When Trump assembled his cabinet prior to his first administration, I wrote a number of articles saying he was either naive or a Trojan horse for the deep state because his cabinet was the swampiest I’d ever seen. I spelled it out in detail for each appointee. Every word of warning proved accurate, given that every one of those cabinet members that I called out was fired or resigned with disgrace that was sent their way by Trump. In the end, the swamp swamped him, burying him in legal troubles for years.
Now he claims to have learned from that experience and to be ready to get even with those who took him down, and we have a new opportunity to see if he really has what it takes. I won’t go any easier on him as the news unfolds in the months ahead than I did last time because everything I said we could expect from his appointments last time proved true; but I will be fair, just as I was then. I care about what is going to happen, not about what any candidate claims is going to happen, nor about the candidate, who is now president elect.
Currently, my feelings are mixed. Some of Trump’s cabinet appointments are completely opposite of the kinds of mistakes he made before his last term. Take Tulsi Gabbard, whom I’ve liked for some time. I’m not sure she’s up to the job she’s being nominated for, having just about no more intelligence-gathering experience than I have, and I wouldn’t choose myself for the job. Lack of experience could be very dangerous, given the kinds of shrewd judgments about intel that are needed on a daily basis for the security of the nation.
HOWEVER, I’m also thinking no experience might be the best experience. Nothing has proven deeper in the state of swampiness than the various intel agencies that plague our own citizens with illegal FISA eavesdropping and that wrongly provided intel about Iraq weapons of mass destruction and that sought to thwart Trump at every turn last time around. Gabbard is, at least, in my opinion, a straight shooter and someone who doesn’t kowtow to party lines and who speaks her mind intelligently and from the heart. She’ll certainly be dedicated to shaking things up, so long as those she opposes (and they will be many) don’t manage to shake her out.
She’s an interesting anti-establishment choice. She may fail for lack of experience in an area that is complex and usually needs lots of experience, but she’s smart. I think it will be interesting to see what she does and how she does it. I’ve included a video in the news links below where she schools congress on censorship of disinformation. She does a great job. I’m rooting for her.
Trump’s appointment of RFK, Jr., as head of the nation’s health is certain to shake up Fauci and all his apparatchiks that gave us the crazy Covid lockdowns and that helped create the world’s riskiest vaccines under Trump during his first term. Teamed up under Biden, that gang turned the nation into 1984 with no concern whatsoever about overreaching constitutional boundaries at all. So, it’s going to be very interesting to watch that shakedown. Clearly nothing Deep State or swampy in RFK, Jr..
I’m a little concerned, however, about his penchant for conspiracy theories. He may be right on every single one of them, and I’m not saying he isn’t; but some don’t seem as well-founded as others. I imagine he’ll create an uproar throughout the medical community, as he will not cower from shaking things up. Shaking the dust out would be good … IF done smartly and wisely. Maybe we’ll even get to see Dr. Fauci go to trial as RFK turns over state’s evidence of corruption to the new head of the DoJ. Trump never even tried to lock Hillary up, however; so, maybe he’ll give Fauci a free pass, too, just like he gave him the bully pulpit on a nearly daily basis.
In spite of my concerns about RFK, I probably would have voted for him if he had stayed in the race just to have a non-conformist, non-incumbent other than Trump, whose first term failed at most of the big items he promised, but especially at taking down the Deep State or “the swamp.” He had to fire almost everyone he hired in important roles and told us all they were idiots. We should accept his opinion about nearly all of his own direct hires. That’simple and fair. That ought to say something about the leader who hired such a circus full of clowns. It certainly tells me something.
Maybe he’s been schooled by the deep state enough to figure out how to beat them. He’s certainly emboldened by how they took him down and ripped him up to get even, and some of his appointments look promising.
The buck stops with financial appointments
Then there are the people being considered as financial appointees who look and smell like the same-ol’ same-ol’ stuff. If Trump actually chooses them, he’s learned nothing! However, he has not made the appointments yet. I’ll provide two examples there as I did for the positive-looking choices.
Reportedly, he is considering Larry Kudlow for director of the National Economic Council. I could hardly imagine a more idiotic choice. Kudlow is as neocon Republican as you get. He was a huge Bush proponent during those eight years that took the nation into the all-out war-infused, economic disaster that launched my avocation in writing about economics.
He championed every dumb thing Bush did, promising the Bush tax cuts would not increase the deficit, which they most certainly did do—a lot—and saying no recession was anywhere in sight, even after the Great Recession—the worst in my lifetime—had already begun at the end of 2007. (It wasn’t officially declared until after Larry’s statement in the summer of 2008, but the housing meltdown began in 2007, and the recession was retro-dated to the last quarter of 2007 before Larry voiced his ignorant opinion.)
I am right to criticize because it was easy for me to see a huge housing disaster was coming quickly, so I started warning people about it, even though some laughed at me, and influencing my own family’s decisions in 2007, saying “Sell now because the worst real-estate meltdown in our life is coming in a manner of months.” I gave the reasons why and said it would be a global banking catastrophe. The rest is history. I can’t think of a worse choice than Krackhead Kudlow. I wouldn’t put Lunatic Larry, as I came to call him, in charge of a kindergarten candy fund.
