A Cabinet of Mendacities
by Mark Van Proyen
Guerrilla Girls, “The World Needs a New Weapon: The Estrogen Bomb,” 2012, poster, 24 x 24”. Courtesy of the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York.
Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence? I guess Marjorie Taylor Greene didn’t want the job. We might remember Gabbard as the four-term Democrat Congressional Representative from Hawaii, campaigning for Bernie Sanders in 2016 and running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. She did so by burnishing her medals and posing atop surfboards while being stupendously vague about policy proposals. The medals were for military service in the Army, where she rose to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel by leading a military police battalion in Iraq and Kuwait. It was not the kind of job that would have made her privy to top secret, complex and highly technical intelligence assessments, nor was it one that put her in harm’s way. In August, she became a surrogate for the Trump campaign, presumably because she viewed him as an anti-war candidate, as might be inferred from statements she made on the June 22 broadcast of “Real Time with Bill Maher.” There, she claimed that U.S. support for Ukraine portended a serious risk of global nuclear holocaust. I could not have disagreed more with her over-agitated point of view.
How could anyone with such a flimsy grasp of history and strategic policy have ever risen to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army? If the Ukraine conflict is anything, it is now a war of attrition primarily intended to preserve Ukrainian sovereignty and expand NATO’s sphere of influence. If it serves to destabilize Vladimir Putin’s control of the Russian government (somewhat like our 1980s policy of arming Afghan freedom fighters destabilized Mikhail Gorbachev’s leadership of the then-crumbling Soviet Union), so much the better. But even though Russia has lost a reported 150,000 fighters in Ukraine (almost three times the number of American fatalities in Viet Nam), Putin’s control of his government and his military seems to be as firm as ever.
Then-U.S. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard riding a surfboard. Photo courtesy of Oahu Surf Shots.
However, this is contradicted by the fact that North Korea has recently sent 11,000 combat troops to Ukraine, casting more doubt on the capability of the Russian military. Yes, the war in Ukraine is also being fought over land and money, the land being in southeastern Ukraine (including the warm water ports of Crimea), the money being the amount that the Russian Federation may or may not have to forfeit from its seized assets to rebuild Ukraine. And yes, it has already cost American taxpayers over one hundred billion dollars (and zero American military casualties). But neither is it going well for the Ukrainians. There is already talk coming from the incoming Trump administration about a cessation of hostilities under terms very favorable to Putin. Ukraine’s aspiration to join an already expanded NATO would probably vanish. Any Russian guarantee of respect for Ukrainian sovereignty will clearly be met with justifiable suspicion from Ukraine.
In 2017, Gabbard visited Bashar al Assad in Syria. Since that time, she has been accused repeatedly of being a Russian asset, which may or may not be true. But then again, so has President-elect Trump, and it is not like he plays that down, let alone denies it. It is alarming that the Trump transition team wants to forgo FBI background checks for his Cabinet picks, breaking with long-standing precedent and confirming our worst suspicions about the reasons for that. One thing is for sure: NATO, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Ukraine as an independent state will be at a disadvantage come January, particularly if Gabbard is confirmed to head up our national intelligence. We cannot know for certain if NATO will step fully into the vacuum of an American abandonment, or at least reduction of support for Ukraine. Given the additional recent rise of right-wing political parties in Europe the necessary level of support for Ukrainian autonomy will be at risk.
Lily Hevesh, The Amazing Triple Spiral,” 2016, dominoes. Courtesy of Lily Hevesh/Barcroft Images.
Video profile of Hevesh’s domino designs (3 minutes)
Gabbard’s anti-war stance does not extend to Gaza, meaning that she is in sycophantic lockstep with Trump’s proposed policy of letting Israel and the Netanyahu government fully annex Gaza and possibly the West Bank, articulated under the euphemistic trope of “giving Netanyahu whatever he needs.” When that happens, direct engagement with Iran will very likely soon follow, not just for Israel but very possibly the U.S. as well. Should that come about, the possibility that China might actively support Iran would not be far-fetched. This catalyzing of unstable alliances resembles the situation that preceded the First World War. The same scenario suggests that Syria might see potential opportunities in Lebanon, if only to protect the Russian naval base at Tartus. How would Gabbard react to that?
The Gabbard nomination for Director of National Intelligence will get pushback in Senate confirmation hearings (assuming those take place), even from some Republicans. How much? Trump’s list of bizarre cabinet appointments should be regarded as litmus tests for Senate Republicans’ loyalty to him, a confirmation of his mob-boss-in-chief style of dictatorship. That demand for loyalty from Senators did not extend to the nomination of Matt Gaetz, establishing that there are limits, at least right now. Not that Florida’s now ex-Attorney General, now the U.S. Attorney General-designate represents a more moderate selection; for now, all I will say is in my view no she is not. Trump knows that there will be resistance, and while he acts as if it is no more than a distraction, he inevitably fumes psychotically inside. As a matter of public policy, it is the dismal tide of a hundred rollbacks of a social contract that has been a central feature of American society since the New Deal.
Barry Blitt, “Matt Gaetz Explains the Conspiracy Meant to Take Him Down” 2021, cartoon.
Courtesy of The New Yorker.
A clearer picture emerges when we look away from the top tier cabinet nominations that require Senate hearings and confirmations (assuming that they take place). An alarming “kitchen cabinet’ is taking shape, that being a group of informal advisors who will exert influence on and remuneration for Trump by reflecting and amplifying his own worst impulses. The term “kitchen cabinet” owes its origin to Andrew Jackson’s presidency (Jackson’s portrait was given pride of place in the oval office during Trump’s first term), during which a group of unofficial advisors were said to hold undue sway above and beyond Jackson’s “parlor cabinet” of Senate-confirmed department heads. In Trump’s case, the beta-tested kitchen cabinet includes such figures as Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon, Donald Trump Junior, Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, Peter Thiel, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Sean Hannity, and Tucker Carlson. And a number of others beyond those most familiar to the public that follows this stuff.
Albert A. Hoffay, “The Celeste-al Cabinet,” 1836, color lithograph, lampooning the Petticoat
Affair, President Andrew Jackson with his Cabinet. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.
Then there is Elon Musk (the world’s richest person) and Vivek Ramaswamy (a mere billionaire) queuing up for leadership of a soon-to-be added “Department of Government Efficiency” that is supposed to cut Musk’s round figure of two trillion dollars out of the federal budget. Let’s just say that these two plutocrats will be the executive chefs working in Trump’s kitchen. No doubt, the ensuing menu will not be to the liking of a great many people. Still, given that these Republicans have captured all three branches of the federal government for the next two years, it may not much matter.
