Published on: Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:30:00 GMTOriginal Story: Opinion | Trump might really drain the swamp – The Washington Post The Swamp Drains Itself, Apparently. Well, well, well. Look who’s at it again. Our favorite orange-hued, reality-TV-star-turned-commander-in-chief, Donald J. Trump, is apparently gearing up for another round of “draining the swamp.” This time, the esteemed Washington Post, in its infinite wisdom, is suggesting he might actually, you know, *do* it. Bless their optimistic little hearts. Because, if history has taught us anything, it’s that Trump’s promises are as solid as a Jell-O mold in a heatwave. Let’s get one thing straight from the get-go: “draining the swamp” is less a policy objective and more of a catchy slogan. It’s the political equivalent of a unicorn – perpetually promised, never actually delivered. And yet, here we are, again, dissecting the possibility. It’s almost as if we’ve learned nothing. It’s like watching a rerun of a show where you know the plot twist, but you still tune in, hoping *this* time it’ll be different. Spoiler alert: it won’t be. The revolving door of “outsiders.” The core of this latest “drain the swamp” fantasy seems to be Trump’s alleged desire to staff his potential next administration with individuals who are *not* part of the entrenched political establishment. You know, the “outsiders.” The people who, presumably, haven’t been touched by the sticky, corrupting fingers of Washington D.C. The irony, of course, is that the people who *understand* how the swamp works are usually the ones who end up getting stuck in it. Or, more often, they become the new swamp-dwellers. Think about it. Who are these mythical “outsiders” who possess the unique blend of policy knowledge, administrative competence, and unwavering loyalty to one man’s vision, all while remaining untainted by the very system they’re supposed to fix? It’s a tall order, even for a reality TV show. And let’s be honest, Trump’s track record with staffing isn’t exactly a masterclass in picking the sharpest tools in the shed. More like a collection of blunt instruments, some of which were suspiciously sharp at one point but have since been dulled by excessive use and questionable decision-making. When “outsiders” become insiders. The Washington Post piece hints at a potential shift, a move away from the cronyism and political appointees that characterized his first term. But here’s where the memory banks in my increasingly-overworked brain start to churn. Let’s rewind to 2017. Remember the initial appointments? We were promised a cabinet of “the best people.” People who were supposedly going to disrupt the status quo. And yet, what did we get? A whole lot of folks who, while perhaps not career politicians in the traditional sense, were certainly seasoned in their respective industries – industries that often have their own complex relationships with government regulation and influence. Take, for instance, the appointment of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. A former CEO of ExxonMobil. Was he an “outsider” to the oil and gas industry? Absolutely not. He was practically royalty. And while his tenure was undoubtedly marked by… well, something, it certainly wasn’t a picture of pure, unadulterated anti-swampmanship. Or how about Betsy DeVos at Education? A billionaire philanthropist and major Republican donor. Her lack of traditional education policy experience was lauded by some as a fresh perspective, but critics, myself included, saw it as a prime example of putting someone in charge of a massive federal agency who had no idea how it actually functioned, beyond the abstract principles of market-based reform. This isn’t about personal attacks; it’s about patterns. The “draining the swamp” rhetoric is a powerful tool for mobilizing a base, but the actual execution of staffing a government, especially one as vast and complex as the United States federal government, requires more than just a catchy slogan and a disdain for the “establishment.” It requires expertise, a deep understanding of bureaucratic processes, and a willingness to work within the existing frameworks, even if the goal is to reform them. And that, my friends, is where the “outsiders” usually falter. They either become disillusioned, get chewed up and spit out, or, and this is the most likely scenario, they realize that to actually *do* anything, they have to engage with the very swamp they were supposed to drain. The “Loyalty Test” and the art of picking sides. The real story here, beyond the pipe dream of a completely uncorrupted administration, is the ever-present “Loyalty Test.” Trump, as we’ve seen time and time again, values fealty above all else. He wants people around him who will echo his pronouncements, defend his every move, and never, ever, question his divine right to rule. This is where the “outsider” ideal clashes violently with the “loyalist” imperative. If you’re truly an outsider with independent thought and a strong moral compass, you’re likely to butt heads with someone who demands absolute devotion. And when that happens, who do you think wins the