Share This Article with a Friend!

Transition to Trump: Carly Fiorina could be next to join Trump’s conservative cabinet

Ever since Donald Trump began working in earnest on his transition a month ago he’s met with a whole host of notable people ranging from Mitt Romney to Ted Cruz to Al Gore to actor and “climate change” champion Leonardo DiCaprio.

In the process Trump’s had face- time with many of his former rivals in both the business and political sectors.

Carly FiorinaOne person who’s been missing is Carly Fiorina. That changed on Monday.

Nolan D. McCaskill of Politico reports, “Fiorina was reportedly brought in to speak with Trump about the role of director of national intelligence. She chaired the CIA External Advisory Board during President George W. Bush’s administration but has no government experience…

“Fiorina would be the first female DNI, if selected. Her discussion with Trump came hours after the president-elect expressed his latest denial of U.S. intelligence that Russia interfered in the U.S. election.”

In the course of their discussion, Fiorina reportedly joined Trump in dismissing the CIA’s Russian hacking reports. But the real importance of her visit to Trump Tower was evident by the loftiness of the office she’s being considered for. As an expert on the tech industry as well as a successful businesswoman, Fiorina would appear to be an aggressive no-nonsense candidate to lead the country’s intelligence agencies.

After the meeting Fiorina heaped praise on former rival Trump in a similar manner to Mitt Romney a couple weeks ago. But at least in Fiorina’s case her words sounded genuine. I doubt Newt Gingrich will be going on TV accusing Carly of “sucking up.”

I have argued many times that Fiorina would make a great press secretary for the Trump administration. Her off-the-cuff debating abilities are first-rate and we became well aware of how skillfully she spars with reporters.

But in the end, DNI would probably be a better place for her skill set. In tabbing Fiorina for the position, Trump would be adding another talented “outsider” to his administration.

On the subject of press secretary, Kellyanne Conway was apparently offered the role if she wanted it, but turned it down because of a desire to lead more of a “normal” life in raising her children.

That doesn’t mean she won’t be around. “But for me, I think the lesson also is all the opportunities out there for women, increasingly in politics and media and public policy and government affairs—all the things we do here in Washington—that we still have to make choices, there are limits,” Conway said at the Women Rule Summit.

Conway is the perfect example of a principled conservative who fights the good fight in her career and still maintains a balance in her personal life. It sounds like the Trump administration is shaping up to be a real winner with conservatives.

The left is going all out to stop Trump in the Electoral College, but the Founding Fathers won’t let them succeed

Six days from now Americans will have a new president.

This news may come as a surprise to those who believed we’d already elected someone to replace Barack Obama on November 8, but constitutionally speaking, a new president isn’t “official” until the Electoral College members gather in the respective state capitals to cast their votes at noon on December 19.

Seeing as just about everyone will stop “officially” questioning Trump’s legitimacy after the Constitution’s requirements are satisfied, the forces opposing Donald Trump are pulling out all the stops to try and derail him before it even happens.

Byron York of the Washington Examiner writes, “The hope is to create one of two scenarios. If rogue (Republican) electors vote for candidates other than Hillary Clinton, who won 232 electoral votes on Election Day, then no candidate would have 270 and the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives. If the 37, plus one more, voted for Clinton, she would reach 270 and become president...

“At key points in Trump's run, opponents conjured up elaborate scenarios through which he might be stopped. They planned complex delegate maneuvers at the Republican National Convention. They explored ways of replacing him on the GOP ticket. They hoped he might simply drop out of the race on his own. None of that happened. And now, they are pinning hopes on the most elaborate and unlikely scenario of them all.”

Last week I wrote about these plots to foster “faithless electors” as the same type of “fake news” that liberals are so up in arms about these days as Democrats continue trying to discover the reason why Hillary Clinton was so roundly rejected outside of the largest population centers of the country.

In doing so, there are signs everywhere that they still don’t get it. Take for example this story from The Hill, depicting confused Democrats pointing fingers and laying blame on everyone but themselves.

Niall Stanage of The Hill reported, “Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump is an unmitigated disaster for Democrats, who want to ensure nothing like it happens again. But Clinton’s popular-vote lead over Trump is so large that it complicates the question of how to recalibrate for future elections.

“Clinton led Trump by almost 3 million votes as of Sunday, according to a Cook Political Report tracker, with some final results still to be tabulated. More than 128 million votes were cast for the two main candidates nationwide, and Trump emerged as the victor by winning three Rust Belt states by margins of roughly 11,000 (Michigan), 23,000 (Wisconsin) and 44,000 (Pennsylvania).”

The margins might as well be billions for all it matters to the Electoral College. Similar to the way Republicans analyzed the corpse of Mitt Romney’s defeat in 2012, Democrats are engaging in a very public soul-searching that seems to hover between two poles. One is “hey, we almost won, we don’t need to change!” and the other is “Hillary would have beaten Trump if Bernie had been nicer to her” or, the most recent “The Russians did it because they love Trump!”

It’s astonishing to me that a political party as a whole would so completely ignore the other major symptoms of system-wide sickness, found mainly in the form of minority status in Congress and individual state Democrat delegations that occupy fewer seats in legislatures and governor’s mansions since…I don’t know when. But a long time for sure.

Instead of seeing the writing on the wall – that the party’s politically correct overreach and kowtowing to the leftist elites in New York and Hollywood created the mess – the Democrats surmise the real reason Republicans won almost everywhere this year is because they cheated.

