Salon's look at Trumpers and the "drain the swamp" con makes the case that it's not about good governance--it's a political purge. The goal isn't better governance, it's a purely partisan goal of putting conservatives in charge.
This ties in with Newt Gingrich, who might have revealed too much:
"I'm told he now just disclaims that. He now says it was cute, but he doesn't want to use it anymore," Gingrich said...
"But, you know, he is my leader and if he decides to drop the swamp and the alligator I will drop the swamp and the alligator."
Adele Stan's analysis of Trump's oligarchy-building worries that it's "difficult to take in all the harm being inflicted on the republic at this moment in history, and the consequences are terrifying to contemplate:"
The stage has been set for a massive accrual of profits to private capitalists--both here and abroad--through the leveraging and misappropriation of the nation's assets and resources, be they highway funds or the fossil fuel that sits beneath the lands and oceans, or the lands over which such fuel must travel to reach a market. And even those two examples represent but a glimpse of the massive grift that is to come.
Stan writes that "the real act....is the diversion of the nation's assets in the service of financial flows between the private capitalists of the United States and the oligarchs of the world--especially those of Russia:"
Trump has found his model, and thanks to the political infrastructure created by private capitalists Charles and David Koch--oilmen themselves--he has access to a strong apparatus for maintaining power. It's the same apparatus that just stripped the incoming governor of North Carolina of much of the office's previously held powers. It's the apparatus that is likely to keep the U.S. House of Representatives in Republican hands for a generation.
It's all to the good of the gaggle of people who sit atop large, privately-held entities and corporations, people whose actions are unaccountable to the public because shares in their businesses are not traded on exchanges.
Rather than divest himself of any holdings, Trump will apparently maintain his position atop that financial apparatus:
Today comes word that rather than place his holdings in what is traditionally known as a "blind trust," Trump is contemplating a "half-blind trust," one that would leave his family in charge of the store.
The nation rustles lightly, its weariness from a hellish campaign and fear over its outcome obscuring its view with heavy eyelids.
In the land of unseeing, the half-blind man is king.
And thus we return to Newt, this time for a lecture on professional ethics:
We have never seen this kind of wealth in the White House, and so traditional rules don't work, and we're going to have to think up, you know, a whole new approach. ...
I've suggested that people who are widely respected, like Attorney General Mukasey, might -- that the president-elect might want to form a panel who are sort of a review group, if that makes sense, and that the panel would monitor regularly what was going on and would offer warnings if they get too close to the edge.
"This is not a surprise," the piece continues, "to anyone who has followed the three-decade-arc of the deeply corrupt and cynical career of Newton Leroy Gingrich:"
But let us take him at his word that Donald Trump wants to "clean up" Washington because we live "in an age when people are convinced that government corruption is widespread both in the United States and around the world." Exactly how does letting the incoming administration off the hook on corruption issues ahead of time help fight that perception?
The answer, of course, is that it doesn't.
"After eight years of complaining that Obama is a dictator who sees himself as above the law," Salon snarks, "surely we can expect the GOP to put its money where its mouth is. Right?"