The Trump Presidency 2.0

[amlove21]

The director has always been a political appointee, and usually a former DOJ prosecutor or Judge. There has only been one former agent as a director, and that was Freeh.

Comey was a former DOJ prosecutor....

It’s the deputy director, and below that has never been done before…..like having the Secretary of Defense as a civilian, which is normal…but having a JCS member being a civilian

Another first! Historic corruption often takes drastic measures to correct. I’d really hate an entrenched FBI sycophant undermining Kash as his deputy… know what, you talked me into it.

This is amazing I can’t believe the first person of color ever heading the FBI (ever) was so smart as to hire from the outside for the first time in history!

I’m excited to see the outputs- not just, you know, the hand wringing and hemming/hawing from the press for the next 2 months, but the outputs from the FBI actual FBI.

 

[Cookie_]

Remember, DEI is bad because we prefer meritocracy; hiring tv personalities, podcasters, and a general who put on a MAGA hat is all totally based on actual merit and not vibes.

 

[RackMaster]

Remember, DEI is bad because we prefer meritocracy; hiring tv personalities, podcasters, and a general who put on a MAGA hat is all totally based on actual merit and not vibes.

So his times in the NYPD and Secret Service are irrelevant?

 

[AWP]

While everyone is focused on the FBI/DOJ release of the Epstein list/Diddy lists, I have some very real expectations for Kash and Danny B at the FBI. In order of my personal preference:

<snip>

The Epstein/Diddy lists may be mind-blowing to a small swath of the American public writ large, and I agree that they should be released immediately in full; the impacts on trust in our institutions from the above-mentioned cases are, in my opinion, far more prescient/important, even given the gravity of the Epstein scandal and it's second/third order effects.

I largely agree with your post, but with a minor disagreement. Patel stated he would release Epstein files on day one.

FBI Chief Kash Patel weighs release of 'complete' Epstein flight logs

'The black book?... that's under direct control of the director of the FBI,' Patel told broadcaster Glenn Beck, endorsing the idea of Trump releasing the black book 'on day one.'

MSN

Kash Patel's confirmation as FBI director has unleashed an online frenzy of demands for him to fulfill his promise to release Jeffrey Epstein's infamous black book "on day one," with long-standing speculation that President Trump himself is on the list.

Bondi ls also quoted as having those files on her desk and under review. Why review them? Pending litigation? Scrubbing information? And where are the JFK and RFK files?

This stuff matters because it is both sensational and low hanging fruit. It feeds into our country' short attention spans, but again it is low hanging fruit. Easily done and posted to a government archive (presumably not created by DOGE on a Cloudflare server) within hours of approving its release or so being sworn in as Director of the FBI.

That's why the files need to be released and released now. It is too easy, too much of a W, and all too suspicious the longer they wait and wait.

This is an easier victory than an under-15 BOYS soccer team against the best WHOLE ASS ADULT women in the US.
https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/ne...-the-u-s-womens-national-team-in-a-scrimmage/

 

[Cookie_]

So his times in the NYPD and Secret Service are irrelevant?

He's been outside of Law enforcement for almost as long as he was in it. Dude was never a supervisory agent.

Would you hire him as a VP for your company if someone with a similar resume was up for it?

------------
I'm pointing out that sometimes people will yell about "merit" but that shit only seems to apply if we're discussing minorities or people with politics we don't like.

 

[Marauder06]

Remember, DEI is bad because we prefer meritocracy; hiring tv personalities, podcasters, and a general who put on a MAGA hat is all totally based on actual merit and not vibes.

“General Caine is an accomplished pilot, national security expert, successful entrepreneur, and a ‘warfighter’ with significant interagency and special operations experience.” But yeah, let's focus on a hat.

 

[AWP]

How do you break down and rebuild an organization using people with longstanding ties to that organization? How do you break down and rebuild an organization with outsiders or low-level folks who never saw the organization at a high level? How do you not cripple an organization's ability to function while you break and rebuild?

Were I king for a day I'd have fired upper, upper-level folks then used their immediate subordinates to generate reports on how to save, what to cut, who to cut, etc. I'd review those findings with a very small team of trusted advisors. Within 6 months, go forth and execute the decisions. That isn't very cash money "move fast and break things" of me, but it meets necessary checks and balances, allows incoming leadership to see what the underlings can/ can't/ will/ won't do, and doesn't do...this.

Good initiative, poor judgement.

 

[Cookie_]

“General Caine is an accomplished pilot, national security expert, successful entrepreneur, and a ‘warfighter’ with significant interagency and special operations experience.” But yeah, let's focus on a hat.

And it's too bad there isn't a single 4 star in the military who has a background that's anything similar.
------

Our SECDEF literally said he'd always doubt whether former CJCS got his job because of skill or race. We've now appointed somebody who doesn't meet the established pre-reqs for the position. The only thing that's been brought up for why Trump knows him is he wore a MAGA hat and said he could beat ISIS in a week (lol).

