this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
302 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19080 readers
4829 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump is clearly not happy with many of his key hires during his first term in office, regularly slamming former lackeys like Attorney General Bill Barr, Chief of Staff John Kelly, and National Security Adivser John Bolton. Axios reported in 2022 that Trump planned to ensure the loyalty not just of his high-profile appointments, should he win in 2024, but of thousands of mid-level staffers working throughout the government. Political views, rather than credentials or experience, are driving the process.

The outlet reported on Monday that the effort is well underway — and it’s sophisticated. The campaign is contracting “smart, experienced people, many with very unconventional and elastic views of presidential power and traditional rule of law,” according to Axios, to ensure new hires are fully onboard with the brutal policy proposals Trump has floated. It’s also using AI to vet potentail staffers, including by srubbing their social media.

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 146 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Remember all of these little articles, all the social media posts, and any other media outing. We are baring full witness to the onset of a dictatorship.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would be nice if Democratic leadership took this as the threat it is. Instead, they see it as an indication that they can do even less, move even further to the right, and demand even more from voters.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

Absolutely nobody on that list should ever be allowed to have the slightest bit of political power.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 26 points 1 year ago

Harnessing the power of AI to more efficiently install a facist totalitarian state. What an innovative and horrifying use.

And looks like any credentials or experience are going by the wayside again. It was fascinating just how bad all of his appointments were in the first term. Environmental protection agency? Put a coal lobbyist in charge. Department of Education? Grab that religious zealot who wants to abolish all public education. State Department? Get the former boy scouts president and CEO of ExxonMobil in here.

This is frightening though, the idea that Bill Bar and John Bolton sound reasonable in comparison to what he has in mind should be ringing off facist warning bells for any American. I fully expect Attorney General nominee Sidney Powell or someone similar. And for anyone expecting senate confirmations to stop this, it's possible democrats lose the senate again with Joe Manchin out and a bad map this year with democrats and most of these positions don't have any senate confirmation. He also routinely avoided issues with senate confirmation in his first administration, by appointing the facist he actually wanted to a "deputy" or "acting" role, and then leaving the actual role unfulfilled with all duties delegated to the deputy. Many of these people he never even bothered officially nominating to the senate.

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/09/813577462/how-trump-has-filled-high-level-jobs-without-senate-confirmation

[–] Hurensohn@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why does the thumbnail look like he’s sucking his own hair with a vacuum

[–] thorbot@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Here you go

[–] BoxerDevil@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] thorbot@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Now you never have to, look at the image above

[–] Pepsi@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

Well, it certainly does suck

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Trump types don't operate well with actual rules. They won't survive the on boarding process.

[–] Jordan117@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Why assume the fascistic lackeys will be ejected rather than the rules?

[–] Neato@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Trump wants to get rid of the federal workforce. He wants to go back to the Spoils system where Presidents awarded government positions and ambassadorships as favors and payment. That way there's nothing stopping from stacking the government and firing any dissenters.

It won't work. The federal government is HUGE now and it'd take years just to get an accounting of who to replace, even if you only go for supervisors and up. This WILL be a huge problem if attempted because it will decapitate every federal agency from being effective.

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually the Federal Government is quite small, but the employees were told to do more with less, now you have individuals who are unreplaceable. Entire functions of Government run through the hands of so few due to their complexity.

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

So when Trump fires all of them the government simply fails to function.

Sort of similar to how it was before, just far larger in scope of damage.

[–] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He succeeded in firing half of State last time. Crippling the government is the whole point.

[–] Organichedgehog@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Uhh no he didn't? Lol, source?

[–] xc2215x@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Trump demands so much loyalty. Not too surprising.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We did away with this a long time ago, it used to be called the "spoils" system. As in to the victor go the spoils. The end was bipartisan as it's a terrible way to run a government unless you want invite incompetence and corruption.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Ending it made sense from the pure cynical pov. If you can't award favors your opponent can't either. If you can't do something you can't be held responsible for not doing it.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

It worries me how this sounds. This is exactly the sort of thing you read and hear in fictional stories where the bad guys and good guys are fighting for control of their government.

I don't like this one bit.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

Where are they going to get those?

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The former president reportedly has long planned to overhaul the government in his image should he win another term, and Axios reported on Monday that his team is busy screening thousands of loyalists in the hopes of installing an army of up to 54,000 MAGA diehards to expand the president’s power.

Axios reported in 2022 that Trump planned to ensure the loyalty not just of his high-profile appointments, should he win in 2024, but of thousands of mid-level staffers working throughout the government.

The campaign is contracting “smart, experienced people, many with very unconventional and elastic views of presidential power and traditional rule of law,” according to Axios, to ensure new hires are fully onboard with the brutal policy proposals Trump has floated.

Trump has also repeatedly indicated that he will weaponize the Justice Department to go after his political enemies, including the people responsible for his four criminal indictments and other legal issues.

The New York Times reported the same day on Trump’s sweeping plans to attack immigrants — including through deportations.

The Axios report on Monday emphasizes that the former president and the conservative forces organizing the effort to screen potential staffers are going to stop at nothing to tear down any governmental roadblocks standing in the way of Trump’s brutal vision for the future of the country.


The original article contains 487 words, the summary contains 220 words. Saved 55%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Ah the return of the spoilage system.