When loyalty replaces integrity, corruption follows.
Trump’s claim that he “hires the best people” has always been an illusion. Senators Murkowski and Sullivan helped sustain that illusion by nearly rubber-stamping his nominees. Trump’s first administration exposed a pattern of valuing loyalty over competence, while his second has doubled down, this time without the guardrails. What began as mismanagement has evolved into the systematic dismantling of the rule of law.
During Trump’s first administration, a few institutional safeguards still held. Courts, inspectors general, and senior officials occasionally checked his most reckless impulses. At times, even his own appointees resisted unlawful or unethical directives. The secretaries of defense and commerce, the AG, and the White House counsel each refused orders that would have violated the Constitution or U.S. law. Senior military and intelligence leaders resisted efforts to politicize their agencies. Judges blocked unlawful executive actions. The press, though vilified, continued to expose misconduct.
Despite these modest restraints, Trump’s first term was marked by incompetence and ethical collapse. Cabinet members at HUD, Education, and Energy entered office with little or no relevant experience. The EPA and Commerce were plagued by ethics scandals. Many others were dismissed or resigned after clashing with Trump’s personal agenda. Expertise became a liability while loyalty was rewarded.
Even amid dysfunction, dissenters, watchdogs, and congressional oversight limited Trump’s power. His first administration revealed the fragility of American governance but also demonstrated that the system, though weakened, could still resist authoritarianism.
In Trump’s second administration, those barriers have been dismantled. The new governing philosophy, shaped by the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, seeks not merely to reward loyalty but to eliminate independence altogether. Trump learned from his earlier frustrations that competence and integrity can obstruct personal enrichment and control.
Without the institutional resistance that once restrained his power, Trump’s second term operates without guardrails. The appointments of Bondi as attorney general, Hegseth, and Noem exemplify this shift. Their defining qualification is allegiance. At HHS, conspiracy-driven figures reflect a growing contempt for science and fact-based policy. Inspectors general have been fired or sidelined, civil service protections eroded, and independent agencies brought under direct presidential control.
The results are predictable and perilous. The rule of law is weakened, and government policy now serves personal and political interests. Environmental protections have been gutted to benefit corporate allies. Trade and tariff decisions appear tailored to reward donors and politically connected corporations. Trump’s private businesses, including his golf courses and hotels, continue to intersect with official policy. Questions persist about grift tied to cryptocurrency ventures, favorable mergers, tariff exemptions, and even pardons linked to political or financial favors.
What distinguishes the second administration from the first is not only the scale of corruption but the absence of accountability. Courts are increasingly stacked with loyalists. Inspectors general remain vacant or replaced by political appointees. Congressional oversight has withered amid partisanship and fear. Whistleblowers are silenced, and career civil servants replaced by political enforcers. The few institutional checks that once existed have been neutralized.
The implications are grave for both the economy and democracy. When government decisions are driven by personal loyalty rather than policy, efficiency collapses and corruption spreads.
In Alaska, the effects are visible. Environmental deregulation driven by corporate and political patronage threatens fisheries, wildlife, and tourism. Yet the state’s congressional delegation, Murkowski, Sullivan, and Begich, has largely remained silent. Murkowski occasionally voices concern, most recently about tariffs, but her colleagues continue to place party loyalty above Alaska’s long-term interests. Their silence reflects a broader collapse of congressional independence.
The question facing the nation is whether Congress will reassert its constitutional authority. Few signs suggest lawmakers are willing to confront a president who punishes dissent and rewards complicity. Unless Congress and the courts reclaim their role as coequal branches of government, the erosion of democratic norms will continue unchecked.
Trump’s “best people” have become symbols of national decline: unqualified, unscrupulous, and unbound by allegiance to the Constitution. His first administration showed what happens when loyalty eclipses expertise. His second shows what happens when there are no guardrails at all.
The corrosion of ethics, the weaponization of loyalty, and the normalization of corruption, unopposed by Murkowski, Sullivan, and Begich, are bringing our country to its knees. The question is no longer whether Trump hires the worst people. It is whether America can survive them.
Van Abbott is a long time resident of Alaska and regular opinion writer for the Juneau Empire. He has held management positions in government organizations in Ketchikan, Fairbanks, and Anchorage. He served in the Peace Corps in the late sixties as a teacher.