Do we give a shit about merit or not? It's fine if we don't, but let's stop pretending then.

ETA: I wanna give @amlove21 props, because he's been pretty clear that all he cares about for "merit" is if that person will do what the administration asks or not. Sometimes that person doesn't meet the "merit" of the position historically (Hesgeth) sometimes they do (Patel); either way, both will do what the administration asks, which is what he sees as the qualification for the job.

I might disagree with his view, but it's at least consistent one.

 

[Marauder06]

And it's too bad there isn't a single 4 star in the military who has a background that's anything similar.
------

Our SECDEF literally said he'd always doubt whether former CJCS got his job because of skill or race. We've now appointed somebody who doesn't meet the established pre-reqs for the position. The only thing that's been brought up for why Trump knows him is he wore a MAGA hat and said he could beat ISIS in a week (lol).

Do we give a shit about merit or not?

I'm not following the pre-reqs for CJCS. Can you share them with me? If you're talking Goldwater-Nichols, there's a specific proviso authorizing a waiver, i.e. specifically authorizing what the president has done, i.e. meets the requirements.

I think I already wrote something about how dumb it is to focus on somebody's hat.

 

[Topkick]

because he's been pretty clear that all he cares about for "merit" is if that person will do what the administration asks

Well, that is what we voted for.

 

[Cookie_]

I'm not following the pre-reqs for CJCS. Can you share them with me? If you're talking Goldwater-Nichols, there's a specific proviso authorizing a waiver, i.e. specifically authorizing what the president has done, i.e. meets the requirements.

I think I already wrote something about how dumb it is to focus on somebody's hat.

You're correct the president can, if it's in the national interest. Which goes back to my point; there's not a single qualified 4 star general, so we had to pull a 3 star out of retirement?

Again, is this merit or because the President met the guy? Why is second guessing his qualifications somehow different that CQ Brown?

----------

I wanna make it clear that I'm not trying to argue Caine is or is not qualified. Much to my point earlier about consistent, I'm willing to look at people who don't traditionally meet all "preffered requirements". It's a broader discussion about how we apply "meritocracy", and where the boundaries are for that.

 

[AWP]

Not sure about GO's, but officers can be fired "without cause." Your boss can dislike your hair color, summarily fire you, and barely require justification.

Nearly every president has purged the FOGO ranks at some point, some have fired them while at war. Some FOGOs got away with murder and were not fired. When we question "loyalty" we need to question if that is to a President or the oath of office, that pesky "Constitution" clause.

And if we beat ISIS in a week or even a month I'm 6'2", 220, and have 5x5 2-way comms with God.

 

[Marauder06]

You're correct the president can, if it's in the national interest. Which goes back to my point; there's not a single qualified 4 star general, so we had to pull a 3 star out of retirement?

Again, is this merit or because the President met the guy? Why is second guessing his qualifications somehow different that CQ Brown?

----------

I wanna make it clear that I'm not trying to argue Caine is or is not qualified. Much to my point earlier about consistent, I'm willing to look at people who don't traditionally meet all "prefered requirements". It's a broader discussion about how we apply "meritocracy", and where the boundaries are for that.

Can you point me to anywhere that I second-guessed GEN Brown's appointment? Because I don't think I did. That call was the President's to make, just like this one was.

GEN Brown's predecessor was a guy who checked all the blocks for "pre-reqs" but then bragged about undermining the Commander in Chief and ran his mouth about him while in uniform and after. Some would say he did a terrible disservice to the military profession. Hopefully this pick will be better.

 

[Box]

Merit s a funny thing.

Lee Iacocca took a job as an engineer at the Ford Motor Company after finishing his Masters Degree in Industrial Engineering. On his merit - he climbed to the very top and became the President of the Ford Motor company.
Then - in spite of his merit - he got fired - because to quote Henry Ford II; "sometimes you just don't like somebody"

Then - even after the Pinto nearly drove Ford into the poor house - Chrysler still hired him to be their CEO in 1979 - because merit.

Polyticks is different. Merit in polyticks is measured by a very subjective ideological measuring stick.
What is the objective merit to "earn the presidency" ???
Well, according to Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the president must only demonstrate the following "merit"
-gotta be a natural-born citizen of the United States
-gotta be at least 35 years old
-have to have been a resident for 14 years

Most importantly - you have to figure out how to convince 270 members of the electoral college to vote for you.
You can suck at life.
You can bang movie stars.
You can wag your dick at members of the media.
You can court foreign leaders for profit.
You can join secret societies in college.
You can tell people you feel their pain while you sodomize their daughters.
You can snort cocaine until your eyes bleed.
You can buy and sell drugs while smoking so much goddamned reefer that people call you and your friends "The Choom Gang"
...and STILL be elected to the presidency of the United States of America

The sad fact will always be - "Merit" has NOTHING to do with American politics.
Nothing at all.

American politics are all about popularity, profit, and favors.
To quote the freshly minted junior Senator from Delaware, Joseph Robinette Biden, "Don't assume I'm not corrupt. It takes a lot of money to run for the US Senate, even in Delaware. And you have to go to the people with money and do favors for them."

Merit?
Nonsense.
Not in government.

The government of the United States of America would collapse if you reduced it to an absolute meritocracy. For one - sales of lunch time Martinis would plummet because diplomats would be in the office making trade deals instead of spending the afternoon on a 3-Martini power lunch.
...or is that whole "3 Martini Power Lunch" where merit resides?

"Well, what is it you say you do here?"
Well Sir, I do exactly what I was hired to do - I serve as a scapegoat for their shenanigans.
...and therein is where my REAL merit resides.

 

[Cookie_]

Can you point me to anywhere that I second-guessed GEN Brown's appointment? Because I don't think I did. That call was the President's to make, just like this one was.

GEN Brown's predecessor was a guy who checked all the blocks for "pre-reqs" but then bragged about undermining the Commander in Chief and ran his mouth about him while in uniform and after. Some would say he did a terrible disservice to the military profession. Hopefully this pick will be better.

Whoops, should have been clearer on that Mara. That wasn't intended to be directed at you, just broadly refering back to the comments Hesgeth had made that I first mention.

We're in agreement that the president has broad authority to fill these appointments.

 

[SpongeBob*24]

Would you hire him as a VP for your company if someone with a similar resume was up for it?

------------

Yes I would.

Scenario - I'm a leaf eating VP millionaire who needs my Donut making business shookup. I'm too afraid to fire my buddies who helped get me these millions, but my company isn't doing well and losing money because these buddies are wasting my money experimenting with exotic wedding cakes. Six quarters in a row we have loss milions. We have strayed away from our original founding principles - MAKE DONUTS CHEAP AGAIN!

I don't hire a baker as the Deputy, I hire I meat eating pit Viper that spent his career solving hard problems to come in and fix my business. He's not afraid to say you're fired, with or without a severance package. He has no ties to the losers bringing me down. This dude is solely focused on my guidance - FIX THIS COMPANY!!

He's out in 6 months and has something great to add to his resume. My company is booming again bevause I'm able to hire people who just want to make donuts and I can still sleep well at night in my BUZZ LIGHTYEAR PJS!

It's not rocket surgery.....

 

[amlove21]

Remember, DEI is bad because we prefer meritocracy; hiring tv personalities, podcasters, and a general who put on a MAGA hat is all totally based on actual merit and not vibes.

Now you’re getting it. “Force your enemy to adhere to their own rules.” - Saul Alinsky.

Strawman every pick all you want, bemoan their ‘lack of experience’ in your opinion all you’d like, I’m here it.

Dan Bongino gave up (estimated) $10-$30M a year to be a civil servant after being a NY beat cop and secret service special agent to be FBI asst director for $185k a year.

Tulsi is a Russian spy, Elon is a closeted Nazi, Hegseth is an unqualified TV host, Bongino is a just some podcaster, Kavanaugh is a serial gang rapist, Trump is a Russian asset, RFK is crazy anti-vax conspiracy theorist. Just keep doing this stuff, it keeps working.

Did this guy have ‘experience’? I’m old enough to remember crickets when these appointments flew through without so much as a whisper about ‘standards and norms’ and experience’. We didn’t make the rules, we are just playing the game as the other side made it.

 

[amlove21]

Merit s a funny thing.
...snip

You missed one important role merit plays- when the side that doesn't care about merit wants to try and wield your own values against you, they'll default to what they think the "merit" of your picks are as if they ever cared about it. Merit is VERY important in that regard.

 

[DA SWO]

@cookie
Have you read LtGen Caine's bio?
There are other 3 and 4 stars who COULD do the job, are they the best person for the job?
Trump gets to pick the person he thinks is the best. That checks and balances thing.

 

[AWP]

Talking to folks at work the concern isn't justifying our jobs, but all important wording. What is too much or not enough? AI is crawling through the responses, if the AI doesn't like your reply does a human investigate? In short, what is the overall process and standards?

I have yet to speak to one person who is scared of providing bullets. What concerns every single one of us are all of the unknowns. Task? Check. Conditions? Check. Standards? Yeah, nah. We don't know the standards or how they (if they even exist) are applied. And one where the task is vague; "approx. 5 bullets." Is that 4-6? Why not say that? Is 3 okay because over halfway to 5? Is 7 too many? A bullet is a single sentence, what if we use two sentences per bullet?

This is why the 5 Bullets directive is dumb and causing concern. No standards, vague orders, no defined end state. Pretty much like a lot of things so far.