

In staffing his administrations, President Trump has always placed a high premium on “loyalty” to him personally. And throughout his quests for the White House, he has threatened to seek “revenge” against his perceived political enemies. Depending on how he defines “loyalty” and “revenge,” Trump can do either great good or great harm to his own reputation and, more importantly, to the United States itself. Issues of loyalty and revenge have come to the forefront in considering the nomination of Pam Bondi to be Attorney General. And a different, obscure, and little-noticed interpretation of “revenge” by Trump offers the possibility that the future may be brighter than his enemies currently fear.
I’m always skeptical of those who place too much emphasis on demanding the “loyalty” of others. Misplaced loyalty, whether demanded or rendered, can do great damage. Those who hire people while placing too much emphasis on loyalty and not enough on ability risk hiring those who may be unqualified for the positions for which they’re being hired, or at the very least not the best picks. An excellent recent example is Trump’s first choice for Attorney General, Matt Gaetz. The issue of loyalty versus ability is also central to the nomination of Pete Hegseth to be Secretary of Defense.
Moreover, those who render excessive loyalty to an individual may ultimately do more damage to that individual as well as to the larger environment in which that individual works. Joe Biden surrounded himself with men and women who, for more than three years, assured the country that despite his advanced age he could nonetheless leap tall buildings in a single bound and outthink Einstein with half his brain tied behind his back. And they apparently shielded Biden himself from knowledge of his declining cognitive abilities and encouraged him to seek a second presidential term until the infamous July debate with Trump. For years historians will study (or should study) the degree to which Biden’s fading faculties affected his decisions, and what impact they may have had on the country and the world.
In discussing “revenge,” Trump has frequently threatened the criminal prosecution of his perceived “enemies.” How seriously his threats should be taken is debatable. In 2016, for example, he (and his supporters) delighted in chants of “Lock her up!” directed against Hillary Clinton. Yet once in office he never had her prosecuted. Eight years later, he continues to talk of prosecuting foes such as Liz Cheney and Jack Smith for unspecified crimes. Whether they or anyone else will actually be prosecuted for anything at all remains to be seen. But the fact that Clinton has never been indicted for anything, much less been forced to model an orange jump suit, indicates that additional threats to seek criminal convictions of Cheney, Smith, or others probably constitute so much hot air. Probably. But not necessarily definitively.
Issues of both loyalty and revenge have both become central to senators considering Trump’s nomination of Pamela Bondi to be the next Attorney General. Nobody doubts her credentials. Her years as a Florida state prosecutor, followed by two terms as state Attorney General, make her well qualified. Indeed, of all those Trump has nominated for various offices, Bondi may well be the best qualified individual for the position for which he has named her.
Where Ms. Bondi’s loyalties lie and what they may lead her to do are of central concern to the senators examining her nomination. That she is a Trump loyalist is undeniable. She was one of Trump’s defense attorneys when he was first impeached, and she was a member of a team of activists seeking evidence of fraud in the 2020 presidential election. Will her loyalty to Trump lead her to use the enormous powers of the Justice Department to seek to destroy those whom Trump presumably wants locked up?
Bondi has assured her interrogators that she will act strictly according to law. Her assurances will lead Republicans to vote to confirm her, although most Democrats will probably still vote to oppose her nomination. And one may wonder how long Ms. Bondi will actually remain as Attorney General, should she be confirmed and subsequently keep her promise to put loyalty to the law and the Constitution above all else—including, one hopes, President Trump.
But seemingly forgotten in discussions of the fitness (or lack thereof) of Trump and his nominees is a radically different meaning Trump has sometimes attached to the word “revenge.” He actually said at one point during a Town Hall forum produced by Fox News that “I don’t care about the revenge thing…My revenge will be success [in promoting American prosperity].”
It’s unfortunate that neither Trump nor anyone else has stressed this point more, but if Trump truly means what he said, then all the talk of criminal prosecutions is the same sort of nonsense Trump spewed out in 2016 about Hillary Clinton, and which ultimately led nowhere. As long as Trump equates “revenge” with achieving and maintaining economic prosperity, then he is entitled to the loyalty and therefore cooperation of all his subordinates, as long as he, and they, remain within the law. We’ll learn soon enough whether to fear his wrath or applaud his success.
Malcolm L. Cross has lived in Stephenville since 1987 and taught politics and government at Tarleton for 36 years, retiring in 2023. His political and civic activities include service on the Stephenville City Council (2000-2014) and on the Erath County Republican Executive Committee (1990-2024). He was Mayor pro-tem of Stephenville from 2008 to 2014. He has served on the Board of Directors of the Stephenville
Economic Development Authority since 2018 and as chair of the Erath County Appraisal District’s Appraisal Review Board since 2015. He is also a member of the Stephenville Rotary Club, the Board of Vestry of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, and the Executive Committee of the Boy Scouts’ Pecan Valley District. Views expressed in this column are his and do not reflect those of The Flash as a whole.
Be the first to comment