In my cabinet, I often find a trashy collection of chex mix, a handful of safety pins and dark roast coffee beans. In Trump’s cabinet, all I find is a trashy mixture of yes men, con men, zealots, acolytes, boondogglers and destabilizers. Donald J. Trump’s cabinet picks are not qualified individuals, capable of leading the United States of America through a prosperous four-years. Instead, the President-elect has selected his cabinet members influenced by who he believes will remain loyal to and benefit him.
Before we assess Trump’s decisions, let’s talk about the role of a presidential “cabinet.”
A president’s cabinet is a sum of advisors who head fifteen executive departments–selected by the president-elect and confirmed by the senate. A president’s cabinet picks provide a “sneak peek” into the kinds of decisions a president will make. That is, cabinet appointments reflect a president’s qualities and priorities. Political scientist Nelson W. Polsby mentions three kinds of cabinets a president may create: “the people’s pleasers, the specialists” and–what I believe is Trump’s cabinet– “the generalists.” In this alternative government, the president-elect’s appointees do not cater to the American people, nor to their own department and the larger government. While sometimes they do both, they more often than not, serve only the president’s interests. If Trump is unsuccessful in creating this style of government, he will amend and supplant, just as he’s done in the past.
In his first term, the president-elect went through four different national security advisors. Trump’s first appointee for the role was Michael Flynn–a far right-leaning individual–whose values and qualities were akin to those of Trump. However, Flynn was removed when uncanny financial transactions between him, Russia and Turkey surfaced. Subsequently, Trump appointed H.R. McMaster, a famous (controversial, of course) lieutenant general for the United States Army who ultimately superseded many of Flynn’s advisors. Soon after earning his title, the lieutenant was challenged by his colleagues, far-right leaning news sectors, and the president himself because they believed McMster was too amicable with Iran and North Korea, while simultaneously being “too hostile” toward Israel. Trump dismissed McMaster in March of 2017 only to be dissatisfied by his following decisions. I don’t believe this term will be any different. Nor does The National Review.
The right-leaning news sector does not take an aggressive stance in support of Trump. Instead of arguing that the president-elect has made strong cabinet picks, the National Review argues that it’s not that bad. When President Joe Biden made poor cabinet choices, they couldn’t be reformed. For instance, when Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin “literally disappeared,” the president said he had no problem with it. By contrast, the National Review asserts that if individuals like Pete Hegseth and Kash Patel prove unsuccessful in their positions, Trump will have no problem replacing them with more erudite individuals.
Ultimately, Trump’s cabinet is not ideal, but it is most likely temporary. While the National Review makes a somewhat strong argument on Trump’s behalf, a president’s cabinet is more than just a bad haircut: the country’s foreign policy, military and more cannot grow and be repaired within a matter of months.
Even Fox News, arguably Trump’s most loyal fanbase, remained monotone when discussing and writing about the president-elect’s cabinet picks. Just like the New York Times and CNN, the far-right leaning news sector highlighted the sexual allegations made against Trump’s pick for Attorney General, former congressman Matt Gaetz, and his pick for Department of Defense, American television presenter Pete Hegseth. That being said, Fox News asserts that Trump’s cabinet picks are too liberal, or “woke.” What a shocker. Other cabinet appointees and Republicans in Congress are afraid that individuals like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who is openly pro-choice will stray away from the President-elect’s “strong” political agenda.
Despite receiving backlash from Democrats and Republicans alike, Trump feels pretty confident in his picks.
On his X page, the president-elect posted fourteen of his nominees–two of which are arguably his most controversial picks: Pete Hegseth and Matt Gaetz. Despite numerous sexual assault and drinking allegations, the president-elect argues that Hegseth is qualified for Secretary of Defense as a Harvard and Princeton graduate, with a successful army combat veteran history in Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover, Trump asserts that Matt Gaetz’s efforts toward reforming the Department of Justice highlights his ability to serve as a strong Attorney General. The president-elect argues that Gaetz will end a partisan Department of Justice and justice system (favoring Democrats), “protect” the borders and ultimately prove to the American people that the Department of Justice is truly just. Ironically, Matt Gaetz is being investigated by the same department he plans to head.
On Monday December 23, 2024, the House Committee of Ethics released Matt Gaetz’ report, a forty-two page document covering Gaetz’ allegations–that is, the alleged substances used by the former congressmen, specific underage girls Gaetz slept with, the means by which he contacted underage girls, whom he worked with alleged prostitution, among other ethical qualms. The extensive document’s use of names and dates makes it clear the allegations made against the former congressman are most likely true. Of course, it is also notable that nobody defended Gaetz when the allegations surfaced. Markwayne Mullin, a former congressman turned senator, explains why: Gaetz would show videos and pictures of his sexual exploits to the house floor – ultimately bragging about having sex with underage girls.
With all that in mind, Trump’s X page argues that Gaetz possesses all the qualities that make for a good Attorney general: “honesty, integrity, and transparency–”all of which TIME Magazine must believe Trump has too, given that they selected him for person of the year.
In Trump’s interview with TIME, the interviewer briefly mentions the president-elect’s nominee for the Department of Health and Human Services: RFK Jr. When asked about the nepo baby’s controversial vaccine beliefs, Trump responds ambiguously: if RFK motioned to end childhood vaccination programs, Trump would consider signing off. The president-elect asserts that the connection between autism and vaccines must and will be tested in order to corroborate or dismiss RFK’s beliefs. Notably, RFK Jr. has no background in medicine, nursing or any hard sciences, ultimately making it difficult to understand how and where RFK came to these conclusions.
While age purportedly provides wisdom and experience, the only thing that Trump has mastered is the art of self-gain. The president-elect has demonstrated this talent by creating a cabinet that best benefits, and reflects him. However, I believe a president’s cabinet must reflect America’s diversity, transcending the country’s racial, ethnic and socioeconomic realities. Instead, individuals facing sexual allegations have been nominated for departments integral to American life–nominated by somebody facing similar allegations, if not more, himself. While the grasp Trump has on angry Americans will be studied in future history books, for now, we must sit tight and pray. And I don’t even believe in God.
