On Wednesday, returning president-elect Donald Trump announced he would be tapping Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida as his Secretary of State, thereby handing one of the more coveted cabinet positions to a competitor-turned-ally and the first Latino who would ever fill the role (if confirmed). With Rubio, Trump is picking a supporter but also long-time Washington insider. Other choices he made yesterday and in the days prior were more controversial, as the president-elect announced candidates with much less experience for ministerial roles. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (FL-1) is Trump's pick for Attorney General, which turned some heads as Gaetz has recently been embroiled in ethics investigations and even resigned from Congress after the nomination. The 42-years old has served nearly two full terms in the House....
pull down to refresh
related posts
292 sats \ 23 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
Better than normal, but worse than hoped.
reply
18 sats \ 13 replies \ @SimpleStacker 14 Nov
I don't disagree with any of the appointments ideologically, but I'm skeptical of their ability to rein in the bureaucracy.
reply
21 sats \ 12 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
The foreign policy appointees are all more hawkish than me. However, to be fair, it's almost impossible not to be.
I would have preferred some true America first non-interventionist paleoconservative, on the assumption that it wasn't going to be an antiwar libertarian or progressive.
reply
27 sats \ 11 replies \ @SimpleStacker 14 Nov
What do you think of the whole "peace through strength" argument?
To me that's the best case for having a mix of hawks in your administration, even if you're more of a non-interventionist yourself. You can't signal too much predictability to foreign actors, so having some credibility to your threats & posturing may help you secure more peace.
reply
21 sats \ 10 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
I pretty fully reject the idea that we should be threatening and posturing towards other countries to achieve foreign policy objectives. I'd rather bring all the troops home and just embrace unilateral free trade.
I'm also not a utilitarian, so I'm not making any claims about outcomes. I just think that sort of behavior is immoral and I strongly suspect it's also counterproductive.
The version of peace through strength that I fully embrace is having an incredibly well-armed civilian population, such that no one would even consider invading.
reply
27 sats \ 7 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Nov
I think those are the objectives, can't do that from a position of weakness though... that said its impossible to gauge what's already been agreed to behind the scenes, we're just watching the scripted version
5GW isn't about invading armies and artillery anymore, otherwise our navy alone off the shores would have us covered. Space, cyber, info and clandestine ops are the modern battlespace and why posturing is still needed.
Smaller countries for example wouldn't need to invade if they can sneak a suitcase nuke into a football stadium, EMP half the country with a drone, or unleash a bioweapon... everything is asymmetrical now.
reply
4 sats \ 6 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
I know that's the case people make, but I don't think interventionists have an impressive track record compared to non-interventionists.
It seems like everyone admits the non-interventionists were right eventually, but it takes decades and they never seem to change their minds about intervention in principle.
Until I see more compelling evidence, all those hypotheticals are just FUD to me.
reply
26 sats \ 5 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Nov
Agreed but with more optimism, the Washington/Jackson/Lincoln/JFK levels of fight against Trump is his because he's weeding them out and "draining the swamp"
He's talked explicitly about the US being looted of blood and treasure with military intervention, that is the deep states doing... they're a well-resourced enemy funded by military industrial complex, foreign heads of state, and global finance, a dangerous animal needs to be trapped carefully... slow drip more devastating than a flood etc...
Feeling much better/accelerated trajectory this go around now that the wake up op has been running for ~8 years... enjoy the show and keep the popcorn handy.
view replies
22 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 14 Nov
Fair enough. I don't entirely disagree with you in principle, but I think in practice I'm more willing to embrace America having a role in actively promoting peace around the world, but with a heavy, heavy dose of skepticism as to the true incentives of those who advocate for intervention.
reply
4 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
If we're going to have an interventionist role, I do prefer it be of the form where we never actually intervene, because other states stay on their best behavior.
It's like hiring a big scary dude to work security, but having him under orders not to intervene. As long as potential malfeasors don't know he won't intervene, it's an effective deterrent.
I also don't mind Vivek's strategy, which is to use the current US overreach as negotiating leverage: i.e. we'll agree to stop funding and arming Ukraine, if you negotiate a peace settlement.
reply
15 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 14 Nov
Bingo
reply
17 sats \ 7 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 14 Nov
Did you expect someone who wasn't nominated?
reply
43 sats \ 6 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
Expecting? Not really.
I would have preferred less hawkish appointees to the foreign policy positions and I thought there was some chance of that happening.
The two I'm most excited about that aren't on there are Thomas Massie for USDA and RFK for HHS.
reply
25 sats \ 5 replies \ @398ja 14 Nov
Agree, but thinking about it, a less hawkish appointee might send the wrong signals to Iran, China, Russia etc, no?
reply
63 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
I don't really care what signals get sent to who. The only signal I want to be perfectly clear is that attacking the US will not work out for you. Otherwise, mind your own business and we'll mind ours.
