THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY

[Fry Guy]

I'm not conflating anything FryGuy.

Trump has made many terrible hiring decisions.  He has hired/appointed people for key positions who were far from the most qualified available and were eyebrow-raising choices to many objective observers from the get-go.

Paul Manafort was qualified to help lobby delegates ahead of the Republican Convention, no doubt about that.  Trump should have thanked him and ended it there.

Manafort was under a lot of scrutiny when he volunteered to help with the convention and before he was promoted to head the campaign.  He was under investigation for shady Ukraine/Russia dealings starting in at least 2014.  I wasn't surprised that he was forced out when the shit hit the fan, and I'm not surprised that he's in so much deep shit now.  Putting him in charge of the campaign was a bad move. The writing was on the wall way back then and Trump may pay more for it again later.

Michael Flynn was a terrible appointment as National Security Adviser for so many obvious reasons.  It was no surprise that he lasted less than 25 days (because of his secret dealings with Russia regarding sanctions and his attempted cover-up). 

George Papadapolous wasn't someone I'd ever heard of before his guilty plea.  He was another terrible hire -- making drunken statements to Australian intelligence about getting Russian help with the Trump campaign pushed the Russia interference investigation into full gear.  Silly amateur.

Weren't conflating anything? You DID say this:

Even so, I still hope your general premise is right and Trump is just the worst President ever at hiring people, and the most ignorant President ever when it comes to knowing what his subordinates were up to right under his nose.

So WAS I saying this? At all? 

Nope. There is plenty of things that Donald Trump does unconventionally and sure many people do not like it but this does not mean it is incompetent. 
His campaign is case in point. I mean think of those embarrassing pet names to Jed, Marco and Ted. Incompetent? Stupid? Poorly thought? What was the immediate effect? GREAT PLAN! Not liking something does not make it bad. 
Because he does things differently it is not necessarily worse nor is he doing it for the worst or most ill-thought out intentions. 
Personally I like the "image" of Obama and I think that image is really the benchmark of Presidential. Poise, grace, dignity, charisma and such. Perfect for a President. So therefore he was Presidential material. Right? No not really. He was not a great President and not terribly effective. What did he do? I mean Osama Bin Laden was killed under his reign. Obamacare...? First Black President? What else?
If Trump gets through 8 years, he will do far more. However by the standards of Presidential that you would favourably measure Obama above and he falls short. BUT Presidents ought not be ineffective cardboard cutouts and if you remove that completely then you need an effective President. Obama was not that and I believe Trump is. 

So in short I do not believe Trump incompetent nor perfect and I do not give a damn as to him being conventional a President or not behaving in traditionally Presidential way, I do not give a crap. 

As to Paul Manafort -
Trump got rid of Lewindowski that did a fantastic job. However the skills that Lewindowski had used so well that helped Trump win through the Primaries was not the same skills Trump believed he needed towards the end phase. He needed some other skills that he believed Manafort had. It was no endorsement on Manaforts personality or moral fibre. Trump wanted to win and he had a guy that had that kind of experience that he could draw on. 

Was it a good decision? Did Trump win? Would Trump have won if he only stuck with Lewindowski? 

Michael Flynn - 
Great choice. Yes he did talk to Russians and other diplomats and so he should have. As to Flynn pleading guilty to lying, okay but did he lie? Department of Justice did not think he lied but went after him for lying and then charged him with it and he pleaded guilty? Why? What kind of pressure did they put on him and how much was it costing him to contest?

Fantastic choice and a patriot. A shame this worked out badly for him and his family. Also probably was not a good idea to have lied to Sessions. If he did in fact lie. 

George Pappadopolous - 
What does he have to do with Trump? Not a lot. How much was the campaign paying this gentleman. Answer - "Nothing". He was a volunteer. How many meetings or projects did he sit in on? Answer - One. 

He was a volunteer and was not a "Trump hire" he was a young bloke suggested by Preibus I think and volunteered for a project and did not have much influence and impact. He made some suggestions to the Trump campaign that was rebuffed and seems hardly even a bit player. 

Unrelated to Russia and equally bad hiring decisions by Trump:

Omarosa.  Really?  Very bad hiring decision.

Scott Pruitt.  As corrupt a grifter as they come.

Anthony Scaramucci.  Booted as Communications Directors within days for making a public statement about how another questionable hire, Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, sucked his own dick.

There are more.   Most of them were hired/appointed because Trump believed they were loyal to him, according to Trump himself.  They were not hired because they were the most qualified candidates.  And, all of them were let go because they predictably fucked-up royally.   The number of firings and forced resignations is far higher than under any other presidency.

Making the argument that the high turn-over is because even better than "the best people" came along and that Trump hasn't made terrible hiring decisions is not rational or objective.

Omarosa - 
On the face of it, not a bad decision. She was a successful black woman who he knew of and who was keen to work hard and get in front of the press and outreach. She also had worked with Clinton and came over to Trump. Lynne Patton worked behind the scenes and Katrina Pierson was brilliant and front and centre with the media BUT how many other black women were prepared to represent and do outreach?

Besides that she was little risk to Trump. If things did not work out she was persona non grata with the Left so?

So NO, this is not a bad decision. It was a good decision. Do ALL decisions work out? He did lose out but not a lot. By the time the ink dries she will be as relevant as Jessica Leeds. 

Scott Pruitt - 
Seems a bit of a dickhead. Does not mind using the benefits of office to make fraudulent personal expenses. Right? I mean how can that be a "good" person? Depends what you mean by "good". Clearly doing scummy things or being sly and slimy is NOT good. At least in the sense of moral. BUT do you mean good as in a good person or an effective person in your role? The answer is not "yes" and you cannot use this interchangeably. 
From reports, he was good at his role. He was good at running it. Was he ALSO scummy and overstepping the mark in his efforts to be fraudulent and such. So was he a success? Certainly not by conventional standards. But was he fulfilling Trump's agenda well and effectively and despite his other dumbarsery. 

Anthony Scaramucci - 
He needed a loyal toecutter and he got it with Scarmucci. Look who Scaramucci was bought in to get rid of and shake up. He did too. He went on the offensive at a time that Trump needed to appear on the front foot. He did that and got Trump over a tough time. He appeared to show some real potential. Then he fucked up and was let go. 

So was he a bad choice OR was he someone who fulfilled a role and had done what he needed to do? Clearly the latter. 

Laugh all you want Biggie.  Just because you're typically not one doesn't mean they don't exist.

Included among the many objective observers were Trump-supporting Republican lawmakers and pundits who publicly expressed the same puzzlement over some of those hires as I  did.  

I don't think observers who knew about those people before they were hired could have objectively considered them the best for the country (or even the administration).  Considering how they worked out and what's going down now, that was an accurate assessment.

You are not either Hair of the Dog and I think you must be aware of that. 
How many objective observers that Trump-supporting Republican lawmakers and pundits who publicly expressed the same puzzlement over some of those hires ALSO thought that he was crazy for running and would never win? Wasn't spending enough on his campaign? Was wrong to campaign on the wall? and we could go on and on and he bloody won so NO let's not base our opinions on that. 

As for what is going on.....yes let's agree the DNC and DOJ colluded and conspired to nullify the results of a fair election. They did this by both pursuing a phony Trump/Russian collusion narrative and through Fusion GPS hired a foreign agent to conspire with Russian agents of the Kremlin to doctor a dossier which supported the FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign and to pressure the appointment of a Special Counsel without an underlying crime (which incidentally is necessary for the appointment of one). It also allowed Hillary Clinton to dodge bullets over the Private Servers and scrubbing of emails and handing out immunity deals like candy. 

If you want to pretend that this was something other, go ahead BUT remember this, there is every chance that at the end of the day and despite all of this, it will run its course and will eventually finish. A couple of perjury convictions and a few non-Russia collusion charges. Then what happens? I will give you an idea of what "I" think. Look at the amount of old guard on both sides (establishment) on both sides of the political divide retiring this year. How many Trump appointees and Republicans in the Supreme court and how many Obama appointees are being let go in the lower court and being replaced by Trump appointees? What the heck do you think Sessions has been doing? How have all those investigations on Uranium One and The Clinton Foundation and such are doing? Why are they holding off on taking them to court? How many Security clearances will be pulled? How many senior FBI and DOJ officials have been booted?

See you may look at this now and say "Ha, see Trump is so done for. This politcisation of the court processes and the Intel services is great when it is used against Trump." But what most do not realise is something called precedent. 

You reckon Trump will take this laying down? IF Trump is NOT impeached and ESPECIALLY if the Senate and House are not lost to the Republicans AND with loss of opposition in his side from people like McCain, Flake, Ryan and Corker he is going to rain Hell down on those he considers enemies. He will have the courts stacked, the majority and the precedent.