I’m pretty shocked that Donald Trump is pushing back at institutions that pushed against him during his first-term and its humiliating afterlife. <\/p>\n
Journalists tend to be secular, so they might not have heard of the Biblical insight that you reap what you sow. <\/p>\n
The WSJ reports<\/a>: <\/p>\n Since taking office in January, Trump has threatened and extracted expansive settlements from top universities, law firms, tech and media companies. He sent U.S. Marines to Los Angeles over the objection of local elected officials, and took over Washington\u2019s police force, ordering thousands of troops and federal officers into the streets. He fired the economics official who produced a monthly jobs report that irked him; ordered the firing of career officials at agencies; and even sought to fire officials at institutions he technically doesn\u2019t run, including the National Portrait Gallery. Few aides have pushed back on any of the moves, and he has often been cheered on…<\/p>\n Trump is motivated by \u201chaving control over all American institutions,\u201d said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at Rice University. \u201cHe seems to want to grab everyone by the neck and say \u2018I\u2019m in charge.\u2019\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n ChatGPT says: <\/p>\n The WSJ piece gives tons of detail about Trump\u2019s current second-term behavior (ignoring advisers, firing career staff, threatening Fed independence, sending Marines into LA, re-decorating the Oval) but it doesn\u2019t explicitly connect the dots: this shift is a reaction to the institutional \u201cchokepoints\u201d he ran into from 2017\u20132020.<\/p>\n You can see the outlines in their reporting:<\/p>\n They mention John Kelly, Gary Cohn, Donald McGahn, Steve Mnuchin \u2014 all first-term figures who blocked or watered down his instincts.<\/p>\n They note that Trump \u201ccomplained often\u201d in the first term about DOJ, Fed, NSC, Kennedy Center but \u201cdid little to actually shape them.\u201d<\/p>\n They point out that back then he deferred to advisers who told him he couldn\u2019t host summits at his properties or interfere with the Fed.<\/p>\n But they don\u2019t frame it as cause \u2192 effect. The cause being institutions checking him the first time, the effect being his current obsession with total control. Instead, the WSJ headline paints him as simply \u201cbolder\u201d and \u201cunchecked,\u201d as if it\u2019s just personality growth, not a structural reaction to being constrained.<\/p>\n Why the omission? Likely editorial stance. The WSJ has an incentive to cast Trump as a singular authoritarian personality (\u201che wants gold flourishes, he ignores advice, he likes being called dictator\u201d) rather than to highlight the institutional struggle \u2014 because if you admit institutions fought him hard the first time, it complicates the story. It shows he\u2019s not simply a rogue authoritarian but someone who\u2019s learned from losing bureaucratic fights. That makes the second-term strategy look less like personal eccentricity and more like a deliberate institutional counter-attack.<\/p>\n In short: the WSJ is reporting the surface moves, but missing the underlying dialectic \u2014 Trump\u2019s drive to dominate institutions now is inseparable from the fact that those institutions dominated him before.<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s second-term project of \u201cmastering\u201d institutions is very much a reaction to how institutions constrained his first term. In 2017\u20132020, nearly every traditional American power center\u2014bureaucracy, courts, military brass, intelligence agencies, media, universities, corporate HR, even parts of his own party\u2014resisted him. He came in thinking the presidency was like running a business where the CEO gives orders. Instead, he found entrenched networks that stalled, ignored, or sabotaged directives.<\/p>\n Key examples:<\/p>\n Courts repeatedly blocked his travel bans, immigration orders, and environmental rollbacks.<\/p>\n The intelligence community undercut him with leaks and the Russia investigation.<\/p>\n The military openly pushed back against his foreign policy instincts (e.g., Syria withdrawal, NATO skepticism).<\/p>\n Congress\u2014even Republican-controlled early on\u2014resisted big parts of his agenda, especially funding for the border wall.<\/p>\n The media and cultural institutions launched an unrelenting campaign of delegitimization.