When anonymity outlives its usefulness

So, I wonder: Is anonymity still appropriate here? It might be. The author might have the same personal safety and national security concerns as the whistleblower. Or the smokescreen could have less noble provenance. For some months now, the guardrails have been off this presidency; most of the grownups — people such as Jim Mattis, H.R. McMaster, Gary Cohn and John F. Kelly — have left the building. The initial purpose of the op-ed, to caution the president, and to warn the public, no longer applies. The publisher is touting “shocking” accounts of malfeasance, which will surely sell some books. But at this point, can anyone be surprised by anything? Doesn’t even a miscreant such as Trump have the right to know his accuser?

Advertisement

In recent weeks, we have witnessed a bracing parade of government officials — members of the diplomatic service, intelligence community and the uniformed military — willing to stand up, under oath, and give testimony about the president’s dealings with Ukraine. They have placed their careers, and perhaps their personal safety, at risk. That is what the anonymous author of “A Warning” should now do, too. We are past the point of being coy about the president’s malfeasance. It is time to stand and deliver.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement