Post acquittal Trump on a roll

While the Democrats battle it out for the nomination, amidst discussions of whether that person should be moderate, or progressive, and the merits of Fidel Castro, President Trump has taken a widening and aggressive stance, after his impeachment acquittal, a position that supported many of the earlier fears of the DNC as they fought against impeachment; but now his name calling, posturing and sackings have been taken to a fever pitch, against the backdrop of rallies, where he has excoriated all that oppose him.

Shortly after the impeachment, where he was infuriated by Mitt Romney’s vote to impeach, (thus robbing him of unequivocal acquittal), the heads began to roll along with the sacking of Alexander Vindman and his brother Yevgeny, both back to the Pentagon, to be reassigned.

Then his remarks about the Democrats as “do nothing” and even worse terms, which, by extension, he decided to ramp up loyalty tests for current staff members

Most egregious was the president's public disagreement with the plea from Arthur C. Brooks at the National Prayer Breakfast, to put away partisan rancour and accept Jesus' call to love our enemies; at which Trump said, taking the podium, "I don't know if I agree with you."

MSNBC quoted the Washington Post in its coverage, "What began as a campaign of retribution against officials who participated in the impeachment process has evolved into a full-scale effort to create an administration more fully in sync with Trump's id and agenda."

Aligned with that is that anything or anyone that demonizes and infuriates the left is a starting point to stay in Trump’s good graces.

On the same theme, The New York Times reported, that the Administration was looking for those that were “insufficiently committed to the president or suspected of not aggressively advancing his agenda."

Ominously, White House Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley on Fox News, said there are "a lot of folks" in the executive branch who may not be committed to the Trump agenda. "If we find them," he added, "we will take appropriate action."

If this sounds more like a medieval court than the world’s most famous republic, then that seems to be what we are now encountering, in Washington; and the fear of loyalty tests has many staffers who thought they were safe, now very worried.

The protectionist stance sends a message that most have surmised that the president was guilty in his “perfect” call to the Ukrainian president.

“The National Security Council, the State Department and the Justice Department are targets of particular focus, according to two administration officials, and there have recently been multiple resignations and reassignments at each of those agencies,” reported the Post.

Johnny McEntee, director of personnel is the point person on the purges and seems to have been on a mandate from Trump’s tweet: “We want bad people out of our government!”

We have seen loyalty tests before, mostly in corporate life, but now that there is the reflection on the highest levels many are wondering about the fallouts, which were most recently seen in the Bush administration with the director of FEMA and the disastrous response to Katrina, and now with “Trump’s decision . . .  to appoint Richard Grenell as the next acting director of national intelligence, placing a fiercely loyal but inexperienced ally atop an intelligence structure against which the president has frequently railed,” is sending another dangerous precedent.

Supporting this effort is the president’s son, Don, Jr, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, under the cover of supporting Trump’s agenda, but in reality, say critics covering up his past, and possible corruption.

“Brendan Buck, a longtime adviser to former House speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), said that while Trump is entitled to have political appointees who support his agenda, the purity tests could make it difficult to find qualified people.

“If they also insist on hiring only people who’ve never taken issue with something the president has done, it’s going to be slim pickings,” he said, to the Post.

With the 2020 election coming closer, and closer the man who some said never wanted to be president, but did so as a public thumb nosing at Hillary Clinton, wants to stay in the job and the political benefits of loyalty can be seen in the Alabama primary with Bradley Byrne and his allegiance to Trump when the president said, “Bradley Byrne, Alabama. What a great place. Thank you, Bradley” at a White House event, which was quickly and strategically placed as support for him, a not so implicit version of quid pro quo by the president.

Seeing is believing and this is just the type of action that Speaker Nancy Pelosi feared, along with the danger of incumbent Democrats, that would further embolden the president’s notorious, and nefarious behavior; until she and other leaders were pushed by the whistleblower’s revelations on Ukraine.

Doug Jones of Alabama is representative of vulnerable Democrats, especially in ruby red states such as his, he is especially vulnerable.

With November approaching soon, the president is thinking of those independent voters or dissatisfied Democrats, in dark blue states such as Illinois, and the recent commutation of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, which sends a clear signal that Trump is taking no vote for granted.

Likewise his extension of the Muslim Ban to Nigerians, further bolstering his anti-immigrant base, and furthering his nativist stance, and by even further extension of the old Lindbergh led, America First; although a bright line around even that is dubious.

Friday’s news of an agreement with the Taliban is mostly symbolic, and dependent on the latter’s good will and honor something that Middle East scholars find questionable.

What is also questionable are the actions of the Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife Ginni Thomas who has taken her hard right stance to a recent meeting with the president trashing just about everyone, and everything, and even excoriating the White House for “blocking Trump supporters from getting jobs in the administration,” reported The New York Times. 

While somewhat outside of her square say she has taken a stance both consistent with her radicalized DNA but also seems an attempt to build on a thwarted run at Congress, in her younger years, not to mention unethical, even for a fringe organization.

“It is unusual for the spouse of a sitting Supreme Court justice to have such a meeting with a president, and some close to Mr. Trump said it was inappropriate for Ms. Thomas to have asked to meet with the head of a different branch of government< mused the Times.

Even as a fringe conservative her actions and speech have caused alarm in many quarters of the nation’s capital, and is also attached to her conservative Christianity and in fact, “Ms. Thomas — whose group, Groundswell, was formed in 2013 to strategize against Democrats and the political left and meets weekly — joined others in prayer at the start of the meeting. Some members of the group prayed at different moments as the meeting continued.”

Some at the meeting, seemingly at odds with Christian principles, suggested that Republican leaders be “tarred and feathered” as Trump, who was in attendance, asked that Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority leader, Kevin McCarthy be spared, if not from those suggested actions, perhaps from eternal hellfire.

Retribution, radicalism and retrenchment seem to be the order of the day for the post acquittal Trump administration, and as the old expression noted, “it’s all over but for the fighting.”

Updated March 9, 2020 at 6:18 p.m. DCST