DU Poll: Should anonymous book writer stay anonymous?

[BigmanPigman]

24 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	16 (67%)
	No
	3 (13%)
	Other
	5 (21%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Marie Marie]

1. Other. Yes, until Trump is out of power.

[True Blue American]

3. Deep throat?:)

[True Blue American]

2. Trump can not attack her/ him!

[mopinko]

4. until they appear at impeachment hearings.

[califootman]

5. I voted other which is more of a yes, but...

If the author remains anonymous, s/he should donate all profits from book sales to charity.

[pat_k]

10. According to publisher: "donating any royalties to nonprofit organizations that focus on...."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/books/anonymous-op-ed-trump-book.html

In a news release announcing the book, the publisher said that the author did not receive an advance, and would be donating any royalties to nonprofit organizations that focus on government accountability and press freedom.

[KewlKat]

6. I think it will drive the con batshit crazy not knowing who is outing him so I say stay behind the

curtain.

[SonofDonald]

11. He's going to stroke out after this

Can you even imagine the tweets that are on the way?

He's probably already started

Priceless

[Flaleftist]

7. That's up to anonymous.

I'd like to know the identity, but I do not need to know.

[pat_k]

8. For safety of self and family -- Yes

[Demobrat]

15. Agree

As much as I would love to know, that person would be as good as dead if Dumpster’s goons knew.

[Quixote1818]

9. It depends if corruption is involved

They sign a contract but if someone is corrupt I really don't have a problem with them coming out of the shadows.

[greyl]

12. If the writer defended southern border policies of scaring immigrants and separating families,

which can be inferred to be so from the released excerpts, Kirstjen should come forward now.

This is totally different from the whistleblower issue. The writer and their comrades are still accomplices, and the whistleblower took real action.

[eppur_se_muova]

13. If you vote "NO", you're asking this person to willingly risk his life.

When 45 goes down, his rabid supporters will want vengeance. And they won't forget a grudge.

[meadowlander]

18. There is a legal whistleblower avenue that would protect this person's identity.

They are choosing not to use that route (likely because they know that they also have criminal liability).

Taking pot shots with an anonymous book doesn't cut it. If he or she genuinely believes that our democracy and that human lives are stake then they have a duty to do everything in their power to stop Trump. Writing this book isn't going to stop Trump. Testifying to the impeachment committee will.

[eppur_se_muova]

22. "Likely because ..." Well, you must know something about his situation that I don't.

So I guess you're in a position to advise him to go ahead and risk not just his career but his life. Don't underestimate the craziness that would be unleashed on this guy. Remember tRump-humpers are routinely phoning in death threats to Dems they don't like, and not even trying to cover their tracks.

?resize=768%2C381&ssl=1

Oh, yeah, other stuff too.

Nice of you to be so brave on his behalf.

[meadowlander]

24. I work in public service. That's what you sign up for.

I go in to work every day to an office where we routinely get death threats and bomb threats.

Marie Yovanovich showed up for her hearing. Bill Taylor showed up for his hearing. Alexander Vindman showed up for his hearing.

That's literally the job that you are being paid to do and which you took an oath to do - "defend the Constitution".

If you're too chickenshit to do it, you should resign and let someone who it prepared to take their responsibilities seriously have the job instead.

[eppur_se_muova]

26. That's what people signed up for *before* tRump threw out all the rules of the game.

You're saying anyone who walks into a public building has only themselves to blame if the building burns down and kills them, because they chose to enter. If they knew a deranged arsonist was planning to burn the building to the ground at the exact time they were about to enter it, then I'd say, yeah, that would be accepting the danger, knowing realistically what that danger was.

People didn't go into government work expecting that the POTUS was going to personally, specifically, target them for revenge and physically endanger their lives by provoking the crazies. At least they didn't, before they found out just how horrible 45 really is. But we've seen too many examples now not to know better.

Having someone change all the rules on you is "chickenshit". Being the victim of that is not.

[meadowlander]

28. Oklahoma City Bombing was 24 years ago.

There have always been nut jobs. There's not a single person working in public service who doesn't know and accept that before they take the job. And if, by some miracle, they didn't the active shooter drills and bomb threat lockdowns and evacuations would wise them up pretty quick.

It doesn't change the fact that this person took a fundamental oath and that they are accepting a salary to do a job that they are not actually doing.

There is a legal whistleblower process that would protect this person's identity that they are not using, choosing instead to publish cryptic anonymous bullshit that can't be used in the impeachment hearing. That is the very definition of chickenshit.

[greyl]

19. But people risk their lives every day for a greater good,

or to help a being less fortunate than they. In contrast with the whistleblower, this writer is withholding details in order to serve their own self-interest.

[eppur_se_muova]

20. Not getting shot by a crazed tRump-Humper is part of my self-interest too, so I'm biased.

But it's real fine of you to volunteer someone else to make the sacrifice.

[greyl]

21. True, but yard signs and bumper stickers puts us at that risk.

But F being afraid, do the right thing. Easy to say as a spectator, I know, but aren't we all spectating a parade of people going public about the horrors in our White House?

This shit is serious, and I don't have sympathy for the anonymous writer. As I alluded to above, they agreed with Trump's policies.

Edit, to clarify: I'd prefer the writer come out on their own, and am much less in favor of them being outed by someone else. Undecided on that detail.

[eppur_se_muova]

23. ORLY ?

Because those two things are, like, totally comparable. I mean, both get your name reported in the national news where anyone, anywhere, can look it up anytime they want, even 30 years after the fact, and result in finding your name on a "hit" list run by crazies. That's why I'm scared shitless to put up yard signs.

I wouldn't volunteer someone else to bear witnees against 45 and his minions any more than I would volunteer to send them into armed combat with no backup.

[greyl]

25. Yes, RLY. A parade of people are testifying publicly.

They are doing the right thing.

[eppur_se_muova]

27. According to their own good judgement, as is their right.

I'm sure they would return your admiration, for your own heroism.

No smiley. You figure out how it's meant.

[greyl]

29. Not sure how we can know "good judgement" is involved with this person.

They agreed with Trump's policies.

[tenderfoot]

14. Maybe Hannity or Alex Jones will try to out them.

eom

[meadowlander]

16. If "I'm the adult in the room" was his excuse to stay and his message now is "That's not enough"

then he needs to get the fuck out and start dedicating himself full time to getting Trump out of office.

[Eugene]

17. Absolutely yes. If this person is found out, Trump will retaliate viciously.

[moondust]

30. Entirely up to the writer.

If they want to risk looking out their front window one day and seeing a Cesar Sayoc van parked across the street then go for it.

[patricia92243]

31. I can't imagine anyone taking very seriously a book written by nobody.

we need to know for sure the author has more insight than has already been said by other people.

[Kaleva]

32. Should we remain anonymous?

[hlthe2b]

33. Trump's cult is dangerous. I can not deny to "anonymous" the same protections I demand for the

whistleblower--even IF they are on the political "inside" and not a career civil service employee. Like "DEEP THROAT" I expect we will eventually know, but I have to be consistent.

That said, the real heroes and heroines are these workers who are giving up their security (both career and personal safety) to come out publicly. They are the ones who will truly be remembered and rightfully lauded.

[Maeve]

34. While I think they should come out into the open

I also think that they have the right to stay masked...for now. They write "Nor am I unprepared to attach my name to criticism of President Trump. I may do so, in due course."

Patience

[Baked Potato]

35. I think "Anonymous" is still working in

The White House, very close to Trump and may move up in the Staff. If the name comes out, it would end a career and an avenue of Trump intel. Should stay anonymous.