Then there is one of Trump’s considerations for US Treasurer, Kevin Warsh, a former Fedhead. That is as status-quo as you get! Now I don’t know anything about Warsh, and maybe guilt by association isn’t fair; but I can hardly imagine the old familiar track of appointing Fed officials to the position of US Treasurer is going to bring anything new. If he actually becomes Trump’s nominee, I’ll research him. For now, he’s just one of the names being tossed around; but, seriously, after four years of Yanet Jellin’, Trump is willing to even consider a former Fed governor for the job?
In which case, Team Trump has indicated they want to pair Walsh with Scott Bessent as director of the White House’s National Economic Council, instead of Larry.
Both Warsh, 54, and Bessent, 62, are seen as having the Wall Street pedigree that Trump has been seeking to lead his economic team, and each has the support of many advisers close to the president-elect.
Trump is too impressed with pedigree. It’s in his blood. Both of these options seem like typical Wall Street banksters to me; but, again, I don’t know their details. However, when something crawls up out of a bucket of rotting fish, I’m not inclined to eat it:
Still, concerns remain over whether Warsh is loyal enough to Trump’s “America First” protectionist economic agenda. In a 2011 op-ed co-authored with Jeb Bush, Warsh said policymakers must “resist the rising tide of economic protectionism….”
Warsh was a top contender for a nomination to become chair of the Federal Reserve during Trump’s first term, but then-Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin persuaded Trump to instead choose Jerome Powell for the job.
Nuff said, I think. This would almost certainly be a return to putting swamp creatures in charge of all the major financial departments of government again. In which case, we’ll take the same trip all over again! Still, none of these guys, unlike the first two mentioned above have been selected yet.
The press, of course, is ridiculing Trump for not having already finished his picks for these top financial posts, but we are not even near the end of November yet. So, that seems obtuse:
The protracted decision-making and infighting during the Treasury secretary selection process has intensified anxiety among market participants over the incoming administration’s ability to carry out economic policymaking.
Well, they can just go wet their beds while they wait. Grow up, people. After all …
The Treasury post, fifth in the presidential line of succession, is closely connected to global financial markets. The job oversees the $28 trillion Treasuries market, nearly 40 economic sanctions programs and currency policy.
Warsh is also a guy who worked for GW Bush in the White House, and we saw what an all-out financial disaster those years became when people failed to see coming something that was not that hard to see. At least, I thought it was pretty clear. So, I cut Bush no slack for being bushwhacked (or maybe just bushwhacking all of us).
Other words of warning
Consider Trump’s financial appointments in light of a warning about the context they will be happening in from Bill Bonner, which scoffs at one of the most idiotic headlines of the year, which I also scoffed at a few days ago:
One of the dopiest headlines over the weekend was this from USA Today: “Trump inherits strongest economy in 50 years.”
Oh my. They’re tempting the gods. But Trump is not heir to a strong economy at all. He begins with a labor force that is struggling to keep up with inflation and the highest priced assets in history. And unlike Reagan, who came into office with an economy built on solid ground of low debt and low asset prices, Trump’s economy sits on the slopes of a rumbling volcano of debt ($36 trillion of government debt… $8 trillion of his own doing). And on the slopes of this Vesuvius stands the whole US capital structure — overpriced… over-extended… and overdue for a correction.
And you’re going to put those status-quo guys that I just listed in charge of getting us through this mess? They are the kinds of people who created it! That has greater disaster written all over it. Let’s hope Tump is smart enough this time to pass over those options that are being presented to him and look for an outlier to the banking world and Wall Street, not insiders.
As another writer warns in our headline picks today,
Our number one criticism of Trump was that he enabled the deep state by empowering people into positions of power who furthered the globalist agenda…. But now I’m seeing picks that reflect our earliest criticisms. Some of these are really bad. Some are OK, some are good. So as a member of this coalition I raised the alarm.
I am of the same mind to raise the alarm. Some of Trump’s picks are interesting and may be good; and, fortunately, the options that look bad on the surface are only under consideration; so he may not even pick them. I’ll research them deeper if he does.
The war front
In terms of Trump’s war cabinet during a time of many wars with US involvement, I’m going to just quote an article from 321Gold.com:
But all that hope of the non-interventionists / libertarians lasted for less than a
week. Consider Trump’s key appointments made so far.
I. II. John Rubio, as the Secretary of State, would be a continuation of Pompeo.
Elise Stefanik would be a continuation of Nikki Haley for the role of US
ambassador to the UN.
III. Mike Waltz, as the National Security Advisor, is as Neocon as one can
possibly be. Waltz had worked as an Advisor to both Donald Rumsfeld and
Dick Cheney – the two most war-mongering Republicans of the recent past.
IV. Pete Hegseth, Trump’s choice for Secretary of Defense, is far from Trump’s
stated anti-war position. Pete is an out-right military expansionist and has
advocated for “rewriting the rules of war” to ensure the US military’s
success.
After these four appointments, objective observers should have little doubt that
Trump 2.0 will continue Trump 1.0 from a policy perspective. Whatever
ideological chasms they had imagined between Trump and the previous
administrations are non-existent in the current setup. There cannot be any doubt
remaining after these appointments.
We’ll have to see what additional appointments Trump choses, but it looks like a mixed bag right now with about half of them looking like they could be the same old terrible we’ve always known. (And before you jump all over me for being critical of some of Trump’s choices, just remember lots of people jumped all over me four years ago, too; and there is not a statement I’d take back today after seeing how those cabinet choices played out so bad that Trump, himself, fired nearly all of them or kicked their butts out the door as they resigned.)