Wa-Po rehashes Trump’s White House nondisclosure agreements. Why?

Trump Derangement Syndrome runs so strong in the national media that rehashing old news is fair game to disparage President Donald Trump.

The Washington Post’s deputy editorial page editor  saw fit to report on Sunday that “in the early months of the administration,” Trump was so “furious over leaks from within the White House, senior White House staff members were asked to, and did, sign nondisclosure agreements vowing not to reveal confidential information and exposing them to damages for any violation.”

Screengrab Trump Cabinet

Of course, Marcus’ goal appears to be to advance the liberal narrative that “this is no ordinary White House” … and that he must have plenty to hide.

“This is so ridiculously excessive, so laughably unconstitutional,” she wrote, “that I doubted, when it first came my way, that anything like it was ever implemented.”

Marcus tells readers that Trump is notoriously “fond” of confidentiality agreements, adding: “Now we know that he imported these bullying tactics into the White House.”

Having acquired a draft copy of an agreements, she claims violators are exposed to “penalties of $10 million, payable to the federal government,” and took umbrage over these agreements appearing to extend beyond Trump’s time in office, which Marcus characterized as “not only oppressive but constitutionally repugnant.”

An anonymous source told her the nondisclosure agreements “were meant to be very similar to the ones that some of us signed during the campaign and during the transition.”

And that’s just it, it’s not exactly breaking news that Trump “requires” employees to sign such agreements.

The Associated Press reported in June 2016 that “Trump requires nearly everyone to sign legally binding nondisclosure agreements prohibiting them from releasing any confidential or disparaging information about the real estate mogul, his family or his companies.”

And they meant “nearly everyone,” noting that even a maker of his “Make America Great Again” hats was subject to a confidentiality agreement.

(AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)

Politico reported in Dec. 2016, that Trump transition team members “had to sign a non-disclosure agreement to make certain they keep all of their work confidential.”

When Steve Bannon was fired earlier this year, a full year into Trump’s presidency, it was widely reported he had signed a written confidentiality and non-disparagement agreement.

But with a porn star threatening to spill the beans on Trump despite having signed a nondisclosure agreement while pocketing $130,000, this is suddenly news.

As for the constitutionality of the practice, that’s for the courts to decide, not the editorial page of The Washington Post. If the newspaper believes “democracy dies in darkness,” as its motto suggests, perhaps they should turn the lights on to their own anti-Trump bias.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Tom Tillison


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.


Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Latest Articles