The Old ‘New Trump’ and All His Men

After winning the November 5, 2024 election, Donald Trump returned to the presidency for a second time following a four-year hiatus. The entire world is now focused on Trump’s secondterm. Everyone is curious about how Trump will govern the United States, the world’s largest economy and military power. It is important to emphasize that Trump was elected president thanks to a broad coalition with diverse characteristics. Therefore, how effectively Trump’s new presidency will reconcile the demands of the factions within this coalition and transformthose demands into policies is another matter of curiosity.

It is important to emphasize that Trump was elected president thanks to a broad coalition withdiverse characteristics. Consequently, how effectively Trump’s new presidency will reconcilethe demands of the factions within this coalition and transform those demands into policies is another matter of curiosity.

On the other hand, it should be noted that the continuation of this coalition is also crucial forthe Republicans to maintain power after Trump. Trump not only won decisively in theElectoral College but also significantly outperformed his opponent in the popular vote. For a long time, Republican presidential candidates had been far behind their Democratic rivals in the popular vote. However, on November 5, 2024, the opposite occurred. For the first time, Republicans are optimistic about the future.

The Republicans won not only the White House but also both chambers of Congress, securingcontrol of the House of Representatives and the Senate by narrow margins. This majorityprovides significant support for Trump to implement his policies. However, it cannot be saidthat all Republicans in Congress are fully aligned with all of Trump’s promises.

A far more significant source of support for Trump is the U.S. Supreme Court, the country’shighest judicial authority. During his first presidency, Trump appointed three new justices, ensuring a conservative majority on the Court. Currently, conservatives hold a 6-3 majorityon the nine-member Supreme Court. Furthermore, a ruling by the Court has effectivelygranted U.S. presidents a power akin to that of a “monarch.” In his new term, Trump is expected to wield this power as broadly as possible, relying heavily on executive orders togovern.

Both Trump’s supporters and opponents have started referring to him as the “Red Caesar.” The historical Caesar sought to transform the Roman Republic into an empire, whereasTrump claims to aim at restoring the “American Empire” to its identity as the “AmericanRepublic.” However, just as Rome during Caesar’s time resembled an empire more than a republic, it is unrealistic to expect the American Republic to be entirely distinct from an imperial structure.

The United States derives much of its power from its imperial privileges, such as the U.S. dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. The global financial system’s dependence on the dollar extends the reach of American influence, allowing the U.S. to pressure nations it considers rivals or adversaries. It seems highly unlikely that Trump would abandon the U.S.’smost powerful tool against its competitors: the “dollar hegemony.”

It is evident that Trump’s position will be much stronger in his new term. He has filled keypositions in his administration with individuals whose loyalty to him is unquestionable. During his first term, Trump was compelled to select his economic, financial, security, defense, and foreign policy teams from the ranks of establishment Republicans. These figureswere referred to in mainstream media as the “adults in the room,” whose role in the White House was perceived as guiding or restraining Trump, who lacked prior governmentexperience.

In his first term, Trump often had to compromise with establishment Republicans in both his cabinet and Congress, which prevented him from fulfilling many of his promises. His cabinetincluded both “globalists” and “nationalists.” For instance, National Economic CouncilDirector and Chief Economic Advisor Gary Cohn was a globalist, while National TradeCouncil Director Peter Navarro and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer werestaunch nationalists.

Navarro and Lighthizer were hardliners on the issue of tariffs, advocating aggressively fortheir increase to protect American industry. Both were prominent China hawks, firmlyinsisting that higher tariffs were essential to safeguarding U.S. industries. In this context, European Union countries also found themselves in the crosshairs.

On the other hand, even neoconservatives like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo held positionsin Trump’s first cabinet. Now, however, Congress includes more Trump-aligned members. The establishment Republicans, often referred to as “mainstream Republicans,” are in a morevulnerable position against Trump. However, this does not mean Trump will easily geteverything he wants from Congress. The congressional dynamics also allow mainstreamRepublicans to impose limits on Trump. To pass the legislation he desires, Trump will need toaccount for this arithmetic and again reach compromises with mainstream Republicans.

Under current procedures, even a single senator can delay a vote on legislation for days ormonths. Collaboration between one or two Republican senators and Democrats could disruptTrump’s legislative plans. During his previous term, Trump frequently encountered suchsituations, which often derailed his agenda.

Even after winning the election and earning the title of “President-Elect,” 30 to 40 Republicanrepresentatives in the House made their opposition clear by refusing to vote for a bill Trump wanted to pass. These representatives were fiscal conservatives, forming the backbone of theRepublican Party’s traditional political identity.