Clearly, I'm in the minority though.
reply
27 sats \ 0 replies \ @398ja 14 Nov
That's perfectly reasonable.
reply
11 sats \ 1 reply \ @398ja 14 Nov
Well, Col. Douglas MacGregor agrees with you...
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
I tend to like what he has to say.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
We are currently sending the signals of unhinged to Russia, China, and Iran. Pure carrying a big stick energy.
reply
64 sats \ 36 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Nov
I hope the Rubio pick is a boomerang operation to replace him in the senate, total dink.
I lulz'd hard at the Gaetz pick in spite of my distaste for him personally, that pick is clear as day signal that the objective with the DOJ isn't to reform it or reign it in, but rather completely expend it as it gets wielded against the same people that opened pandoras box and weaponized it in the first place.
Schadenfreude season.
reply
20 sats \ 12 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
I hadn't thought about that possibility for Rubio. I share your hope.
I also share your take on Gaetz.
reply
38 sats \ 11 replies \ @SimpleStacker 14 Nov
I share @Cje95's take that Gaetz's nomination isn't real: #766750
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
Two things can be true.
reply
22 sats \ 9 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Nov
Literally everything related to Washington is a psyop so it being fake is the base case, only question is why... whatever comes next with it is planned so I guess we'll find out.
reply
20 sats \ 8 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
Hey as a person who works in Congress I would like to say I'm real imma real person!
reply
27 sats \ 7 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
Exactly what a psyop would say!
reply
34 sats \ 5 replies \ @SimpleStacker 14 Nov
OMG @Cje95 may be a fed hiding in plain sight
reply
21 sats \ 4 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
Lmaooo wait did you not know I work for a House Committee?! Its why Darth LOVES me! He's a CIA guy though its why he's so crazy about the Government
view replies
15 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
I feel so appreciated rn 🥲
reply
42 sats \ 22 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
Gaetz isnt going to get through his hearing if he makes it that far. The Ethics report is damning and he doesn't have an out. Its why he resigned effectively immediately to dodge it coming out. If he goes forward with the hearing then the Senate Judiciary Committee is going to get access to it and air out all his dirty laundry.
Rubio will easily clear confirmation and DeSantis will fill his spot with someone like Byron Donalds. That's the only reason I can think of that he skipped out on all the House Leadership races.
reply
0 sats \ 21 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Nov
I think you're trying to apply analysis to things that aren't real and the fact that they know whats going on behind the scenes and we don't, whatever this leads up to is already known and scripted
That's the point, it's how privately known information makes it into the public record... but this works both ways because no one is clean, if you're convinced of this the next question is who does he take down with him?
They're already telling us confirmation doesn't matter with recess appointments, popcorn ready?
reply
42 sats \ 20 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
As someone who works on The Hill I'm watching this stuff all first hand. The ethics investigation has been going on for 2 years I think give or take and that was public knowledge. They had announced the report was coming out Fridag and bam he resigns? Yeah its clear why he dipped.
Gaetz is an honest to god awful human. My interactions with him he leaves a bad taste in my mouth. This is the perfect way to get rid of him out of Congress quickly
reply
0 sats \ 19 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Nov
Yea it's there to be watched, doesn't mean its real
He definitely seems like a complete douche so no argument on those grounds
But I'm also not above being entertained by him causing an absolute a scene, either as AG or otherwise, for a little while anyway... as long as the end state is collapsing the DOJ temple onto itself
It'll all be a footnote after the looming constitutional convention anyway
reply
0 sats \ 18 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
I mean I am putting it out there that maybe… just maybe… this is a sick joke and once he flames out of the AG confirmation Trump nominates Kevin McCarthy and we watch Matt Gaetz combust on live TV 😂 it would truly be an amazing moment in history lol
reply
0 sats \ 17 replies \ @justin_shocknet 14 Nov
I don't think Trump would sign off on that, looks bad for him if the nomination blows up
Simplest explanation is that he's bait for a bigger trap, whatever they hit him with they'll get hit with 10x as hard after setting the precedent
reply
0 sats \ 16 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
Honestly because of how the confirmation hearing is set up its one way they ask he answers so I dont know how he could hit back with anything. His issue with Senate women is going to be the death blow
view replies
82 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 14 Nov
wen RFK
reply
256 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 14 Nov
He most likely will get Health and Human Services
reply
202 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Nov
I know Massie is linked to USDA already, but I did see RFK Jr make a video outside of their HQ. The tone was very similar to his comments towards the FDA.
reply
37 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 14 Nov
For food policies? Don't miss the next episode, we won't either!
reply
12 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 14 Nov
Just announced! 😂
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4991324-trump-nominates-kennedy-health-department/
reply