internal battle? It’s not the person with the most nuanced policy proposal; it’s the person who can shout the loudest and accuse the other of being a “disloyal” RINO, or worse. So, the “outsiders” who *do* manage to get in are the ones who are willing to bend their principles, conform to the prevailing winds, and essentially become the swamp’s most enthusiastic inhabitants. They learn to speak the language, to play the game, and to prioritize pleasing the boss over effective governance. A familiar tune, sung slightly off-key. This isn’t to say that every single appointment in a potential second Trump term would be a disaster. But the fundamental premise of “draining the swamp” by bringing in a fresh batch of completely untarnished individuals is, frankly, a bit naive. The swamp isn’t a physical place with a single entrance and exit; it’s a complex ecosystem of interests, power dynamics, and established norms. To “drain” it requires a profound understanding of its intricacies, not just a desire to bulldoze it. Trump’s genius, if we can call it that, lies in his ability to tap into public frustration. He articulates a feeling of being unheard and unrepresented by the traditional political class. But his solutions, or at least his approach to implementing them, often fall short of the lofty rhetoric. The idea of bringing in a team of “outsiders” who will somehow magically avoid becoming part of the establishment is a comforting thought for those who are tired of the status quo. But it’s also a dangerous oversimplification. We’ve been down this road before. The promises of a new era, of shaking things up, of truly changing the system. And while there were certainly moments of disruption, the fundamental structure of Washington D.C. and its various interlocking parts remained largely intact. The swamp, it turns out, is a remarkably resilient organism. It adapts, it absorbs, and it often outlasts the reformers who try to tame it. So, while the Washington Post might be holding its breath for a truly “drained” swamp, those of us who have been paying attention are more likely to be bracing ourselves for a slightly different shade of murky. Snarky Takeaway So, the Washington Post is suggesting Trump might *actually* drain the swamp this time. Adorable. It’s like your uncle who keeps saying he’s going to finally learn Spanish, and every year he just orders more tapas. The only thing getting drained here is our collective patience and possibly a few more perfectly good government agencies, staffed by people who are great at doing… whatever it is they do. Bless their hearts. Pass the antacids. Post navigation NATO Grovels: Trump Demands International Loyalty GOP Squirm: Trump’s Leash Still Too Short?
The Swamp Drains Itself, Apparently. Well, well, well. Look who’s at it again. Our favorite orange-hued, reality-TV-star-turned-commander-in-chief, Donald J. Trump, is apparently gearing up for another round of “draining the swamp.” This time, the esteemed Washington Post, in its infinite wisdom, is suggesting he might actually, you know, *do* it. Bless their optimistic little hearts. Because, if history has taught us anything, it’s that Trump’s promises are as solid as a Jell-O mold in a heatwave. Let’s get one thing straight from the get-go: “draining the swamp” is less a policy objective and more of a catchy slogan. It’s the political equivalent of a unicorn – perpetually promised, never actually delivered. And yet, here we are, again, dissecting the possibility. It’s almost as if we’ve learned nothing. It’s like watching a rerun of a show where you know the plot twist, but you still tune in, hoping *this* time it’ll be different. Spoiler alert: it won’t be. The revolving door of “outsiders.” The core of this latest “drain the swamp” fantasy seems to be Trump’s alleged desire to staff his potential next administration with individuals who are *not* part of the entrenched political establishment. You know, the “outsiders.” The people who, presumably, haven’t been touched by the sticky, corrupting fingers of Washington D.C. The irony, of course, is that the people who *understand* how the swamp works are usually the ones who end up getting stuck in it. Or, more often, they become the new swamp-dwellers. Think about it. Who are these mythical “outsiders” who possess the unique blend of policy knowledge, administrative competence, and unwavering loyalty to one man’s vision, all while remaining untainted by the very system they’re supposed to fix? It’s a tall order, even for a reality TV show. And let’s be honest, Trump’s track record with staffing isn’t exactly a masterclass in picking the sharpest tools in the shed. More like a collection of blunt instruments, some of which were suspiciously sharp at one point but have since been dulled by excessive use and questionable decision-making. When “outsiders” become insiders. The Washington Post piece hints at a potential shift, a move away from the cronyism and political appointees that characterized his first term. But here’s where the memory banks in my increasingly-overworked brain start to churn. Let’s rewind to 2017. Remember the initial appointments? We were promised a