Want to drain the swamp? Start at Mar-a-Lago

Readers of the Washington Post may remember that throughout Trump’s first term, the Post ran a steady stream of stories about chaos and alleged scandals at the White House and in his administration. Frequently, the stories included the following statement:

This report is based on interviews with [20-40] aides, officials, and others with knowledge of [whatever the subject was] many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Whatever impression this statement conveyed, it did not mean that all two or three dozen insiders agreed with what the Post was reporting or even that all of them actually knew about the subject. But it was clear that plenty of unauthorized leaking was going on.

Trump complained about the leaks, and with good reason. The Post’s reports based on leaks painted a negative picture of the administration, and the very fact of the leaking portrayed an administration the president couldn’t control. But Trump was never able to stop it

One might have hoped that this time around, a wiser, more savvy Trump would be able to prevent leaking on a large scale. However, that does not seem to be the case.

Throughout the transition period, the Post and New York Times (led by Maggie Haberman) has been running stories based on inside information from leakers. The latest example is this article in the Washington Post that purports to describe in detail the nasty jockeying and in-fighting going on during the transition.

The title of the article is “Sharp elbows and raised voices: Inside Trump’s bumpy transition.” The subtitle is “His freewheeling team has returned to the patterns of his first term in office — with shouting matches, expulsions from meetings and name-calling.” The article lives up to its sensationalist billing.

The Post, too, has “returned to the patterns” of Trump’s first term in office. It even trots out its signature line from the first term:

This portrait of Trump’s blooming team of rivals is the result of interviews with more than half a dozen aides, advisers, confidants, and others involved in the transition process, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to offer a candid assessment.

At least the number of leakers for this story is “more than half a dozen,” not more than two or three dozen. But if Trump doesn’t stop his aides, advisers, and confidants from leaking to unfriendly new outlets, the number will surely grow. Absent meaningful discipline of leakers, others in the know will want to confide in the Post and the Times to advance their agenda.

Leaking, of course, is one of Washington’s favorite sports. It’s not easy to prevent.

However, the Obama administration was not plagued by leaks. Neither was the Biden administration except for leaks that disparaged Kamala Harris during her first two years in office. In fact, discipline in Biden’s inner circle was so complete that word of his growing incapacity never made it into the press.

I understand that the mainstream media will be less aggressive in obtaining leaked information and more circumspect in using it when a Democrat is in the White House. Even discounting for this, however, I have to conclude that Obama and Biden ran a much tighter ship than Trump.

Trump should tighten up his ship. His chief-of-staff, Susie Wiles, is said to have brought discipline — or at least enough of it — to the Trump campaign. She seems like a good candidate to curb leaking.

But according to the Post, Wiles herself is part of one of three factions fighting for control of the transition process.

In one group, unofficially helmed by Trump’s oldest son, Donald Trump Jr., sits Vance alongside other longtime MAGA warriors such as former Fox News host Tucker Carlson; and former Trump administration official Cliff Sims. Another group, unofficially helmed by Wiles, consists largely of her cadre of loyal and disciplined campaign aides, including Trump’s 2024 political director James Blair and deputy Taylor Budowich.

A third group consists of people connected to the America First Policy Institute, including AFPI President Brooke Rollins, transition co-chair Linda McMahon — who Trump on Tuesday announced as his choice for secretary of education — and Keith Kellogg, who served as national security adviser to Trump’s previous vice president, Mike Pence. The group served as a sort of government-in-waiting during the campaign, and held an event at Trump’s club last week. But many observers have been surprised at their lack of influence in these first few weeks.

There are also a number of independent actors whose power extends directly from their personal relationship with Trump.

(Emphasis added)

Sounds a little like a swamp to me.

It’s quite possible that Trump likes this sort of strife. But if he wants to limit leaking, he will have to assign responsibility for that job and support that person by punishing leakers.

Leaks won’t bring down an administration except in the most extraordinary circumstances. But if, as seems likely, Democrats regain control of the House in 2026, leaks could lead to yet another Trump impeachment. Leaks could also undermine JD Vance’s attempt to succeed Trump in 2029. The anti-Harris leaking certainly didn’t help her, though it did provide valuable information to voters.

Leaks may, or may not, provide valuable information about Trump’s second term. But that information is almost certain to cast Trump in a worse light than he desires.