The Plan to drain the SWAMP

[Maxmars]

I have no idea of how the skeleton of this 'new' ideal of exposing malfeasance is actually going to work.

Just like the Kennedy assassination, there are so many who "went along" with the 'surface stories' to work 'with' the system, that they too are liable to face harsh judgements for their 'self-imposed' impotence.

The truth is, this should be a kind of revelation that also destroys would-be heroes via "collateral damage" as the truly guilty flail and threaten anything they can while trying to avoid 'accountability.'  

I find it terribly interesting how 'resignations' are following in the wake of incoming 'comeuppances.'

As if the people suddenly in the 'spotlight' are going to teach us all 'a lesson' for questioning or inquiring... as if we, the people were somehow 'unworthy' to demand answers for what they allowed to happen.

"Servants of the people"... you gotta love 'em, right?

[jaded]

Have been kind of surface scanning the blurbs from Fox-The Hill ect watching more for trends than concrete facts. Mostly cause those facts won't be facts till after Trump is officially in office an they actually happen. 

So!
Trends I'm seeing is news outlets trying to twist the narrative's from "cost cutting" to portraying Trump-Musk-RFK an others into dictators & despots. BEFORE anything has actually happened.
Ooooo nice try!

Then there's the endless stories about the Dem's wondering & navel gazing over the election. The entire world has alerted the Democratic Party to their failures, so are they also illiterate? 
One would think so.

Currently the algorithm's are spitting up innanities. Had no idea the bots go into tailspins at the holidays, but alrighty!

[UltraBudgie]

I find it terribly interesting how 'resignations' are following in the wake of incoming 'comeuppances.'

Are they though?

Seems to be "Speculation of Mass Resignations" *, or "I guess the departures will start soon" *, or "Mass Resignations Expected" *, or other claims based on Twitter-sources that "there will be a lot of resignations before January 20" *.

Haven't seen any actual evidence of them, though. In fact, some agencies are outright denying the claims.

I guess the white-hats have it under control though.

[Byrd]

I'm not impressed with any of the choices so far.  

In order to understand WHAT to cut and WHERE to cut, you need to be an expert in that field. 

Think of it as a lifesaving operation being carried out on a live patient (America.)

You don't want an organ harvester operating on that patient if you want them to live.  You don't want the guy running an ice cream truck operating... you want a surgeon, and specifically a surgeon who is an expert on that part of the body or that condition.

Okay... so suppose that the current proposed surgeon is rich and gets rich from unnecessary billing and operations on that part of the body?  You get a different surgeon; you don't run out and grab a history professor from the nearest university.

And that's my problem with the nominees so far... apparently the method of choosing them involves two main processes:  how loyal they are to Trump and how good they look in a test video.

I don't want good looking loyalists.  I want competence and an understanding of the process.

[Maxmars]

I'm not impressed with any of the choices so far.  

In order to understand WHAT to cut and WHERE to cut, you need to be an expert in that field. 

Think of it as a lifesaving operation being carried out on a live patient (America.)

You don't want an organ harvester operating on that patient if you want them to live.  You don't want the guy running an ice cream truck operating... you want a surgeon, and specifically a surgeon who is an expert on that part of the body or that condition.

Okay... so suppose that the current proposed surgeon is rich and gets rich from unnecessary billing and operations on that part of the body?  You get a different surgeon; you don't run out and grab a history professor from the nearest university.

And that's my problem with the nominees so far... apparently the method of choosing them involves two main processes:  how loyal they are to Trump and how good they look in a test video.

I don't want good looking loyalists.  I want competence and an understanding of the process.

I can't refute your reasoning.  It seems sound.

However, there is a distinction that I find significant, given recent history...

Yes, we prefer those 'we vet' and 'accredited with both successful experience and measured skill;' but there are those who are part and parcel of a larger body of experience working against the problem, and those who appear to have worked, for the problem.

Many of the "cult of the qualified" spend more time diligently controlling narratives, than actually 'solving' problems.  I will grant that is an appearance... but the 'same' cadre of these 'universally accepted' folks, from 'trusted' industries, and lacking anything substantial in the way of 'goals of service,' have somehow managed to get us where we are... all while pointing fingers at someone else; and nearly none moving towards 'making things right.'

Now we will see if those who are willing to actually address the issues they are pledging to tackle, can actually 'do' anything. 
(As opposed the 'the regular crew' who have been doing nothing of value to those whom they promised 'progress,' and delivered only 'more of the same.')

It is, to me, enough that the standing cluster of 'perpetual experts' are scoffing... as an indicator that they STILL have nothing to contribute, and somehow feel themselves entitled to be taken seriously - as they bitch about 'changes.'

This is the hard part... the part where many citizens stop paying attention and 'move on' from 'the election,' as they return to their daily lives. 
We'll see if the pressure that relieves ends in stereotypical political apathy, or dogged determination.

There are too many middlemen in their 'political' world... it's become a social game. 
Time to inject some discipline and accountability into what has become their playground...
(I'm not proclaiming it will happen, mind you, only that if there was ever a time it could happen, this seems to be it)

I have no interest in their loyalty to a person (or party.) 
I'm interested in their loyalty to the citizens.
Not the party "plan," not the celebrity in charge, not the fanfare or glory...
If I had one order to hand down to them it would be a simple one: "Just serve us."

[727Sky]

Kash Patel is an American political figure and attorney known for his roles in national security and intelligence. He served as a U.S. National Security Council official, senior advisor to the Acting Director of National Intelligence, and Chief of Staff to the Acting United States Secretary of Defense during the Trump Presidency. Patel's career began as a public defender, where he managed complex criminal cases. He later worked as a terrorism prosecutor at the Department of Justice (DOJ), leading high-profile investigations and prosecutions against terror groups like Al-Qa’ida and ISIS. He also served as the DOJ Liaison Officer to the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). Patel now works with his foundation to provide legal funds for whistleblowers within the federal government. Patel is committed to educating the public on topics the mainstream media refuses to cover.

[727Sky]

Pete Hegseth Reveals What Trump Told Him Today, and Why He's Fighting the False Media Narratives