Storm clouds loomed around John Kelly well before most people recognized him as a Trumpist. At his sycophantic Senate hearing, the Homeland Security committee skimmed over his brutal record at Guantanamo. Rubber bullets flew on his watch. The alleged moderate also ardently defends drug war policies, including the enforcement of marijuana laws in states where it’s legal. His authoritarianism was never hidden.
Maybe it was the stupor into which a general’s stars send many civilians. Whatever the case, the political class’s hopes for Kelly have failed miserably. This chief of staff has operated more like a gung-ho fighter in the Trump Wars than any kind of “adult” figure. President number forty-five continues to radiate chaos, craziness and hate.
We need a Chief of Staff who is sane and politically adept. Which means Kelly must be replaced. Of the possible alternatives, OMB director Mick Mulvaney is the best option. Readers of this blog (except Ebrun) will not like the former Congressman’s politics. But he stands the best chance of correcting Trump’s course toward disaster.
In stark contrast to the novice Kelly, Mulvaney is a seasoned politician. His rapid rise in Washington proves that he has the savvy to manage the White House. It is unlikely that as Chief of Staff, Mulvaney would have shepherded an abuser into top roles. Mulvaney could stop more fiascos like the Porter matter, which would be good for political stability and for the safety of female employees.
Speaking of women, Mulvaney doesn’t seem to share the toxic cultural obsessions of Kelly and Trump. He’s a Tea Party budget cutter–period. The austerity politics he’s committed to, is not exactly good for the country. But it’s also null until the next time Republicans can set reconciliation rules. Meanwhile, there’s at least a chance Mulvaney would nudge Trump away from his signature bigotry.
I want to be clear: We should have low expectations for any Chief of Staff. This administration will never have a James Baker or a John Podesta, in part because the president wouldn’t want one and in part because people of that caliber won’t work for him. Mick Mulvaney may be the closest we can get, certainly in comparison to John Kelly.
Alexander Jones is an original contributor to PoliticsNC.
“President number forty-five continues to radiate chaos, craziness and hate.” As a summary of the Trump presidency, it is excellent. It is also totally depressing.
As for Kelly leaving and Mulvaney as a replacement, I seriously doubt it will do much to alter the chaos, and nothing to change the hate.
Wow, any time a far lefty pundit recommends personnel changes in a Republican Administration, you can bet they have an ulterior motive in mind. Mulvaney is right where he needs to be–a seasoned and effective budget cutter in charge of the Office of Management and Budget.
As for General Kelly, he acts as an impenetrable target running the White House. The radical left can’t gain much credence with the American public by resorting to identify politics invective against a retired four-star General who lost a son in combat while serving in the U.S. armed forces.
And as far as using those rubber bullets at Guantanamo is concerned (OMG!), you snowflakes are gonna have to toughen up just a bit if you don’t want to become politically irrelevant.
Alex: For all of the good reasons you cited for making Mulvaney chief of staff, that probably means Trump would not choose him. The Trump equation seems to be that the less qualified you are the more likely you are to be appointed by him.
Frankly, I have never understood this fascination with generals–my recall into Army service in Korea is at work here–who, from my observation, got to be generals because they could game the system. They also knew which parts of the anatomy of their senior officers needing kissing and tender care. There are a few exceptions to the rule, but not many. Kelly turned out to be just another extension of Trump’s personality.
Just what I want you picking the next chiel of staff.