cabinet of “the best people.” People who were supposedly going to disrupt the status quo. And yet, what did we get? A whole lot of folks who, while perhaps not career politicians in the traditional sense, were certainly seasoned in their respective industries – industries that often have their own complex relationships with government regulation and influence. Take, for instance, the appointment of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. A former CEO of ExxonMobil. Was he an “outsider” to the oil and gas industry? Absolutely not. He was practically royalty. And while his tenure was undoubtedly marked by… well, something, it certainly wasn’t a picture of pure, unadulterated anti-swampmanship. Or how about Betsy DeVos at Education? A billionaire philanthropist and major Republican donor. Her lack of traditional education policy experience was lauded by some as a fresh perspective, but critics, myself included, saw it as a prime example of putting someone in charge of a massive federal agency who had no idea how it actually functioned, beyond the abstract principles of market-based reform. This isn’t about personal attacks; it’s about patterns. The “draining the swamp” rhetoric is a powerful tool for mobilizing a base, but the actual execution of staffing a government, especially one as vast and complex as the United States federal government, requires more than just a catchy slogan and a disdain for the “establishment.” It requires expertise, a deep understanding of bureaucratic processes, and a willingness to work within the existing frameworks, even if the goal is to reform them. And that, my friends, is where the “outsiders” usually falter. They either become disillusioned, get chewed up and spit out, or, and this is the most likely scenario, they realize that to actually *do* anything, they have to engage with the very swamp they were supposed to drain. The “Loyalty Test” and the art of picking sides. The real story here, beyond the pipe dream of a completely uncorrupted administration, is the ever-present “Loyalty Test.” Trump, as we’ve seen time and time again, values fealty above all else. He wants people around him who will echo his pronouncements, defend his every move, and never, ever, question his divine right to rule. This is where the “outsider” ideal clashes violently with the “loyalist” imperative. If you’re truly an outsider with independent thought and a strong moral compass, you’re likely to butt heads with someone who demands absolute devotion. And when that happens, who do you think wins the internal battle? It’s not the person with the most nuanced policy proposal; it’s the person who can shout the loudest and accuse the other of being a “disloyal” RINO, or worse. So, the “outsiders” who *do* manage to get in are the ones who are willing to bend their principles, conform to the prevailing winds, and essentially become the swamp’s most enthusiastic inhabitants. They learn to speak the language, to play the game, and to prioritize pleasing the boss over effective governance. A familiar tune, sung slightly off-key. This isn’t to say that every single appointment in a potential second Trump term would be a disaster. But the fundamental premise of “draining the swamp” by bringing in a fresh batch of completely untarnished individuals is, frankly, a bit naive. The swamp isn’t a physical place with a single entrance and exit; it’s a complex ecosystem of interests, power dynamics, and established norms. To “drain” it requires a profound understanding of its intricacies, not just a desire to bulldoze it. Trump’s genius, if we can call it that, lies in his ability to tap into public frustration. He articulates a feeling of being unheard and unrepresented by the traditional political class. But his solutions, or at least his approach to implementing them, often fall short of the lofty rhetoric. The idea of bringing in a team of “outsiders” who will somehow magically avoid becoming part of the establishment is a comforting thought for those who are tired of the status quo. But it’s also a dangerous oversimplification. We’ve been down this road before. The promises of a new era, of shaking things up, of truly changing the system. And while there were certainly moments of disruption, the fundamental structure of Washington D.C. and its various interlocking parts remained largely intact. The swamp, it turns out, is a remarkably resilient organism. It adapts, it absorbs, and it often outlasts the reformers who try to tame it. So, while the Washington Post might be holding its breath for a truly “drained” swamp, those of us who have been paying attention are more likely to be bracing ourselves for a slightly different shade of murky. Snarky Takeaway So, the Washington Post is suggesting Trump might *actually* drain the swamp this time. Adorable. It’s like your uncle who keeps saying he’s going to finally learn Spanish, and every year he just orders more tapas. The only thing getting drained here is our collective patience and possibly a few more perfectly good government agencies, staffed by people who are great at doing… whatever it is they do. Bless their hearts. Pass the antacids.