Natalie Harp’s Letters to Trump Go Public

The message quickly moved beyond travel logistics. Harp wrote that she wanted “things to always be right between us” and said she had been distracted throughout the week, sometimes forgetting to eat or sleep.

She also worried that comments made by other people had lowered Trump’s opinion of her. Harp insisted that she wanted only to bring him joy, then signed the letter by calling Trump “my Guardian and Protector in this life.”

What did she say about burnout and her White House role?

The second letter began on a lighter note. Harp thanked Trump for helping her “unplug” while they spent time together on the golf course.

“We could be out on the Course, with no machines, and even forget what time it was!” she wrote. “I didn’t have to be ‘Human Printer.’”

“Human Printer” is Harp’s White House nickname, a reference to her habit of rapidly printing favourable articles about Trump and delivering them to him. Apparently, even a human printer occasionally needs to be switched off.

Harp said Trump had noticed her “slightly negative” mood and explained that she was approaching burnout. She admitted feeling envious of people whose work “seems to be to talk with [Trump] and look pretty,” adding, “I want that job!!”

She described herself as an “in-betweener,” caught between Trump’s staff and those who could simply speak with him during flights or dinners. Harp compared the feeling with her previous job as a talk show host at the ultra-conservative One America News Network, a role she said she hated.

How did the second letter end?

Harp closed by giving Trump broad permission to reprimand her. She wrote that he had the “absolute right to cuss me out, if need be, when I deserve it, because no one knows or cares about me more.”

Taken together, the letters show an aide discussing workplace exhaustion, status within Trump’s circle and an intense fear of disappointing her boss. They also reveal a level of personal devotion rarely committed to paper in professional politics, perhaps because most staff members prefer performance reviews with fewer references to guardians and protectors.