Are the staffers who are secretly trying to keep President Trump in check doing the right thing?

Tweet

I originally wrote this as a comment on a post by @cmoneyspinner concerning the anonymous Op-Ed in the New York Times by a Senior Trump administration staffer. Here's what I said: I have to admit that I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, I agree with former President Obama that having staffers secretly working to block the president they work for from carrying out his policies is not the way the system is designed, and isn't good for democracy. There are procedures that should be followed, such as impeachment or invoking the 25th Amendment, so that all is above-board and by the book. There should be no palace coups. On the other hand, the Constitutional procedures that are in place depend on those who have responsibilities for carrying them out doing their duty. In this political climate, it's clear that Republicans in Congress simply will not exercise in any meaningful way their responsibility of oversight over the president. Mr. Trump said he could shoot someone on 5th Ave, and his followers would stand by him. So far, it looks like he was right. The problem is that he sits in the most powerful chair in the world. It is said that he wanted to order the assassination of a foreign leader. If he were to be obeyed in such things, even if the process eventually worked to remove him from office, that leader would still be dead, and the consequences of killing him would still be upon us. Similarly, as I understand it, there are no Constitutional or legal restraints on a president's ability to order a nuclear strike. If the "adults in the room" don't act to restrain him, WW3 could be started before the "procedures" can take effect. If nothing else, the Trump presidency is showing us that we desperately need to update our procedures for restraining a president who is unfit for office so that his or her ability to do immense damage before those procedures take hold is restrained.