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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Vanity Fair: This Is No Time for Cynicism
Vanity Fair - (archived: https://archive.ph/vsbyW ) This Is No Time for Cynicism
Writing off institutions like the Senate, which has a duty to scrutinize Donald Trump’s nominees, only plays into a would-be authoritarian’s hand.
By Molly Jong-Fast
Mitch McConnell, accompanied by John Thune takes a question from a reporter during a news conference following the weekly Senate Republican policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on November 19, 2024 in Washington, DC.by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images.
Donald Trump took a moment to interrupt the Thanksgiving holiday weekend with the announcement that Kash Patel, a conspiracy-pushing loyalist, would serve as the next FBI director. As we’ve seen since 2016, here was Trump dominating the news cycle with a controversial move, musing about replacing an FBI director he nominated, Christopher Wray, with one so boosterish that he even wrote a series of children’s books called The Plot Against the King, the first of which offers a “fantastical retelling of Hillary’s horrible plot against Trump” for “the whole family.”
It’s worth pausing to appreciate that Patel made Trump the king in this children’s book, in case that wasn’t completely obvious. But more than just being a stylistic sycophant poised to give the president-elect a rubber stamp, Patel has that Project 2025 vibe to him—that dismantle-the-government-from-the-inside-out thing. According to The Wall Street Journal, Patel “suggested that the bureau had become too powerful and that he would strip it of its intelligence-gathering role and purge it of employees who refuse to go along with Trump’s agenda.” Appointing MAGA Republicans to lead agencies they plan to disassemble is one of the tropes of Trump’s second term and ties into Project 2025’s goals of unraveling the administrative state. Patel also vowed to “come after” members of the media if Trump were to win, telling Steve Bannon, “Whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out.”
While the Patel pick only adds to the sense of gloom that Trump’s authoritarian fantasies may come to fruition, it’s important to remember that autocrats want you to believe they are more powerful than they already are. Trump has been president-elect for less than a month and we’ve seen instances in which his ambitions have been checked. His first attorney general pick, Matt Gaetz, had to withdraw because of sexual misconduct allegations (which he denies). The MAGA favorite for Senate majority leader, Rick Scott, lost a secret ballot to John Thune, a lawmaker more in the mold of Mitch McConnell (who, likely not seeking reelection, could be a thorn in Trump’s side). Scott, it should be noted, didn’t even make it to the second round; he got 13 votes, less than not only Thune (23) but John Cornyn (15).
Trump has historically bullied Republicans into doing what he wants, but in a 53-47 senate, he can only afford to lose three senators in trying to get his cabinet picks confirmed (given that JD Vance would be the tie-breaker in a 50-50 vote.) Some who could be swayed against Trump include Maine’s Susan Collins, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski, and North Carolina’s Thom Tillis. I’d also keep my eye on the independent-minded(ish) doctor Bill Cassidy and Mitt Romney’s successor John Curtis. While it’s fair to be skeptical whether some of the aforementioned senators will buck Trump and the Republican Party line—see Collins and Murkowski’s role in the fall of Roe—it’s no time to cynically write off the Senate as a check on executive power.
/snip
Writing off institutions like the Senate, which has a duty to scrutinize Donald Trump’s nominees, only plays into a would-be authoritarian’s hand.
By Molly Jong-Fast
Mitch McConnell, accompanied by John Thune takes a question from a reporter during a news conference following the weekly Senate Republican policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on November 19, 2024 in Washington, DC.by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images.
Donald Trump took a moment to interrupt the Thanksgiving holiday weekend with the announcement that Kash Patel, a conspiracy-pushing loyalist, would serve as the next FBI director. As we’ve seen since 2016, here was Trump dominating the news cycle with a controversial move, musing about replacing an FBI director he nominated, Christopher Wray, with one so boosterish that he even wrote a series of children’s books called The Plot Against the King, the first of which offers a “fantastical retelling of Hillary’s horrible plot against Trump” for “the whole family.”
It’s worth pausing to appreciate that Patel made Trump the king in this children’s book, in case that wasn’t completely obvious. But more than just being a stylistic sycophant poised to give the president-elect a rubber stamp, Patel has that Project 2025 vibe to him—that dismantle-the-government-from-the-inside-out thing. According to The Wall Street Journal, Patel “suggested that the bureau had become too powerful and that he would strip it of its intelligence-gathering role and purge it of employees who refuse to go along with Trump’s agenda.” Appointing MAGA Republicans to lead agencies they plan to disassemble is one of the tropes of Trump’s second term and ties into Project 2025’s goals of unraveling the administrative state. Patel also vowed to “come after” members of the media if Trump were to win, telling Steve Bannon, “Whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out.”
While the Patel pick only adds to the sense of gloom that Trump’s authoritarian fantasies may come to fruition, it’s important to remember that autocrats want you to believe they are more powerful than they already are. Trump has been president-elect for less than a month and we’ve seen instances in which his ambitions have been checked. His first attorney general pick, Matt Gaetz, had to withdraw because of sexual misconduct allegations (which he denies). The MAGA favorite for Senate majority leader, Rick Scott, lost a secret ballot to John Thune, a lawmaker more in the mold of Mitch McConnell (who, likely not seeking reelection, could be a thorn in Trump’s side). Scott, it should be noted, didn’t even make it to the second round; he got 13 votes, less than not only Thune (23) but John Cornyn (15).
Trump has historically bullied Republicans into doing what he wants, but in a 53-47 senate, he can only afford to lose three senators in trying to get his cabinet picks confirmed (given that JD Vance would be the tie-breaker in a 50-50 vote.) Some who could be swayed against Trump include Maine’s Susan Collins, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski, and North Carolina’s Thom Tillis. I’d also keep my eye on the independent-minded(ish) doctor Bill Cassidy and Mitt Romney’s successor John Curtis. While it’s fair to be skeptical whether some of the aforementioned senators will buck Trump and the Republican Party line—see Collins and Murkowski’s role in the fall of Roe—it’s no time to cynically write off the Senate as a check on executive power.
/snip
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