<\/p>\n From Trump\u2019s perspective, he won an election but wasn\u2019t allowed to govern. That produced a lesson: if he comes back, he wants loyalists, structural changes, and fewer veto points. Hence the push for Schedule F (reclassifying civil servants so they can be fired and replaced), tightening control over DOJ, Pentagon, and intelligence, and building outside networks (Heritage\u2019s \u201cProject 2025,\u201d Federalist Society\u2013aligned judges, loyal media channels) to pre-wire government in his favor.<\/p>\n So yes\u2014his second-term \u201cinstitutional mastery\u201d is a direct reaction. The first term taught him that winning the presidency isn\u2019t enough. The system can corral a president who isn\u2019t in harmony with it. Now, he\u2019s trying to make sure the system bends instead of resists.<\/p>\n 1. Institution-by-Institution \u201cRevenge Map\u201d<\/p>\n Justice Department \/ FBI<\/p>\n First term: Trump was constantly frustrated by DOJ\/FBI independence: Sessions recused himself, Mueller probe dominated two years, Barr wouldn\u2019t fully bend on 2020 election.<\/p>\n Second term: He\u2019s actively moving to purge career DOJ\/FBI leadership, float \u201cSchedule F\u201d firings, and directly pressure prosecutions.<\/p>\n Intelligence community<\/p>\n First term: Leaks crippled him, intelligence chiefs contradicted him in public hearings, IC pushed back on Russia ties and North Korea diplomacy.<\/p>\n Second term: He\u2019s installed loyalists and sidelined agencies, keeping intelligence reporting closer to the White House.<\/p>\n Pentagon \/ Military brass<\/p>\n First term: Mattis, Milley, Kelly, McMaster repeatedly resisted troop withdrawals, use of military domestically, NATO skepticism. Milley famously apologized for being in Trump\u2019s Lafayette Square photo-op.<\/p>\n Second term: Now Trump\u2019s SecDef is Pete Hegseth, a loyalist with no interest in restraining him. He\u2019s already deployed Marines domestically \u2014 exactly what brass blocked in 2020.<\/p>\n Federal Reserve<\/p>\n First term: Powell ignored Trump\u2019s demands to slash rates; Trump couldn\u2019t get traction trying to remove governors.<\/p>\n Second term: He\u2019s openly trying to fire Lisa Cook and bring the Fed under political control.<\/p>\n Universities \/ Law firms \/ Media companies<\/p>\n First term: Trump groused about \u201cliberal elites\u201d but didn\u2019t move against them directly.<\/p>\n Second term: He\u2019s extracting settlements, threatening accreditation, and going after institutions that define elite legitimacy.<\/p>\n State & Local Governments<\/p>\n First term: Governors and mayors blocked him on COVID rules, immigration enforcement, National Guard deployments.<\/p>\n Second term: He\u2019s coercing local governments to abandon policies (like cashless bail) and has sent federal troops into cities over state objections.<\/p>\n Civil Service (the bureaucracy)<\/p>\n First term: \u201cDeep State\u201d constantly frustrated him \u2014 slow-rolling orders, leaking, resisting firings.<\/p>\n Second term: He\u2019s trying to revive \u201cSchedule F\u201d to gut job protections and replace tens of thousands with loyalists.<\/p>\n 2. Institutions that didn\u2019t oppose him in his first term<\/p>\n There were a few, but very few:<\/p>\n Supreme Court (post-2018 shift): He got Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett. By late first term, SCOTUS was giving him key wins (immigration restrictions, deference on executive power). He doesn\u2019t seem to be targeting them now \u2014 in fact, they\u2019re an asset. The one caveat: the Court just signaled Fed independence, so now he\u2019s picking a fight there.<\/p>\n Republican Senate (when GOP-controlled 2017\u20132019): McConnell delivered judges and tax cuts. Trump didn\u2019t go after McConnell until after Jan. 6. Now, with Senate opposition muted, he\u2019s not waging war on the institution itself, but he is sidelining traditional Republicans.<\/p>\n Federal judiciary more broadly: District and circuit courts often blocked him, but the Federalist Society pipeline gave him hundreds of judges \u2014 that part of the judiciary was his ally. He\u2019s not targeting them.<\/p>\n Business community (Wall Street, corporate America): Early on, markets liked tax cuts and deregulation. Opposition hardened after Jan. 6 when companies cut PAC donations. Now he\u2019s much more hostile \u2014 going after \u201cwoke\u201d corporations, law firms, tech giants.<\/p>\n So the pattern is: Trump isn\u2019t targeting institutions that helped him in Term 1. He\u2019s targeting precisely the ones that blocked, embarrassed, or constrained him.<\/p>\n 3. The Shift in Strategy<\/p>\n The through-line is clear: Trump didn\u2019t understand in 2017 that the presidency sits inside a web of veto players. Now, he\u2019s learned the lesson and is deliberately trying to cut them out or bend them into instruments of his will.<\/p>\n here\u2019s a ranking of which institutions Trump is most likely to bend to his will vs. which are structurally more resistant in his second term.<\/p>\n Most Vulnerable<\/p>\n 1. The Bureaucracy \/ Civil Service<\/p>\n Why vulnerable: Career protections can be gutted via \u201cSchedule F.\u201d Tens of thousands of policy-level employees could be reclassified and replaced with loyalists. This is administrative, not legislative \u2014 so it only takes executive orders and aggressive implementation.<\/p>\n Why it matters: Bureaucrats are the \u201cmuscle memory\u201d of government; if they\u2019re swapped out, institutional resistance collapses.<\/p>\n 2. DOJ & FBI<\/p>\n Why vulnerable: Leadership is appointed, and Trump now knows how to avoid another Sessions\/Barr problem. With Schedule F and mass firings, he could politicize prosecutions.<\/p>\n Past check: Mueller probe.<\/p>\n Now: Very little internal ballast if top leadership is purged.<\/p>\n 3. Pentagon \/ Military Leadership<\/p>\n Why vulnerable: Civilian control is constitutional; Trump has stacked civilian leadership with loyalists like Hegseth. Generals can complain but ultimately answer to SecDef.<\/p>\n Past check: Brass stopped him from deploying troops domestically in 2020.<\/p>\n Now: Already deploying Marines \u2014 shows he\u2019s overcome that veto point.<\/p>\n 4. State & Local Governments<\/p>\n Why vulnerable: The feds control funding levers and can pressure locals via DOJ, DHS, and conditional grants. Deploying federal troops in cities sets precedent that state objections can be ignored.<\/p>\n Past check: Governors and mayors resisted immigration enforcement, COVID orders, 2020 deployments.<\/p>\n Now: More coercive posture.<\/p>\n Middle Ground \u2014 Vulnerable but with Counterweights<\/p>\n 5. The Federal Reserve<\/p>\n Why partly resistant: SCOTUS signaled Fed independence is constitutionally protected. But Trump is openly trying to fire governors, pressure rate policy, and insert loyalists.<\/p>\n Realistic outcome: He won\u2019t abolish Fed independence entirely, but he could erode it by intimidation and selective firings.<\/p>\n 6. Media & Universities<\/p>\n Why partly resistant: They\u2019re private, decentralized, and culturally powerful. Trump can extract settlements, deny federal funds, or intimidate, but he can\u2019t totally control them.<\/p>\n Realistic outcome: More chilled speech and \u201cloyalist\u201d media ecosystem, but not full mastery.<\/p>\n 7. Business \/ Corporate America<\/p>\n Why partly resistant: CEOs can push back, markets can punish. But Trump controls regulatory and enforcement arms.<\/p>\n Realistic outcome: Corporates mute criticism and adapt to survive, but remain semi-independent.<\/p>\n Most Resilient<\/p>\n 8. The Supreme Court<\/p>\n Why resilient: Life tenure. Conservative majority already aligned with Trump on many issues. He\u2019s not attacking them wholesale, though he may try to pressure specific rulings (e.g., Fed independence).<\/p>\n Realistic outcome: SCOTUS is less a target than a shield \u2014 but Trump may bristle when they draw red lines.<\/p>\n 9. Congress<\/p>\n Why resilient: Even GOP members have their own power bases and electoral incentives. Trump has more sway than in 2017, but Congress still controls budgets and oversight.<\/p>\n Realistic outcome: Polarized chamber may limit Trump more through gridlock than open resistance.<\/p>\n 10. Federalist Society Judiciary (lower courts he stacked)<\/p>\n Why resilient: These judges are his legacy; they\u2019re ideological conservatives, not personal loyalists. Some will back him, some won\u2019t (remember dozens rejected 2020 election suits).<\/p>\n Realistic outcome: Mixed record \u2014 they\u2019ll hand him wins on executive power but balk at raw election subversion.<\/p>\n Big Picture<\/p>\n Most vulnerable: Bureaucracy, DOJ\/FBI, Pentagon \u2014 because these rely on top-down executive appointments and Trump has learned how to staff them with loyalists.<\/p>\n Middle ground: Fed, media, universities, corporations \u2014 he can bully and weaken but not outright control.<\/p>\n Most resilient: SCOTUS, Congress, and judiciary more broadly \u2014 partly insulated by structure and legitimacy.