Staff Reports
Donald Trump’s presidency saw a revolving door of chiefs of staff, with four different individuals stepping into the role during his time in office. The parade began with Reince Priebus, transitioned to retired Marine General John F. Kelly, then moved on to Mick Mulvaney, and finally landed on Mark Meadows. The position itself is a relatively modern invention, courtesy of Dwight Eisenhower, but it appears to have sparked some age-old drama among those who held it.
Recently, John F. Kelly has decided to stir the pot, making headlines in the liberal media with claims that Trump embodies “the general definition of fascist.” This new revelation seems to have sent Democrats into a frenzy, ready to brand Trump as the reincarnation of every villain from history. Kelly’s narrative thrives on the presumption that Trump leads a far-right movement replete with dictatorial tendencies and hostility toward dissent. Sounds compelling if you’re in the anti-Trump camp, but caution should be exercised before diving into the rabbit hole of his rhetoric.
Biden-Harris Team Still Flying Haitians into the United States
By Ed SherdluLast April, the Republican-led House Committee on Homeland Security caught the Harris-Biden administration spending your taxpayer dollars to fly military-age Hattian men into America. Charter flights… pic.twitter.com/Ncztptjlmy
— Greg Snow ❄ (@Greg__Snow) October 30, 2024
Mick Mulvaney, who also held the title of chief of staff and worked closely with Trump, has seen through the nonsense. In an op-ed for the New York Post, he dismissed Kelly’s accusations as sheer fantasy. Mulvaney’s take was that while Kelly envisioned his role as some sort of governmental watchdog, he himself understood it as an essential support to the president. This divergence in perspective is telling; while one viewed it as a mission to thwart a democratically elected leader, the other saw it as a commitment to serve that same leader.
Further dismantling Kelly’s claims, Mulvaney pointed out that none of Trump’s directives ever crossed the lines of legality or morality. Not once did Kelly allege that Trump pressured him to participate in any questionable activities. Instead, Kelly’s grievances seem to stem from ideological differences—essentially a lack of agreement with Trump’s leadership style rather than any factual misdeeds. The absence of corroboration for Kelly’s Hitler-like comparisons raises eyebrows; one must wonder what reality he lives in.
Moreover, Trump’s personal connections to the Jewish community, given that his daughter and grandchildren are Jewish, certainly complicate any baseless accusations of admiration for Adolf Hitler. The evidence, or lack thereof, points to the fact that the narrative being pushed by Kelly doesn’t resonate with the experiences of those who served alongside the former president. Mulvaney made it abundantly clear: if Trump had behaved in a way that suggested fascism, he would have acted accordingly—by either confronting Trump or resigning. The silence from Kelly on any notable incidents during their tenure speaks volumes about the validity of his claims.
As Mulvaney hammeringly affirmed, the unpredictable nature of Kelly’s recent commentary and behavior is more reflective of personal grievance than a truth-seeking endeavor. Instead of fostering unity, Kelly has only inflamed partisan divisions while further diminishing his credibility. His claims add nothing to the discourse but rather provide fertile ground for the media’s ongoing attempts to delegitimize Trump and incite animosity. It’s a classic case of a disgruntled employee airing grievances long after the fact, proving yet again that those who didn’t get along with Trump have a tendency to retreat into the annals of sensationalism.
