One Does Not Simply Dismantle the Deep State in Three Months

A Job Worth Doing Well

Newton’s First Law of Motion (the law of inertia) states that an object in motion will stay in motion, with the same speed and direction, unless acted upon by an external force. So, to reverse the course of an object, one must apply a force of greater magnitude than the object’s current momentum. This is something we take for granted in everyday life—to hit a baseball, one must apply a greater force (in the opposite direction) than that with which the pitch was thrown. Duh.

Where Are We Going With This?

For the first time, this second Trump administration has recently faced a degree of pressure both from within the Republican Party and shockingly, from Trump’s own supporter base. The criticism generally centers around two policy areas. The first relates to the Trump administration’s tariff policy and the economic uncertainty that has accompanied it. The second brand of criticism centers around Trump’s cabinet—specifically the lack of prosecutions by his DOJ, and the relative political inexperience of appointees like Pete Hegseth.

On one hand, this criticism is justified. The stock market has been highly volatile—not something you’d expect from the early months of a Trump presidency. And, apart from some hopeful signs this week, there has been little transparent progress toward prosecuting the ‘deep-state’ individuals that weaponized our political and judicial systems.

On the other hand, I would ask these critics to remember what they voted for. A vote for Trump/Vance was a vote against the sociopolitical status quo. Not to simply disturb it but to overhaul and rebuild it, from the ground up. Trump told us it was possible—and now it’s time for him to deliver. But doing so requires quite a bit of force. And time.

A Schism Emerging?

The federal government, with its entrenched bureaucracies, stifling regulations, and corrupt cronyism, is like one massive object, hurtling in the wrong direction with huge institutional inertia—propelled by decades of bad decisions, waste, and corruption. Its size, complexity, and the vested interests of career officials and political stakeholders, make it highly resistant to change. The infrastructure of international trade and foreign relations is equally entangled. Dictated for years by non-governmental and inter-governmental groups with the same globalist agenda (the EU, WEF, etc.), and exploited rabidly by the Chinese Communist Party—this structure wasn’t likely to give way easily.

In both cases, the "external force" required to overcome the inertia is the Trump Administration itself—its executive actions, policy and budget reforms, personnel changes, and legislative pushes. Resistance from meritless legal challenges, media opposition, and internal sabotage serves as friction, slowing progress or potentially derailing it altogether.

Accordingly, it would be somewhat disconcerting if, within 3 short months, the new administration had already been able to transform and overhaul the global economic and political order. It would mean that any such changes could be erased and reversed as quickly as they were enacted (remember Newton’s First Law).

For instance, many have asked why Trump insists on promoting his tariffs as a good in and of themselves, rather than a means to any kind of discernable end. The recent resignation of Klaus Schwab as WEF Chairman reveals a possible answer. By adhering rigidly to his seemingly ‘beloved’ tariffs, Trump is maximizing his leverage in relation to the rest of the world. By targeting China with particularly harsh Tariffs, he has made them a kind of foil—the Eastern antithesis to his projected Western socioeconomic environment.

Some are speculating that Trump’s tariffs might push certain countries to turn away from the US and form new trade partnerships with China—but that might be the point. By refusing to cave on the tariffs, Trump has forced other countries to choose a side—us or China—without the necessity of compromise. On one side you have the United States (the largest consumer economy in the world and the largest historical innovator) who actually honors its trade agreements (usually). On the other side is China, who have demonstrated time and again they are an untrustworthy ally on the world stage. One suspects he already knows what choice the majority will make.

What does Klaus Schwab have to do with it? Well, Schwab, a staunch globalist, has long been a vocal opponent of the Trump administration’s America First policy and its resurrection of national sovereignty. Given that he resigned ahead of an internal WEF investigation and a ‘Whistleblower Report’ allegedly exposing Schwab’s corruption, some have suggested it evidences a schism within the globalist infrastructure created by the current wave of populism. This suggests a long-term, sustainable reordering of the global order, rather than just a patch-up of the broken status quo.

Similarly, in the case of DOJ prosecutions—there is every reason to believe a meticulous approach is the right one, even if frustratingly slow. Due Process (as the Mainstream Media incessantly reminds us these days) is a principle of vital constitutional importance. This fact was apparently lost on Democrats during Biden’s term in office, when spurious prosecutions and unjustified investigations, with little legal or factual basis, became commonplace.

Now, Pam Bondi and Kash Patel could just do what the Biden administration did and prosecute bad actors prematurely—betraying the same political and judicial standards to do so. Lord knows they deserve it.

But I would caution against that approach. After all, the danger stemming from the Democrats’ callous abandon of judicial and procedural principles in prosecuting Trump and others, was the precedent being set for future administrations, potentially leading to increasing and compounding abuses in years to come. Restoring these standards is one of the biggest gifts the Trump administration can bestow on the American people. Hopefully that’s what we’re seeing.

So, by all means, prosecute the bast***s. But do it the right way, even if that takes a little bit more time.

Don’t Go Easy

You might be getting the impression that we are advocating that conservatives lay off the criticism we’ve seen over the past few weeks. That’s actually not the case. In fact, it may well turn out that Trump’s stance on tariffs has kicked a hornet’s nest that should’ve been ignored completely. It may well also be that Pam Bondi’s lack of federal prosecutorial experience renders her ineffectual in this context. All we’re saying is the jury is still very much out—and will be for some time.

But criticism is good, it’s healthy. Particularly for officials who care deeply about public approval, it can be an effective motivator. More importantly, it shows where the public’s priorities lie, and the standard we expect from our elected officials. The Obama and Biden administrations were able to get away with many of their misdeeds precisely because their base was so ignorantly supportive.

So, by all means—continue to demand results. Continue to apply pressure in the right direction. But don’t give up hope. And most importantly—do not embrace a return to the status quo, simply because it’s comfy and familiar. Comfy and familiar is not what we voted for.