The first rule in Trump’s Washington: Don’t write anything down
The First Rule in Trump's Washington Don't Write Anything Down
Hey everyone! Ever wonder how things really worked behind the scenes during the Trump administration? Beyond the headlines and the tweets, there was an unspoken rule, a practice so pervasive that it shaped everything from policy decisions to internal communication. It was simple don't write anything down. This wasn't just about avoiding memos or formal reports it was a culture that prioritized verbal communication, often bordering on the informal and undocumented.
The Case for an Absence of Documentation
Why this aversion to written records? Several factors contributed. First, there was a deep distrust of leaks. The Trump White House was notoriously leaky, and officials feared that anything committed to writing could end up in the hands of the media or political opponents. This paranoia fostered an environment where sensitive information was shared verbally, minimizing the risk of unauthorized disclosure.
Second, the administration favored speed and decisiveness over meticulous record-keeping. The emphasis was on getting things done quickly, and detailed documentation was often seen as a hindrance. Verbal directives and agreements allowed for rapid adjustments and changes in course, even if it meant sacrificing transparency and accountability.
Third, the President himself preferred to communicate orally. Trump's penchant for off-the-cuff remarks and impromptu decisions set the tone for the entire administration. His aversion to lengthy briefings and complex memos meant that key information was often conveyed through informal conversations and personal interactions.
The Consequences of Unwritten Rules
The "don't write it down" rule had profound consequences. On the one hand, it fostered a sense of urgency and agility. Decisions could be made quickly, and the administration could respond rapidly to changing circumstances. On the other hand, it created a system ripe for misinterpretation, manipulation, and a general lack of accountability.
Without written records, it became difficult to track decisions, assign responsibility, and ensure that policies were implemented consistently. This lack of transparency fueled internal conflicts, eroded trust, and made it harder to hold officials accountable for their actions.
Comparing Approaches Documented vs. Undocumented Administrations
To better understand the implications, let's compare a highly documented administration (like Obama's) with the more undocumented approach of the Trump era.
| Feature | Documented Administration (e.g., Obama) | Undocumented Administration (e.g., Trump) |
| | | |
| Documentation Level | High Detailed memos, reports, and meeting minutes | Low Reliance on verbal communication, few written records |
| Transparency | High Greater access to information, easier to track decisions | Low Limited access to information, difficult to verify claims |
| Accountability | High Clear lines of responsibility, easier to hold officials accountable | Low Blurred lines of responsibility, harder to assess performance |
| Efficiency | Moderate Decision-making may be slower due to documentation requirements | High Decisions can be made quickly, but implementation may be inconsistent |
| Risk of Leaks | High More opportunities for unauthorized disclosures | Low Fewer written records to leak |
| Consistency | High Policies are implemented consistently across agencies | Low Policies may be interpreted differently, leading to inconsistencies |
As the table shows, each approach has its advantages and disadvantages. A documented administration promotes transparency and accountability, but it can also be slower and more bureaucratic. An undocumented administration prioritizes speed and agility, but it risks sacrificing transparency and consistency.
Examples in Action
Consider the numerous investigations and inquiries that followed the Trump presidency. The absence of clear documentation made it difficult to reconstruct events, verify claims, and determine who was responsible for key decisions. In some cases, officials were forced to rely on their memories of conversations and meetings that had occurred years earlier, making it harder to establish the truth.
Another example is the handling of sensitive national security information. Without proper documentation, there was a greater risk that classified information could be mishandled or inadvertently disclosed. The lack of written procedures and protocols made it harder to ensure that everyone was following the rules.
The Long-Term Impact
The "don't write it down" rule had a lasting impact on the functioning of the US government. It normalized a culture of secrecy, eroded public trust, and made it harder to hold officials accountable for their actions. As we move forward, it's essential to learn from this experience and prioritize transparency, documentation, and accountability in government.
My Reflections
Looking back, the "don't write it down" rule serves as a stark reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in government. While there may be legitimate reasons to keep certain information confidential, the wholesale avoidance of written records is a recipe for disaster. It creates an environment where abuse of power can flourish and where the public's trust is easily eroded. As citizens, we must demand that our leaders prioritize transparency and accountability, and that they commit to documenting their decisions in a clear and consistent manner. The health of our democracy depends on it.
Sources
Numerous articles and books have documented the inner workings of the Trump administration, including those by journalists from The New York Times, The Washington Post, and other reputable news organizations.
Congressional reports and investigations have also shed light on the administration's policies and practices.
Interviews with former Trump administration officials have provided valuable insights into the culture and decision-making processes within the White House.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment