Clinton used Les Aspin, my congressman at the time.

@tchrist That doesn't sound great.

Obama retained Bush's SECDEF.

> To ensure civilian control of the military, U.S. law provides that the secretary of defense cannot have served as an active-duty commissioned officer in the military in the preceding seven years except for generals and admirals, who cannot have served on active duty within ten years.

Lloyd Austin had to get a special waiver from Congress and there were a few who thought it was a bad idea to make such exemptions.

When Aspin bailed/was forced out, Clinton chose a Republican senator from Maine to replace him as SECDEF.

@tchrist Who do you think has made these choices?

@Cerberus Is it though? I mean, it's more different from the US, but both are very different from the US, so it seems arbitrary to choose (say) Western Europe as your basis for comparison.

The Americas are very European.

But it doesn't really matter anyway.

That is the comparison I am making and not some other comparison.

@Cerberus Why? That's definitely not how Americans see it.

Doesn't matter.

They can't even find their own country on a map.

@Cerberus But why is that comparison a particularly relevant one?

@Cerberus Extremists bent on subverting our democracy.

@alphabet It is relevant to me.

@tchrist But who are they?

Some random clique of people around Trump?

@Cerberus Why? You always ask this!

His advisors are very tight with him.

You don't believe this is happening?

@Cerberus 94% of them can.

You think he just makes this up? You can see the pattern in the picks.

@Cerberus To you, exactly.

They've been planning all this all year long. They've had a lot to sift through, vet.

We don't have to finger this or that named person from this or that loony-toons think-tank to see what's going on. We don't have to be able to say "Oh this is one that Musk picked, and this is one that the new nazi Stephen Miller picked, or this is one that the Project 2025 staff from Heritage House picked."

The all-important thing is that they will never NOT do whatever he says. That's the bottom line. They have ways of figuring out which people are in that set.

@tchrist No, I am just wondering who those people are.

His picks' allegiance to their Leader must come before any allegiance to the office, to tradition, to the law, or to the constitution. Because that's what got in his way last time. He learned his lesson.

I'm just wondering whether the people around him who pick those ministers are as anti-democratic as Trump.

bbc.com/news/articles/cm2m1ey10rxo

I mean, I have no idea how anti-democratic Musk is, for example.

He's lawless and heartless.

@alphabet You will note that an Iranian made the original comment.

Everyone knows American culture is about money a lot.

Random AI suggests that "The advisory team surrounding Trump as he considers candidates for his new administration includes notable figures like Stephen Miller, Mark Meadows, Kellyanne Conway, David McIntosh, along with leadership from the Heritage Foundation such as Kevin Roberts and Mike Needham. Their collective efforts are significantly tied to Project 2025’s mission of preparing a robust slate of candidates aligned with conservative values." No reason to think that's right. Or wrong.

He's rewarding people who were vociferous in their support of him.

Ai suggests this?

He's disincluding those who were not, like Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo.

@Cerberus Yes, but you could probably get it to suggest anything.

Right.

> And above all else, Hegseth and Noem have been fierce Trump defenders from the start. [...] Trump may be placing a premium on loyalty with his early staff announcements, but the pressures of governing ultimately will reveal whether his second four years in office end up different from his first."

That's the end the BBC article I linked above.

His picks have actually been less batshit than I'd expected, other than the whole "DOGE" thing.

Still batshit though.

But I'd expected him to make the MyPillow guy the head of the Treasury or something.

David Bossie is another likely advisor in this.

So some of these direct or indirect advisors are "political operatives". Others are from his campaign or previous administration. Whose voice is heard about what is impossible to say without taped conversations.

They're people in the far right, many with truly troubling ideas.

@Cerberus You should stop watching so much television. Or they should, one or the other.

Always trust the AI to repeat the Internet's most common superficial talking-points!

@tchrist Agreed.

Yes.

@tchrist This is what I would think.

@alphabet That is good to know.

@tchrist The last sentence would be so much easier to parse with an additional it!

I may have some of those X's and Y's mixed around. :)

They do look like chromosomal aberrations, or is that rude.

@Cerberus You want it extraposed as well? Without taped conversations ɪᴛ is impossible to say whose voice is heard about what.

@Cerberus Yeah like XYY vs XXY respectively, but who am I to judge? :)

@tchrist Much better!

manifold XX/XY mosaïcs

But the whose could have stayed where it was, with the it.

Whose voice it is who's heard?

Umm.

@Cerberus That said, I'm sure they've been ordered to self-castrate and provide the results as collateral, or something like that to keep them loyal.

We shall see how loyal they are in case the proposes something they think goes too far.

And what they might do without his noticing.

What was it Trump had said about he'd be the people's "revenge"? Some other word than revenge, crueller stll. But of course, it's all about getting his own revenge on everybody he can.

Or how they might talk him out of things.

While remaining loyal.

Remember he can't hold on to anybody.

Yeah.

I mean the people around him have egos too.

How long can Musk refrain from exploding in anger?

But I am surprised Trump will be sharing a Cabinet with someone who ended up apologizing for implying Trump was, shall we say, fun-sized.

He'll burn through these people faster than wildfire on the prairie under a hundred mile an hour windstorm.

If he wants to appoint new ones, he will have to ask the senate again?

> Senate Republicans reacted with alarm and dismay to President-elect Donald J. Trump’s decision to nominate Representative Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, for attorney general, and several said they were skeptical that he would be able to secure enough votes for confirmation.

@Cerberus Right, Musk is fundamentally different from all the rest of these. He does not need Trump for elevation in station or for rescue from ethics investigations. Musk plans to use Trump for several important things. The others are all ones whom Trump is planning to use, rather than vice versa.

> “He’s got his work really cut out for him,” Senator Joni Ernst, Republican of Iowa, said, chuckling as she spoke.

Our Senate expert on castration has her chance to speak.

@Cerberus Yes and no.

Gaetz is probably the second most batshit choice behind Musk and Vivek.

If he wants them Senate-approved instead of acting-blah, yes.

But he loved his acting-blahs last time. Especially towards the end. He didn't even try, nor pretend to try.

@tchrist I get what you mean, though I think in all cases both parties are trying to use the other.

He has a huge non-Senate-approved staff to appoint. Those also will not last long.

How long can acting officials be appointed for?

@Cerberus There are laws about that. It's like 120 or 150 or 210 days. Lemme check.

And can those even be appointed when the old functionary is still there and available?

@Cerberus no

If the previous one has resigned or been fired, then there's an acting one.