A Mutiny in Washington

On Wednesday, as you’ve probably heard, The New York Times published an anonymous opinion piece by “a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure.”


The author of this piece, which a Times tweet identifies as a man, claims…

  • …that he is one of many “unsung heroes in and around the White House” who are “working diligently from within to frustrate parts of [Trump’s] agenda and his worst inclinations.”
  • …that the “root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.”
  • ...that Trump’s “impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.”

  • …that there were “early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president.”

  • ...that he and his comrades “will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.”

Another senior administration official then told Axios: "…people seem so shocked that there is a resistance from the inside… A lot of us [were] wishing we’d been the writer.... I hope [Trump] knows … that there are dozens and dozens of us."

The debate rages.

Trump defenders: Donald Trump, not anonymous officials, won the election. This essay proves Trump is right to warn of a “deep state,” conspirators within government who are thwarting the will of the people as expressed by the 2016 election result. This is not how democracy should work.

Trump critics: This essay provides a first-person account of the threat President Trump poses to the republic. Yes, he won the election. But the public deserves to know just how dangerous he is.

A “cowardly coup?”: In addition, as David Frum asks in The Atlantic, if the problem identified by the author is that Trump is temperamentally unfit for office, won’t this essay make matters worse? “If the president’s closest advisers believe that he is morally and intellectually unfit for his high office, they have a duty to do their utmost to remove him from it, by the lawful means at hand.”

Other arguments: Should the Times have published this piece? Does the public’s right to hear this person’s voice justify anonymity, an extraordinarily rare privilege? Or should the Times simply have quoted this person as part of a news story rather than giving him this forum while allowing him to keep his anonymity?

My view: This person assures us there are “adults in the room,” that he and his comrades will “steer the administration in the right direction.”

If he wields that sort of power, we deserve to know his name. This is not just one more Republican backing Trump in public while trashing him in private. This man’s desire to keep his job doesn’t outweigh the right of Americans to know who “steers” their government.

Signal reader, what do you think?

In 2012, the United States created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program to protect these young people from being deported. Yet just five years later, the program was rescinded, putting close to 700,000 DACA recipients at risk of being banished from the only home they've ever known. More than five dozen of these DACA recipients at risk are Microsoft employees. These young people contribute to the company and serve its customers. They help create products, secure services, and manage finances. And like so many young people across our nation, they dream of making an honest living and a real difference in the communities in which they reside. Yet they now live in uncertainty.

Microsoft has told its Dreamers that it will stand up for them along with all the nation's DACA recipients. It will represent them in court and litigate on their behalf. That's why Microsoft joined Princeton University and Princeton student Maria De La Cruz Perales Sanchez to file one of the three cases challenging the DACA rescission that was heard on Nov. 12 by the United States Supreme Court.

Read more on Microsoft On The Issues.

What do people think is driving the stock market's recent record high gains?


Well, there's really no precise answer, but analysts point to several factors. So, number one is strong third quarter earnings. Companies have reported stronger than expected results so far this season. The second is the jobs market. You saw the October jobs numbers exceed economists' expectations. And the third is the Federal Reserve cutting interest rates three times this year. That lowers borrowing costs for consumers and businesses and encourages them to spend more.

More Show less

In the predawn hours of Tuesday morning, Israel launched a precision attack in the Gaza Strip, targeting and killing a Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) commander. In response, the terror group fired more than 220 rockets at southern Israel. Exchanges of fire have brought cities on both sides of the Gaza border to a standstill and at least 19 Palestinians are dead and dozens of Israelis wounded. With this latest escalation, Israel now faces national security crises on multiple fronts. Here's what's going on:

More Show less

Last week, French President Emmanuel Macron said that NATO was experiencing "brain death," citing a lack of coordination and America's fickleness under Donald Trump as reasons to doubt the alliance's commitment to mutual defense. NATO – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – was formed in the wake of World War II as a counterweight against Soviet dominance in Europe and beyond. Its cornerstone is that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. But disagreements over sharing the cost of maintaining military readiness have caused friction between the alliance's members in recent years. In 2014, the bloc agreed that each member state would increase their own defense spending to 2% of their respective GDP over the next decade. But so far, only seven of 29 members have forked out the money. Here's a look at who pays what.