The Pre-President versus the Swamp Denizens

On Sunday, the DOTUS gave his first interview since the election to Chris Wallace. I call him the “Pre-President” because he’s been acting like the President since the election. Part of the interview was conducted on the plane dubbed “Trump Force One”. He’s says it’s nicer than Air Force One. It’s a Boeing 757. Inside it has gold window frames. Go figure.


In the course of the interview he made a comment I haven’t seen picked up on, to do with “draining the swamp”.

Now. a number of the opposition politicians including the DNC have said “But, but, but, he promised to drain the swamp and he’s appointing billionaires, you should rise up in outrage”. Total misunderstanding. “Drain the swamp” doesn’t mean appoint poor people. Never did. It means get rid of corruption, inefficiency, duplication of effort, and unnecessary regulations.

Part of draining the swamp has to do with bad business deals. The DOTUS spoke of two of them. The first was the contract for a new Air Force One for the President. He wants to cancel the deal, says it’s a total ripoff. Gotta say … this is the first Pre-President that would know first-hand if Air Force One is a bad deal or not. I and most of us sure wouldn’t.

The other bad deal was the horrendously overpriced F-35, your basic horse designed by a committee that does everything a bit but does not do anything well. Hundreds of billions of dollars. Meanwhile it’s taken so long that the world is moving on to drones …

Now, the Pre-President has already taken the first action to drain the swamp. Before he began looking for appointees, he made it clear that they will be held to his campaign promise regarding lobbying. Anyone he appoints will be barred from working as a lobbyist for five years, and will be barred in perpetuity from working as a lobbyist for any foreign country. This is totally unprecedented, and long overdue.

In his Trump Force One interview, in addition to talking about bad deals, he made what to me was a new proposal and pointed to a different kind of swamp denizen, not a lobbyist but a job-hopper. People negotiate deals with large government suppliers, both defense and others, and once the deal is done, six months later they’re working for the company that they just gave the bid to at three times their government salary … as the Donald pointed out, this may involve more money than that regarding lobbyists.

So his proposal, as I understand it, is similar to that of the lobbyists—if you are involved in cutting a government procurement or grant deal with some company, you can’t go to work for that company for five years. Me, I’d make it a lifetime ban, but the five-year ban will help.

I like that plan a lot. It will definitely help us cut better deals for the people of the US, and as a businessman, I can only applaud that.

What a time to be alive! We’ve never had a Pre-President before, one who would lay down the law regarding a five-year ban on lobbying before even starting his interviews.

My very best wishes to everyone,


PS—I note that people are still confused about why the Donald is meeting with such odd people. Today it’s Bill Gates and Kanye West that have the twitterati all abubble. My previous explanation still holds. He is meeting and learning from every major player in every industry in the time he has; and he is also auditioning with each of them to be their President. Gates and West are each giants in their own arenas, none bigger. Trump wants to know everything he can about them—their aims, their dreams, their abilities, their alliances, their enemies, their strengths and weaknesses, what they can offer him, what they want from him. In addition, he needs for them to be on his side, to accept him as their President and not reject him as an unknown ogre. What an amazing opportunity he has, to meet and learn the ropes about your new job from every successful person, every superstar, every leader in every field of life! Any future President-Elect who doesn’t emulate this master-class in preparing for the job is a fool.

22 thoughts on “The Pre-President versus the Swamp Denizens

  1. Considering the value of some of those lucrative procurement contracts, perhaps a ten year ban would be more effective. By that time, one’s value in knowledge and contacts would be severely diminished.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. There used to be a term I remember..”Code of Conduct”. As an ex UK Govt employee I don’t remember any training for it..just a couple of huge manuals with rules in them and some warnings from the wise elders. What I see now is pretty much “Anything Goes” and it often aligns with the term “contempt for the people”. Trump appears to be bringing the unexpected back to Govt… I really hope so!

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Was reminded of Eisenhower’s Farewell Address to the Nation today (part)

    “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
    Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite”.

    Liked by 2 people

    • One of the most brilliant and prophetic insights by any President since The Founders. Like Trump, Eisenhower did not depend on politics/ government for his self-identity or worldview.

      If Trump can carry through on most of what he’s promised, many Americans will “get” the danger of the academic “class.” They get paid for spinning ideas about what makes for a free and just society, but not for proving the truth value of those ideas.

      Further, climate science shows that any sufficiently complex science whose theories is at risk from corruption by the political process. Medical and educational sciences are others. I did a course paper in my PhD program for DT Campbell (one of the most eminent social scientists in regards to experimental design) and Augie Feldman (a Marxist sociologist) about using academic research to test the validity of government programs. My conclusion: the research would get co-opted by the political process.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Aussie papers reported on the Donalds interviews
    they reckon Kanye is muttering about 2020 run himself
    thatd be fun
    so far I havent heard him say much, and what I did hear was unintelligible.
    and theyre worried about Trump?
    hoo boy


  5. Regarding the F-35, a wise man once told me, ‘Everything takes longer and costs more, even when you take this rule into account.’ Can’t think for the life of me who it was.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Pingback: The Pre-President versus the Swamp Denizens – Skating on the underside of the ice | Cranky Old Crow

  7. Drain the swamp, by moving departments to where they are most relevant i.e.: Agriculture to Iowa. The bureaucrats would then be closer to the electorate than their fellow bureaucrats, cutting back on the $1000. lunches!

    Isn’t that what Al Gore invented the internet for /sarc.


  8. Placing independent thinking people in positions that allow them to be objective is a good thing. Those persons who are not suceptable to lobbying, leveraging, bullying, or monetizing, would fit the bill perfectly in this “dispelling the status quo” environment. You can’t typically bribe billionaires. Hence why all the career politicians, on both sides of the isle, and assiciated beneficiaries of such are afraid. They should be Very afraid as objectivity is in the house finally…. Just sayin, can you imagine a given government project based upon its merits instead of someone’s influence?

    Liked by 1 person

  9. DJT is casting a wide net in the process of building an Admin. Can’t wait to see who he puts in charge of FCC, Democrat Party control of THAT is a yuge problem.


  10. My personal experience with LM and software is best highlighted by the DoD’s Warrior2000 program. The program was to bring connectedness to the grunts, and let “upper management” see what was really going on on the battlefield. Planned release date, 1997. In 2002 I was briefed (non-secure) on the status, and how they were moving forward. At that time, the program had consumed $7 billion, and had not delivered a single line of code. The truck was so far in the ditch that one couldn’t even see a bumper in order to drag it out.

    The same organization has been working on the F 35 avionics. Somehow rebooting the radar during a dogfight seems counter productive, or is that just me.


  11. Pingback: Safe and Secure – Skating on the underside of the ice

You are invited to add your comments. Please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE DISCUSSING so we can all be clear on your subject.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s