he can wield maximum influence over others.
There are probably other reasons why Trump would have someone write the article and release it the following day after Woodward's revelations (which he knew were coming for months). Why isn't anyone suspecting him? It's not as if this tactic would be beneath him. There is absolutely nothing but molten lava that is beneath the moral fortitude of Donald Trump. In reality, this comes straight from his playbook. Trump has been spreading disinformation in the media his entire career.
All that being said, I admit that I do not know who Trump ordered to write the article. Perhaps it was Pence. But it is evident, at least to me, that this was not an authentic act of resistance. On the contrary, this was a move designed to combat a growing resistance that is all too real.
(George Cassidy Payne is an independent writer and adjunct professor of philosophy at SUNY. He lives and works in Rochester, NY.) Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