It’s not like Democrats are giving people a reason to vote for them, either. For example, this report on the Labor Force Participation rate shows that while the unemployment rate has continued to shrink, more people aren’t actually working. They’re just giving up. And the rate is highest among people without college degrees, aka Trump’s base.

The Democrats are out of power because their main message of redistributing goodies, legalized abortion and gay rights isn’t catching on with Americans in the suburbs and the countryside. No wonder they’re turning to the slim possibility Trump could be stopped in the Electoral College as a last smidgen of hope. (And they’re worried about not being able to combat Trump once in office, too.)

With the wisdom and foresight that is present throughout the Constitution, the Founding Fathers anticipated that such efforts to strong-arm electors would be made and took steps to disrupt them.

Hofstra University Professor James Coll writes in The Hill, “[E]lectors are required to cast their ballots with a pair of Article II stipulations that make concentrated protestations and threats against them much more difficult to have an impact.

“The first requirement is that the electors ‘meet in their respective states.’ By making electors vote in thirteen separate locations  —  today 51 when we include states added beyond the original baker’s dozen and Washington DC  —  the opportunity to use influence, bully or outright violent tactics to persuade the electors into casting votes in the way a single, unified and angry crowd might want is diminished.”

Hence, individual efforts generated in Washington (state), Colorado and Texas (where the lone Republican “faithless elector” resides) are much less likely to poison the minds of electors in other more “reasonable” locales.

Coll continues, “The second requirement is Congress has the power to designate ‘the day on which’ electors vote. Mandating a single calendar event for electoral votes to be submitted prevents a small series of demonstrations from moving place to place to coincide with what could be a rolling calendar of electoral voting akin to primaries and caucuses. Any protest assemblies would have to be widespread and nationally organized to have any significant influence.”

While technically not impossible, it would be extremely difficult for even the most organized leftist entities to try and coerce hundreds of electors all across the country at the same time. But news reports I’ve seen indicate Republican electors have been receiving threats and intimidation from the Democrat-inspired anti-Trump efforts.

If anything, I would think these pathetic ploys will only make the electors more determined to do their constitutional duties. And by next Monday evening, we’ll have a new president and vice president, Donald J. Trump and Mike Pence.

I wonder if the “he’s going to resign before the inauguration” rumors will die at the same time…Stay tuned.

Solving the mystery of Trump’s conservative dream-team cabinet choices

With a few more Donald Trump cabinet choices set to be revealed this week, it’s safe to say the picture of the upcoming administration is coming into focus.

Some trusted onlookers are already predicting Trump’s cabinet will be the most conservative ever. Others are marveling at the “outsiders” – both political and otherwise – that are dominating many of the key positions.

Democrats and leftist groups are distraught. It’s almost like they wake up every day and it’s November 9 all over again. But even Trump’s staunchest supporters are wondering how it is that a president-elect with no claimed ideology has made such a decidedly noticeable right turn.

John Fund of National Review looked into the mystery, writing, “So why has Trump moved in such a conservative direction since his election? Interviews with several people around him turn up several answers.

“1. During the campaign, Trump learned a lot about the country and how its economic vitality had been sapped and its foreign-policy standing eroded during the Obama years…

“2. The refusal of previous GOP presidential nominees George H. W. Bush, John McCain, and George W. Bush to back Trump in the general election has liberated Trump from obligations; he owes very little to them or their followers…

“3. The viciousness with which left-wing allies of Hillary Clinton and their media enablers attacked Trump persuaded the New York billionaire that there was no making peace with his adversaries…”

Trump’s actions appear to be a combination of all of these factors, but more than anything, I think the president-elect just wants a complete break from the stranglehold of insider (“swamp”) Washington. Considering Trump has known many of the power players for years it isn’t difficult for him to spot an establishmentarian when he sees one.

And in naming conservative-approved individuals to his cabinet Trump’s also keeping a promise he made over and over during the campaign, namely bringing in successful people with know-how to sit at the negotiating table with the power to do things – “make deals” -- differently.

If nearly everyone in the country believes America’s train is currently on the wrong track, why not bring in some new engineers? And if it turns out they’re experienced in railroad construction, maintenance and operation at the same time, all the better.

Our culture has become accustomed to football coaches and baseball managers being fired after (or sometimes during) the season if their teams don’t meet expectations – why can’t we ask government leaders to do the same?

If the same old names and faces are underperforming, get some new people. That’s what Trump’s done. And when you look at his cabinet as a group, it’s an eclectic mix of competing and yet compatible interests.

W. James Antle III of the Washington Examiner writes, “Trump is in effect setting up a coalition government. He is incorporating familiar conservatives and new nationalists. His appointees are politicians, Republican bureaucrats, businessmen such as Ross and Mnuchin, generals such as Mattis, national security adviser pick Michael Flynn and Homeland Security pick John Kelly, establishment figures such as incoming White House Chief of Staff Reince Preibus and outsiders such as Bannon and probable secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson.”

There are still a few important puzzle pieces to put in place before the picture is complete. And some won’t be revealed until after Trump takes office, such as his Supreme Court pick to replace the late Antonin Scalia.

If the pattern holds, Trump may produce yet another twist that will make conservatives happy. Anyone like the sound of Justice Ted Cruz?

Share this

Justice Cruz

I know Senator Cruz wants to be president and I would have liked to send him to the White House. Unfortunately, it was not to be. His chances of running again in 2020 will be hampered by Mike Pence, should Donald decide against running again. We need him on the Supreme Court, whether it's a lifetime appointment or not. I hope Donald has the good sense to swallow his pride and appoint Senator Cruz.