Trump appointment news
Retired general John Kelly is Trump’s choice to head the Department of Homeland Security:
Kelly retired from the Marine Corps earlier this year after leading U.S. Southern Command for three years, during which he was involved in the oversight of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay.
He served three tours in Iraq, and holds the somber distinction of being the most senior military officer to lose a child in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan. His son, Marine 2nd Lt. Robert Kelly was killed in November, 2010, in Helmand Province, Afghanistan.
Known as an outspoken but loyal commander, Kelly will be first to lead the department who is not a lawyer and the fifth overall.
Seems fine to me.
DHS also involves immigration enforcement, and Kelly has some experience with that, as well.
People are still eagerly awaiting Trump’s announcement for Secretary of State, which has been drawn out and has garnered enormous and varied speculation, as Trump interviews contender after contender (it reminds me of the fairy tales in which a king questions suitor after suitor vying for the right to wed the princess). As I’ve written before—and probably will write again—Trump certainly knows how to maximize publicity.
Speaking of which (Secretary of State, not princesses and fairy tales), today Trump discussed the rumors that he was only considering Mitt Romney for the SOS post in order to humiliate him:
After being named Time’s “Person of the Year” on the “Today” show Wednesday, Trump said Romney is still in the running despite several other people who have worked their way into contention in recent days.
“I’ve spoken to him a lot, we’ve come a long way together,” Trump said. “We had some tremendous difficulty, but we’ve come a long way together.”
Trump denied stringing Romney along as revenge for some of the comments the 2012 GOP presidential nominee made about him…
“It’s not about revenge, it’s about what’s best for the country,” Trump said.
Well, for what it’s worth, I’ve maintained right along that this isn’t about revenge, and that Romney’s a real candidate. It seems Trump agrees—at least, for public consumption.
I continue to think that Trump’s even considering Romney for the post at all was another brilliant PR move, one of many (beginning with Trump’s victory speech in the wee hours of the morning after the election) that signaled that, contrary to expectations, Trump was not going to do a whole lot of stomping on his former enemies.
I was very cheered by the signal, and similar signals make me guardedly hopeful. It Trump chose Romney to be SOS, I’d be even more hopeful. But even if he doesn’t (and I have no idea if he will), I have never seen Romney as humiliated and won’t see him as humiliated then. He’s what they used to call a gent, and has a natural dignity that has not deserted him and that would be likely to stand him in good stead in the post, or in most anything he chooses to do.
[NOTE: Here’s an interesting article at Vox on the Kelly appointment, and Trump’s general habit (pun intended) of appointing military men to Cabinet positions.]
The appointment of Kelly will set off a howl. For one, my daughter will no doubt feel vindicated for saying that Trump would organize unemployed, uneducated white men into militias. Worse than she feared. He is bringing in retired Marines to no doubt organize trained killers into militias. (That is fanciful projection)
Don’t ask where this intelligent woman gets such stuff; there is more. Nor why she believes it. She does not live in some cloistered world, in which she is habitually prey to conspiracy theories; but, actually functions at the executive level among highly educated professionals. That is what makes it all the more disturbing. Obviously, such nonsense is discussed, and accepted, among apparently sophisticated people.
Regarding Romney, the near hatred of him among a vocal percentage of Trump supporters is shocking. I agree that even if he tried, Trump could probably not hurt Romney on a personal level; but, I hope that is not the motive, because it would validate some negative impressions of Trump that I am in the process of modifying.
Maybe this is a timing thing.Trump may want to get is supporters so enthused about his other cabinet picks that they will accept Romney. It could be a bit like talking with the President of Taiwan and then naming the Iowa governor who is a friend of China’s leader to be ambassador. Who knows?
Trum was in the habit of claiming that his lack of service in Vietnam made him braver than those who served the US through the US military.
There are a few reasons for that.
1. Ego
2. Strategic push pull techniques, anyone in Judo would comprehend that or in wrestling.
3. Hiring good retainers or vassals who can do what he can’t or won’t.
Trum was willing to “burn it all down” when he thought he would lose or when he was just crashing the Republican primaries at the behest and favor request of his good friend the Clintons, but now is a different phase of the game entirely. “You’ll be in jail” is like the weak dog’s howl right before it loses, although in this case it didn’t lose.
In the second game, there’s less need for posturing. Posturing and propaganda works because most people are weak and want to follow gods, leaders, or some kind of all knowing, all powerful Authority.
