The Trump presidency has experienced more backlash and inner turmoil than most administrations had yet to see within the first seven months. Some political pundits and elected officials from the left side of the aisle argue that the executive branch can only deteriorate from this point on. However, the current Chief of Staff General John F. Kelly, who was promoted from his role as the Secretary of Homeland Security, is on a quest to bring order to the train wreck that is the trump administration.

A Glimmer of Hope

General Kelly has not only fired Anthony Scaramucci for mistakenly projecting a narrative that suggested he controlled the reins of the cabinet, but he is also the driving force behind the dismissal of the most controversial figure associated with the president yet: Steve Bannon.

The former chief strategist, who worked as a media executive, drew criticism when he was appointed to the newly created position.

For one, he had no background in politics, which called into question why the president would make up a title for someone who was not familiar with the inner-workings of government. Second, and most importantly, he was a chairman at Breitbart News, a far-right website that became a platform for the alt-right, which accounts for neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and the Ku Klux Klan.

After the events at a “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia that cost one woman her life, people called upon Trump to fire Bannon since he stood as a representative for these nationalists.

In addition to that, most Trump officials were convinced that Bannon was the White House leaker, and that theory was only proved further when he gave a scathing interview to a liberal journalist who challenged the president’s position on North Korea. Despite the fact that Bannon was already on the path to losing his job, he claimed that there is no “military solution” to Kim Jong-un’s threats and that “they got us.”

Bannon’s departure drew the most approval from Trump critics who knew that he had influenced most of the president’s controversial decisions, including his most recent choice to call out “both sides” in his response to Charlottesville.

Now that he is finally out, there is hope that Trump will refrain from making gaffes that provide support for nationalists, as shown by these tweets from two self-proclaimed white supremacists:

An appetite for vengeance

But his chance at salvation could be ruined by Breitbart executives who may seek revenge on the cabinet for giving their colleague the cold shoulder.

After all, Bannon’s main motive for joining the Trump team was so that he could gain exposure for the conservative news site, playing right into what Anthony Scaramucci had implied when he said the chief strategist was “building his brand” off of the president’s power. So, when news broke that Bannon had been let go, Breitbart’s editor-at-large Joel Pollak revitalized anticipation of this administration’s eventual collapse when he tweeted this:

Bannon himself has expressed a similar sentiment that shows he is revved up to return to his previous line of work for reasons that may or may not be limited to the fact that he wants to continue exposing White House secrets.

In his interview with the Weekly Standard, he relished in the fact that he is now “free” and fully prepared to “crush the opposition.”

Moreover, he made an astounding claim that the Trump presidency is over. While it is not certain if he will help make that prediction happen, his assertion in addition to the close relationship that he has with the pro-white groups that Trump has tried to separate himself from shows that he was clearly not one of the “best people” that needed to serve with the president.

Answering the question

To end this three-part piece, we have to answer the question posed in the title. Trump may have been a successful businessman before he began his contentious presidency, but as leader of the free world, he has not demonstrated the wit or good judgment that it takes to ensure that his cabinet members are fit for the roles that they are randomly given.

From a liberal’s perspective, the argument is simple: President Trump cannot deviate from the urge to hire people who, like himself, have little to no experience in government. Meanwhile, conservatives also find themselves fed up with the fact that the candidate who repeatedly promised to “drain the swamp” has added an influx of former Wall Street bankers, such as Anthony Scaramucci and Steve Bannon, to his cabinet.

No matter what side you are on, you have to question whether or not Trump’s version of “swap-draining” means that a president’s administration should erratically give an undeserved platform to corporate cronies, bigoted nationalists, and above all else, inexperienced family members.

And yet, if you were to ask Donald Trump about the ethics of his appointments, there is no doubt that he would stand by his decision-making and maybe even reiterate the point he made at the Arizona rally on Tuesday night: “I invented the term ‘extreme vetting.’”

If that is true, then why doesn’t he extremely vet his own employees? Why would he hire a National Security Advisor who the previous president warned him about? Why would he accept the resignation of an employee who warned him about another? And lastly, why would he consistently hire people who represent the same “swamp” that he promised to drain? When all of these factors are taken into account, it becomes quite clear that the businessman-turned-president does not hire the best people nor does he make the effort to do so.

Follow the page Donald Trump
Follow
Don't miss our page on Facebook!