Thread by @mdlaplante

I think I figured this out: The anonymous Trump administration official working to thwart the president's agenda is U.S. Ambassador to Russia Jon Huntsman, with a writing assist from Ian Bremmer. (I think.) Here's why...

nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opi…

My first guess was Larry Kudlow. He’d written about “first principles” before. But the cadence didn’t feel “Kudlowy,” so I started focusing on small bits of text, searching individual words and phrases. When I did, Ian Bremmer’s work kept popping up.

foreignpolicyconcepts.com/ian-bremmer-on…

Bremmer writes A LOT. So it stands to reason that we’d be able to find a lot of the words in the mysterious op-ed *somewhere* in his writings.

time.com/5324719/recep-…

It’s the extent of the overlap that intrigues me. Lots of instances of words that aren't in common use. And some, like "hellbent" and "amorality" that get hardly any use at all. I tried this with other public intellectuals; not seeing the same correlation.
nytimes.com/2017/07/18/wor…

“Looms large.” “Cold comfort.” “Bright spots.” “The root of the problem.” Of course, a lot of people use these words. But the more overlap there is, the smaller the vocabulistic Venn diagram gets.

blogs.reuters.com/ian-bremmer/20…

It’s also the way those words and strings of words are used in context. Writers are like standup comics. We always go back to the same material. Plus — and this is admittedly more touchy-feely — the cadence just feels “Bremmery.”

weforum.org/agenda/2016/02…

But, of course, Bremmer isn't a senior Trump administration official. But he IS the co-writer of a previous New York Times op-ed, with…
...wait for it…
...Jon Huntsman.

nytimes.com/2013/06/02/opi…

Bremmer and Huntsman were apparently neighbors in D.C.

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/228605900745760768

The op-ed is also sprinkled throughout with phrases Huntsman uses. Particularities like “to be clear” and “don’t get me wrong” and “shared values.” Again, these are terms a lot of people use, but the more overlap, the tighter the circle.

https://twitter.com/JonHuntsman/status/104250677051654144

Then there’s the subject matter itself. Lots of specifics about Russia. Lots about John McCain, Huntsman’s hero. And then, at the end, a section on returning to “civility,” shunning “tribalism,” and resisting “labels.” These are Huntsman stump staples. amazon.com/No-Labels-Shar…

There are also some very loud echoes from the letter Huntsman sent to The Salt Lake Tribune a few months back after columnist @RobertGehrke called on the ambassador to come home. Country over politics, Huntsman wrote. sltrib.com/news/2018/07/2…

Contextually, this would all make sense. Huntsman is no fool. He can see what’s coming. He needs to distance himself from this administration, and quickly. He needs to build a resistance narrative.

If it is Huntsman, and he’s trying to re-frame his involvement with Trump, Inc., does that mean his resistance isn’t genuine? I don’t know. I’ve always liked the guy. For now, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id…

On the other hand, a pure-motivated resistance doesn’t announce its presence in the Times. (And if it IS Huntsman, and he really IS trying to mask his identify, he’s done a bad job. That’s an indicator he’s not very good at keeping secrets—which is not good for a diplomat.)

If it’s not Huntsman (with Bremmer by his side, quill in hand) then someone has done one heck of a job of making it look like it is. Kudos to them on the sweet subterfuge.
/fin

Jon Huntsman says no:

https://twitter.com/USEmbRuPress/status/1037751354507309063

Although @saletan points out there's plenty of wiggle room in that denial. John D. O’Connor, the lawyer who outed Mark Felt, aka Deep Throat, also thinks it's Huntsman, as do some White House witch hunters, apparently. slate.com/news-and-polit…