Now that the AG of Oklahoma is rumored to head up the EPA, grab the popcorn and watch more liberal heads explode
This remains to be seen but so far its setting itself up to be that way, which if you think about it would scare the elites who have been very busy getting us to hate and loath ourselves till we just holler and ask for change that we otherwise would never consider.
Trumps picks are turning out to lean towards productivity and have even made those who live off of the states largess worry quite a bit as its not so easy if the persons behind the current trends are going to do their civic duty and negotiate.
the elite and academics have always thought that the self organization of human groups doesnt happen without political moves, and never want to accept that it happens despite such not because of such.
you can see this in the idea of not informing people in accidents or in mild disasters for fear of triggering some crazy response in the crowd, of which i am quite at a loss to find an example of (though you can find plenty when provacateurs gin up the crowd, including how the term gin up was born)
however i can find thousands of examples that in the absence of intervention by the state, people self organize to function… just look at film clips at the earth quake in aceh yesterday
its this self organization that always gets the planners when the subjects cant be forced or can choose!
its this kind of thing that has made history very much a more interesting thing, because without this agency and ability to veer off, we stop looking at the people and historially follow the elite… but in these times, we ignore the elite and the plight of the common man becomes more interesting due to that mass uncooperatoin with the machinations of those who claim to be others betters.
As I see, Neo, your attitude about Trump seriously improved recently compared to before election day. His moves revealed his strong traits and competence, and I expect a growing acceptance of the man from his critics in the future. Not a love yet, but still…
People that have never worked in business have not been exposed to things like a company working closely and respectfully with people that work for a company that’s currently suing them.
It’s business, people, not a sorority.
Artfldgr”
Conservatives should go back and read Jude Wanniski’s classic, The Way the World Works. Wanniski reminds us over and over again of the lesson of history that there is great collective wisdom in the decisions made by the American voters. ?It’s not often wise to second-guess them; it’s better to listen to what they are saying.
This is one of those fair weather sources to bring up only on those occasions when the “great collective wisdom” of the American voters chooses wisely, that is, when we happen to agree with their choice.. But why did they pick Obama twice, Bill Clinton twice?
The Marxists, aided by all their fellow travelers and useful idiots in academia, the media and the leviathan cultural and entertainment industries, have been marching through all our institutions that shape the mindsets and worldviews of the American voters for a century. Why do you think that every national election is now a toss-up – because the philosophy of Collectivism and the real world consequences it has demonstrated wherever it’s been tried are so appealing?
We’re on the lip of a cliff where the “great collective wisdom” of the American voters could choose the Collective. They’ve been seduced their entire lives to think everything they want should be free, painless and provided by the beneficent central government.
Trump can’t explain any of this to the American voter. He doesn’t even understand it himself. Reagan knew how to do it, Cruz and Rubio also, but unfortunately, the “great collective wisdom” of the American voters chose very, very poorly months before November 2016.
The Kelly choice raises a red flag, not because he isn’t qualified, but because he’s the third retired general to be picked for a very important position. Bannon’s fingerprints are all over these appointments. Is this a war cabinet?
Neo:
What Romney said about Trump during the campaign was vicious and vulgar, not gentlemanly. Uncalled for.
I have some serious reservations about Romney’s savvy. He did not need to say the nasty things he did about Trump.
There are some neverTrumpers that I have not heard about since the election. Sen. Sasse of Nebraska is one.
As to Trump’s pick of generals, I am all for it. Generals in command take little bullshit. The generals he has selected are entirely appropriate for their designated tasks. Yes, OtherChuck, it is a war cabinet; a war against the Progressive ruin of the USA, the dismantling of the fortresses of the Progs. Generals understand command and control.
Frog:
Vicious and vulgar? I don’t agree.
The most vicious and vulgar politician during this campaign season was undoubtedly Donald Trump. Romney called him things that he actually seemed to be. Romney also thought (as most people did) that Trump would lose, and Romney was trying—in his role as the most recent nominee and therefore supposedly party leader—to save the election and keep it from Hillary Clinton.
Sergey:
My attitude about Trump (which has indeed improved since the election) merely reflects his behavior since the election, which has improved markedly and dramatically.
If his behavior um-improves, my attitude will un-improve accordingly.
“Generals understand command and control.”
Indeed they do. That is why putting one in charge of DHS is problematic. The Department of Homeland Security should not exist. It’s bad enough that we have multiple fully armed national police entities such as DEA, BATF, FBI, TSA, as well as armed wings of other departments like National Parks, IRS, and the Forest Service. With the creation of DHS and its own quasi-military overseeing all the rest, it’s a blueprint for a potential police state. Now you put a retired general in charge?