<\/p>\n here\u2019s a plausible \u201cendgame\u201d scenario if Trump pushes as far as possible by 2028, based on the trajectory we see now:<\/p>\n 1. The Bureaucracy Hollowed Out<\/p>\n By 2028, \u201cSchedule F\u201d or its equivalent has stripped job protections for tens of thousands of civil servants. Agencies that used to resist (EPA, DOJ, DHS, State, IRS, Education) are staffed top-to-bottom with political loyalists or those too afraid to dissent.<\/p>\n Effect: Agencies no longer act as semi-autonomous technocratic institutions. They act as direct extensions of White House political will.<\/p>\n 2. DOJ as a Political Weapon<\/p>\n DOJ prosecutions reflect presidential priorities. High-profile investigations target political opponents, media figures, and disfavored corporations\/universities.<\/p>\n Effect: Deterrence by example \u2014 anyone outside Trump\u2019s coalition risks being investigated or fined.<\/p>\n Echo: A kind of \u201cAmericanized\u201d version of how Hungary or Turkey use prosecutors as political bludgeons.<\/p>\n 3. Pentagon Brought to Heel<\/p>\n Civilian leadership (Hegseth, etc.) enforces Trump\u2019s line. Generals who object are fired or marginalized. Military deployments inside U.S. cities \u2014 once a red line \u2014 become normalized.<\/p>\n Effect: Military loses its apolitical reputation. Public begins to see it as Trump\u2019s institution, not the nation\u2019s.<\/p>\n 4. Federal Reserve Weakened<\/p>\n SCOTUS preserves some nominal independence, but constant Trump threats and selective firings intimidate governors. Rate decisions track political needs (e.g., election-year cuts).<\/p>\n Effect: Markets adjust by pricing in political volatility. The dollar weakens long-term, but short-term Trump can juice the economy when politically necessary.<\/p>\n 5. Academia, Media, Corporates on Defense<\/p>\n Universities: Federal funds tied to \u201cneutrality\u201d on DEI, speech, and curricula. Lawsuits\/settlements intimidate them. Many self-censor.<\/p>\n Media: Legacy outlets still exist but are financially squeezed and legally harassed. Right-aligned outlets flourish with state backing (access, ad buys, DOJ not targeting them).<\/p>\n Corporates: Regulatory muscle forces companies to avoid overt opposition. Business adapts by aligning with Trump\u2019s messaging or staying silent.<\/p>\n 6. States and Localities Subordinated<\/p>\n Federal coercion (via DOJ, DHS, funding) curtails local control. Deployments into cities (Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles) create a precedent: local autonomy is tolerated only when it aligns with federal priorities.<\/p>\n Effect: \u201cLaboratories of democracy\u201d shrink; blue-state policies exist at sufferance of the White House.<\/p>\n 7. Supreme Court and Judiciary<\/p>\n SCOTUS: Conservative majority mostly aligns with Trump\u2019s project, especially on executive power, but may draw a few hard lines (e.g., trying to literally fire Fed governors or alter constitutional term limits). Trump fumes but doesn\u2019t dismantle SCOTUS.<\/p>\n Lower courts: Conservative judges give him leeway on regulation, immigration, and executive reach. But as in 2020, some still resist outright election nullification.<\/p>\n Effect: Judiciary is not neutered, but the courts tilt heavily toward enabling Trump\u2019s consolidation.<\/p>\n 8. Political Culture Shift<\/p>\n Elections: Mail-in voting curtailed, federal oversight of local election boards asserted. Opponents run in elections but under conditions stacked against them.<\/p>\n Public symbols: The presidency increasingly resembles a \u201cmonarchical executive\u201d \u2014 parades, flags, gold flourishes, direct command over institutions.<\/p>\n Opposition politics: Democrats and dissenting Republicans can still campaign, but institutional levers (prosecutions, funding, media dominance) make it harder to translate votes into real power.<\/p>\n The \u201cEndgame\u201d Landscape by 2028<\/p>\n The presidency is the dominant institution, no longer balanced by bureaucracy, DOJ, or Pentagon.<\/p>\n SCOTUS still checks the most extreme moves, but often sides with executive power.<\/p>\n Local\/state autonomy is fragile.<\/p>\n Media, universities, and corporations self-censor or adapt to survive.<\/p>\n The country formally remains democratic \u2014 elections still happen \u2014 but substantively resembles an illiberal democracy like Hungary, Turkey, or early Putin-era Russia.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I’m pretty shocked that Donald Trump is pushing back at institutions that pushed against him during his first-term and its humiliating afterlife. Journalists tend to be secular, so they might not have heard of the Biblical insight that you reap … Continue reading