Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

muriel_volestrangler

(101,307 posts)
Wed Jan 18, 2017, 09:16 PM Jan 2017

The Empty Trump Administration

Politico's Michael Crowley has a nice piece explaining the missing National Security Council staffers, and the dangers that could cause if there's an early crisis. Hundreds of briefing papers have been created by Obama's NSC and sent to Team Trump, but the New York Times reports that no one knows if they've been reviewed.

Yet the NSC is ahead of the curve for this administration. Look at the big four departments. There's no Trump appointee for any of the top State Department jobs below secretary nominee Rex Tillerson. No Trump appointee for any of the top Department of Defense jobs below retired general James Mattis. Treasury? Same story. Justice? It is one of two departments (along with, bizarrely, Commerce) where Trump has selected a deputy secretary. But no solicitor general, no one at civil rights, no one in the civil division, no one for the national security division.
...
Overall, out of 690 positions requiring Senate confirmation tracked by the Washington Post and Partnership for Public Service, Trump has come up with only 28 people so far.

The Atlantic's Russell Berman had a good story two weeks ago about how far behind Trump was. Since then? If anything, it's getting worse -- he's added only two of those 28 since Jan. 5. As Berman reported, the Partnership for Public Service suggested a president should have "100 Senate-confirmed appointees in place on or around Inauguration Day." At this pace, he won't have 100 nominees by the end of February, let alone having them confirmed and hard at work.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-18/the-empty-trump-administration

At what level is it better to have no appointee, rather than someone that Trump would appoint?
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

underpants

(182,776 posts)
1. I'd been wondering about that
Wed Jan 18, 2017, 09:24 PM
Jan 2017

Super brain Jared asked at the first visit to the White House how many staffers (just WH staffers) needed to be replaced - Answer all of them. They had no idea.

vlyons

(10,252 posts)
2. Republicans not only cannot govern, they don't want government to work.
Wed Jan 18, 2017, 09:29 PM
Jan 2017

Republicans don't believe in government. They only believe in capitalism and privatizing everything that isn't nailed down. Republicans defund, understaff, and under-regulate, and destroy government as much as possible.

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)
4. The civil service can run their departments indefinitely
Wed Jan 18, 2017, 09:55 PM
Jan 2017

Probably better off with dedicated civil servants than anybody who actually chooses to work for Trump.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
5. I expect civil service protections to be one of the first things on the
Wed Jan 18, 2017, 10:03 PM
Jan 2017

chopping block during the Trump Junta's consolidation of power. Who is going to stop them?

Crash2Parties

(6,017 posts)
8. Simple explanation: each appointee takes care of his own fiefdom per King Trump's decree.
Thu Jan 19, 2017, 02:12 AM
Jan 2017

And they can't do so until they actually are in the position.

hedda_foil

(16,373 posts)
9. Stock up on plastic sheeting and duct tape, kids.
Thu Jan 19, 2017, 02:26 AM
Jan 2017

Fill the bathtub with water and load in the provisions.

Better hunker down in the basement and duck n cover.

The Reichstag is lookin' to blow.

The only question is LIHOP or MIHOP.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Empty Trump Administr...