I believe that all generals/admirals understand the fact that the U.S. armed services exist because of the will of the people. Back in my days as a recruiter we had a motto to remind us of that as we went out into the civilian world to find new recruits: “Civilians – they all outrank us because we work for them.”
Military men who have risen to flag rank understand how to organize, motivate, direct, and supply an organization. All skills necessary to be a cabinet rank department head. Military men who have actually seen war, as Trump’s appointees have, are the most unwilling to resort to military force because they know the costs in blood and treasure.
What I do worry about for any of the appointees is their inability to deal with the bureaucrats such as those in the VA who have stymied General Shinseki and businessman Bob McDonald in their attempts to reform it. When you can’t fire or discipline malingerers, malcontents, and incompetents, your power to bring about change is severely limited. And that is the major problem in our bureaucracies.
That is one of the major problem of our time: the bureaucracies that govern us are themselves ungovernable. And this will be the main problem for Trump, not only in VA reform, but in all his policies.
Neo, I am disappointed that you wrote “Romney also thought (as most people did) that Trump would lose, and Romney was trying–in his role as the most recent nominee and therefore supposedly party leader–to save the election and keep it from Hillary Clinton.”
Romney proved during this campaign that he was not a leader. He and millions believed the MSM and the polls, as I believe you did too. He did nothing effective against Hillary. If one wants to defeat Hillary, one does not violate Reagan’s commandment to never speak ill of another Repub, especially when one is not a candidate.
A gentleman has manners, even when the provocation is extreme. Romney blew it. You will note that GW Bush remains gentlemanly despite a zillion provocations over the past 16 years.
JJ: Thanks. Agree.
Frog:
It’s interesting that you don’t quote these vicious and vulgar things that you claim Romney said.
And Reagan’s commandment was violated much much worse by most of the GOP, especially by Donald Trump. He lied in really vicious ways about most of his opponents. Flat out lied.
Romney called it like he saw it, and I never caught him in a lie, nor was he vulgar in anything I saw that he said. Perhaps I missed something. If so, you should quote it and I would revise my judgment.
Frog:
By the way, you said I believed the MSM and the polls.
The MSM was completely irrelevant in my belief system. I believed Trump likely to lose for my own reasons, which were based mostly on polls but I gave him a 1 in 3 chance of winning. Not at all the same as most of the MSM. I also thought he had a very good chance of getting the nomination, and I thought that way back in August of 2015. Very different from what the MSM was saying.
A one in three chance isn’t bad at all. As far as polls go, to say I “believed” them is stretching it. I repeatedly said that they were flawed but that they were nevertheless the best information we had. And in fact, they turned out to be spot on about the popular national vote. It was the state votes (some of them, anyway) that the polls were wrong about. I made it very clear that state polls were less reliable even than national ones, and less current as the date rolled around, and therefore more suspect. But they were the best information we had.
JJ:
What you say about the caliber of our military is commendable, and I agree. However, there is a good reason why we don’t have the military in charge of domestic law enforcement. You can find a brief but very clear account of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 as well as the Insurrection act of 1807 at Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
Note that its passage arose from a disputed national election in which Tilden had the popular vote, while the electoral vote went to Hayes. The dispute was bad enough that congress had to pick the winner.
Neo,I fear you do not understand gentlemanliness. Maybe that’s your NYC upbringing–not a lot of gentlemen on view there. I am not here to repeat Romney’s quotes; we have all heard them. I am also not excusing other candidates, past or present. That is not my task.
My task was to idicate that Romney’s anti-Trump remarks were about as venal as any uttered. That was not gentlemanly, and that has come to haunt him as he deals with the Pres-Elect.
Sanders debating Clinton was in fact gentlemanly in word and deed.
Remember the old Grantland Rice sports dictum: Nice guys finish last.
Frog:
Nice sliding out of it. We all know the quotes you’re referring to? I certainly don’t. You made some accusations and you need to back them up.
And quit with the New York stuff. I grew up a long time ago when gentlemen were gentlemen, including in New York.
You also don’t seem to know the meaning of the word “venal“:
What on earth are you referring to? “About as venal as any uttered”?????
As for your “task” here, your task is whatever you make it, I suppose. But you don’t actually have some sort of designated task here. I would think one of your tasks would be—as with anyone—to back up what you say with logic and evidence.
A new pick, for Interior department (federal land management): McMorris-Rodgers.