Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Trump's cabinet: 'unconventional'

(Ed. note: after various manipulations, Brains' new look is going to be viewed best in Mozilla Firefox at 125%.  Give me feedback in the comments).

Donald Trump's transition is being marked by sharp internal disagreements over key cabinet appointments and direction, both for internal West Wing positions and key national security posts, sources involved in the transition team tell CNN.

One source with knowledge of the transition described it as a "knife fight."

The split has put traditional Republican operatives such as Reince Priebus -- named Trump's chief of staff Sunday -- against more non-traditional influences such as Steve Bannon -- the alt-right leader of Breitbart News -- who will be Trump's chief strategist. A particular challenge is lack of clarity about the division of power among Priebus, Bannon and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who also has a key role in transition decisions. Another source tied to the transition described the resulting confusion as "buffoonery."

There's going to be a lot of things worth protesting in the coming years, which is why I think some people have picked the wrong battle by going into the streets over the election result, as well as those who think they can petition the Electoral College to not elect the president chosen by the people at the ballot box.  Or to be tossed, as with a wave of the hand.

Fool's errands (but remember, many of these people voted for Hillary Clinton because she is female.  And because she could win).

The divisions are being played out as Trump considers key appointments in the national security and diplomatic sectors, including secretary of state, with mainstream conservatives supporting John Bolton against Rudy Giuliani, who is seen as a loyalist to Trump.

On other key national security appointments, there is more agreement. Sen. Jeff Sessions is now the leading contender for attorney general, and is in the mix for secretary of defense as well, say multiple sources with knowledge of the transition.

Retired Lt. General Ron Burgess, former director of the DIA, is a leading contender for director of national intelligence. Retired General Michael Flynn is leading candidate for national security adviser.

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, the juniah Senatah from the Greht Steht of AlaGodDamnbama.

He's no Scaliawag!

No matter who gets what job, one description seems to fit the makeup of the short list: unconventional. And it highlights the dilemma faced by Trump, who is now torn between a campaign promise to shake up Washington and a need to build a national security team with policy experience.

The presence of so many political backers could signal that Trump values loyalty over experience and is keen to have people on board who share his worldview and are willing to depart from conventional wisdom.

The names conjure the fondest of memories of Walker Bush's rejects.

While more conventional picks had initially been rumored for State and Defense such as the head of the Council of Foreign Relations, Richard Haas, and George W. Bush's National Security Adviser, Stephen Hadley, most analysts are beginning to believe that the odds favor a more conventional choice.

One of the reasons for the non-traditional short-list is that many of the Republican Party's most senior national security experts denounced their presidential candidate during the campaign as too reckless to lead the nation safely, somewhat limiting the pool from which to draw.

But some foreign policy luminaries have suggested that Republican experts should put aside their differences and Brent Scowcroft, George H.W. Bush's national security adviser national security adviser and who backed Hillary Clinton for president, told attendees as a ceremony at the Aspen Strategy Group Monday that "If you're asked to serve, please do. This man needs help."

Don't we all.

Update: Here's what Benjamin in the comments is referring to.


Unknown said...

While the Clintonites are definitely there, these protests are also in line with both Occupy's past mobilisation & Blacklivesmatter's ongoing ones: the openly white supremacist candidate won with a minority of cast votes.

My disagreement with some of the expressed strategies aside, both history & the Milgram experiments (original & redone) show the value of early & blatant opposition.

PDiddie said...

Well-reasoned, Ben. No rebuttal. I plan on picking other battles.