Open the Gaetz to Cabinet Appointments

Larger Perspective

Many on the Left and Right struggle with understanding that all administrations determine cabinet appointments based on more than just expertise or experience in the relevant field. While those are important factors—especially in specific roles—other considerations come into play. Most importantly, cabinet appointments are political appointments. 

A question might help us better understand the nature of cabinet appointments: Why the hell was Pete Buttigieg appointed Secretary of Transportation for the U.S.? When Mayor Pete was confirmed, his experience with large-scale logistics—such as managing ports—was as limited as my knowledge of quantum physics or botany. He lacked the framework to understand his role, and what experience he did have famously highlighted his ineptitude. Pete couldn’t fully manage to fill potholes in South Bend, Indiana. So why was he selected? His worldview aligned with the Biden administration; he was seen as a rising star and checked off some political signaling boxes. For another example, consider William Farish, appointed as special envoy to the UK by the Bush Administration in 2001—quite a leap from horse breeding in Texas to hobnobbing in London.

In my humble—and correct—opinion, the Left’s ideological drive has a more deleterious effect on government since it’s evident competency doesn’t enter their calculus when making nominations (For a primer on Marxist institutional infiltration, listen to this). Again, let’s not forget the crowning jewels of Buttigieg’s tenure: failure and ramblings about systemic racism in the U.S. highway system. Democrats evaluate the intersectional identity and sentiments of their most extreme base when making these decisions. In contrast, Conservatives tend to focus on transferable skills, even if those skills don’t directly derive from experience in a perfectly similar position. The key takeaway is that politics drive cabinet nominations on both sides of the aisle, which is reasonable given the political nature of our system.

Other factors may apply, but hopefully, what I’ve paved (highway reference) thus far suffices to build my case for why Matt Gaetz is a masterful pick for Attorney General.

"He's the Attorney General. Suck it up!"

Thomas Massey

https://x.com/haleytalbotcnn/status/1856806886819205280?s=46&t=gaEMFVr67uHIFcW5MWuiBg

^Rep. Thomas Massie escalating Gaetz to the press.

Forcing Function

Here’s the main point: The Trump agenda is clearly conveyed in the Gaetz appointment—dismantling the administrative state and avoiding the mistakes of the last term. The time required to remove bureaucrats entrenched in these departments, especially the DOJ, is significantly reduced when they leave on their own. The incoming administration is leveraging the specter of these cabinet appointments to haunt the opposition straight out the door. Moreover, those willing to resign simply at the thought of working under these appointees reveal the deep ideological bias within these agencies. Thus, the appointment of Matt Gaetz serves as a forcing function, agitating the opposition to such a degree that they leave before the administration even begins.

Temperament

Upon confirmation, Matt’s temperament would make him an excellent choice for his primary task: cleaning house. The corruption and weaponization of the DOJ have long hindered its ability to fulfill its original purpose. Many conservatives have pointed this out from Crossfire Hurricane to recent developments this year. The DOJ isn’t as concerned with “justice” as it purports.

The times dictate the type of person needed for the role, and contrary to what some might think, the DOJ doesn’t need another Bill Barr right now. It certainly never needed Merrick Garland.

Competency

Beyond temperament, Gaetz is qualified—he’s passed the bar and is an attorney. If being an attorney qualified Kamala Harris for the vice presidency and the Democratic presidential nomination, the same standard should apply to Gaetz. Right? His colleagues regard him as a bright, unrelenting bulldog and, by others, a formidable opponent. Watching Gaetz scrutinize witness testimony in hearings demonstrates his ability to address issues while working from a political angle. His appearances on MSNBC or CNN showcase his knack for articulating positions, often with direct or passive-aggressive opposition.

https://x.com/brennanleach/status/1856827279734706413?s=46&t=gaEMFVr67uHIFcW5MWuiBg

^Sen. John Fetterman's humorous take on AG Appointment

Conclusion

Whether the Attorney General or any other cabinet position, the incoming administration’s appointments underscore their commitment to fulfilling the mandate given to them by the electorate. These choices reflect not just a political strategy but also a deliberate attempt to reshape the government to align with the priorities of the administration. Don’t let the media convince you that these appointments are more radical than those of previous administrations—they are operating within the same framework every administration has followed throughout history.

Presidential cabinets are inherently political. They are comprised of individuals chosen not only for their skills but for their alignment with the president’s vision and agenda. Each appointment, while sometimes controversial, serves a purpose: to ensure that the policies for which the administration was elected are enacted effectively. In this context, wailing of bureaucrats and ideologues shouldn’t be viewed as a flaw in the process but as a sign of progress toward meaningful change.

Ultimately, the success of these appointments should be measured by their ability to disrupt inefficiency, remove corruption, realign institutions with their intended purpose, and get these institutions out of your everyday life. This is precisely why the appointment of Matt Gaetz—or others like him—signals a broader, intentional effort to restore accountability and functionality to the federal government. No amount of bureaucratic resistance or partisan outrage should deter the administration from achieving this goal. If history is any guide, these appointments will be remembered not for the gnashing of teeth they inspired but for the impact they had in advancing the people’s agenda.