<p>We first must distinguish which anonymous has gone public. I am not referring to what Wikipedia describes as “an internet-based collective of hacktivists whose goals, like its organization, are decentralized. Anonymous seeks mass awareness and revolution against what the organization perceives as corrupt entities.&#8221; Not them.</p>
<p>This commentary deals with that one-time bureaucrat who came to prominence when the once respectable <em>New York Times</em> published a long opinion article blasting President Trump by a person only identified as “Anonymous.” He or she was described as a senior level official in the Trump administration.</p>
<p>While American reporters now routinely use anonymous sources in news reports -– a practice that was once considered journalistic malpractice except in the most extraordinary cases – the <em>Times</em> op ed was the first time a major publication used essentially an anonymous letter-to-the-editor. The &#8220;grey old lady of journalism” received a lot of well-deserved criticism for this flagrant example of sniper journalism.</p>
<p>Not naming the author had two effects. There was the obvious question of credibility. Knowing who is saying something is as important as what is said – or in this case written. It also leads to inaccurate finger-pointing. It was suggested that Anonymous was the then White House advisor John Bolton.</p>
<p>Some speculation centered around a relative obscure career bureaucrat named Miles Taylor an assistant Chief-of-Staff over at Homeland Security. He entered the gossip mill because of his privately express disdain for Trump and his efforts to promulgate a Gilbert and Sullivan-style insurrection against the President. In one case – and by his own admission &#8212; he attempted to organize a mass resignation as a show of protest. Apparently, he could not recruit the masses.</p>
<p>In the meantime, Anonymous wrote a book entitled “A Warning.” Even the publisher of the book appears to be anonymous. It is unusual to find book listings on the Internet without any reference to the publisher. In a search, it found one site that listed the publisher as “twelve” – whatever that is.</p>
<p>When suspicion centered on him, Taylor vehemently and repeatedly denied being Anonymous. He denied it to his bosses. He denied it to the media – and by extension to we the people. He lied … lied &#8230; lied.</p>
<p>After leaving Homeland Security by voluntary resignation (his version) or by requested resignation (the other version) matters not. More importantly, once free of his governmental obligations, Taylor became a bit of a Trump critic in his own name – still denying he was Anonymous.</p>
<p>Weeell … apparently the anonymity was too much for the poor boy. Maybe book sales had dropped off. For whatever reason, Taylor decided to appear on CNN’s Chris Cuomo show to come out of the political closet and admit that he is Anonymous. Putting on his lawyer robe, Cuomo asked why anyone should believe him in view of the fact that he is an admitted liar.</p>
<p>Taylor responded that he wanted people to focus only on what he said, not who he was. In other words, he must have known that connecting his name to the writing would have instantly diminished its credibility. Or, as he said, he had to lie “to make it work.”</p>
<p>First of all, being described as a “senior official” by the <em>Times</em> and on the cover of his book was a stretch. Junior official, maybe, but senior? Hardly. He tried to show his importance with a photo of him and Trump in the Oval Office (shown above). Seeing his broad smile and thumbs-up gesture made me see him more as a smarmy hypocritical scum ball – to be precise.</p>
<p>In the interview, he seemed to be many with visions of grandeur – comparing himself to those guys who wrote the Federalist Papers with pseudonyms. He must never have read The Federalist Paper. Comparing his trash writing to the Federalist Papers is like comparing meeting note doodles to the Mona Lisa.</p>
<p>Taylor sees himself as courageous. Not sure how anonymous attacks can be seen as courageous. That is the method of guttersnipes.</p>
<p>Taylor assured Cuomo that there are many who agree with him still in their government positions – to cowardly to come forward. His perception of support seemed to be from watercooler gossip – you know, like when everyone agrees with a guy just to end to rant.</p>
<p>The problem with Taylor’s entire interview is that all the nasty things he said Trump said in various meetings have no supporting evidence. He said that Trump said terrible things about the handling of illegal immigrants – but no corroboration. He came across more like an adolescent who wants all his friends to hate the gal who just dumped him.</p>
<p>Taylor did, inadvertently, raise questions as to who is running the Executive Branch of the federal government – or more correctly, who should be. He seemed to be saying that Trump was not following the policies and procedures established by the bureaucrats – those some refer to as “the deep state.” The elected President of the United States is not to be making policy, but simply implementing the policy of the Washington establishment. That, however, is what Trump was sent to the White House change – to be a real President. (Things might have been better if Trump had acted a LITTLE more like a traditional President, but that is water over the damn – or is it under the bridge.)</p>
<p>For a few more moments, Taylor will bask in the studio lights of the left-leaning Trump-hating programs. He could log more interview time than … ah &#8230; what&#8217;s his name? … oh yeah, Michael Avenatti – another sleazebag propped out by the press merely because of his attacks on Trump&#8230; Perhaps the prevaricating Miles Taylor will also become too toxic even for the biased media. The sooner the better.</p>
<p>So, there ‘tis.</p>
<p> ;</p>
<p> ;</p>