Trump’s new ally, Elon Musk, hinted at consequences for these dissenting Republicanrepresentatives in a post on “X,” the platform he owns. Musk implied that their politicalfutures might not be secure, leading to speculation that he might support stricter Trump-aligned candidates against these representatives in the party primaries for the 2026 congressional elections.

After losing the 2020 election, Trump did not retreat quietly into the background; instead, he continued to reshape the Republican Party in his own image. During the 2022 midtermelections, many Republican lawmakers opposed to Trump were defeated in the primaries byTrump-aligned challengers, effectively ending their political careers. Among the oustedfigures was Liz Cheney, a prominent neoconservative and the daughter of former VicePresident Dick Cheney, who had been a leading member of the Republican leadership team in the House of Representatives.

In 2021, Liz Cheney was removed from her position as chair of the Republican Conference in Congress, and in the 2022 party primaries, she suffered a crushing defeat against a Trump-backed opponent. Cheney, along with her father Dick Cheney and other neoconservatives, threw their support behind Kamala Harris during the 2024 presidential election. Harris prominently included Cheney in her circle of allies.

Between the 2022 and 2024 elections, many candidates openly endorsed by Trump wereelected to both the House and the Senate, giving the Republican caucus a more Trump-centricidentity. However, a significant number of mainstream centrist Republicans remain in office. To successfully implement his policies, Trump will need to carefully consider this balancewithin the party.

THE TRUMP COALITION

Personnel is policy. The individuals in Trump’s administration provide some clues about his policies. However, when examining the religious, political, and ideological leanings of thesefigures, the picture becomes less clear. While it is possible to make predictions about Trump’spolicies based on his personnel choices, this does not provide the full picture.

We have already mentioned the coalition that enabled Trump to win the election decisively. Itcan be said that this coalition is represented to some extent in his new administration. Thesefigures, representing various wings of the American Right, will pursue their own specificagendas within Trump’s government. In this context, the relationship between these factionsand Trump is transactional in nature.

The main challenge lies in how Trump will reconcile his presidential agenda with thediffering priorities and goals of these factions. The issue is not merely about differences in tone or nuances; certain topics, along with the vested interests behind them, are vital to eachfaction. For this reason, predictions that Trump’s administration might become mired in chaosshould not be dismissed lightly.

For example, within the Trump coalition, there are differing views on whether to increase ordecrease government spending. The issue of “Big Government” versus “Small Government” has long been a challenge for Republicans. Additionally, debates arise over increasing orreducing military expenditures, continuing or ending America’s endless wars, regulating oravoiding regulation of cryptocurrencies, raising or lowering taxes (including tariffs), andmaintaining or loosening global alliances such as NATO. Other significant issues includewhether the government should favor workers or employers, adopt antitrust or pro-monopolypolicies, and federal restrictions on abortion, as well as cultural war topics like genderdebates.

There are also major differences regarding the demands of non-White Americans, particularlyBlack and Hispanic communities. Trump achieved unexpected levels of support among Black and Hispanic voters in the last election. The fact that Trump increased his vote share in thesedemographic groups, which Democrats have traditionally considered a guaranteed base, couldplay a significant role in shaping the future of American politics. This striking shift in ethnicvoter preferences appears to have shocked Democrats. Their biggest question now is whetherTrump and the Republicans can sustain this diverse coalition in the long term or if they willabandon it halfway.

The changing U.S. demographic structure, which is increasingly unfavorable to White Americans, is a nightmare scenario for Republicans. Democrats, on the other hand, arebenefiting as much as possible from this demographic shift. While White Americans are stillthe majority, this threshold is about to be crossed. It is highly likely that the looming threat of this demographic change played a significant role in Trump’s easy victory. The collectivepsychology of White Americans may have instinctively perceived this election as the “lastelection.” Trump, in turn, convinced this base that he is the only person capable of halting thisdemographic shift. Consequently, Trump is expected to adopt a much stricter immigrationpolicy.

THE FACTIONS WITHIN THE TRUMP COALITION

The Trump coalition also includes various factions represented by specific lobbies. Theseinclude the “techno-libertarians” led by Elon Musk, the “crypto-libertarians,” the “fiscallibertarians” represented by Republican Senator Rand Paul, and the “national conservatives” embodied by Vice President J.D. Vance. Other factions include “hawkish conservatives” likeSenators Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton, “national trade hawks,” “centrist Republicans” such as former Senate leader Mitch McConnell, and “Christian Zionist Evangelicals” represented by figures like Mike Huckabee, the newly appointed U.S. Ambassador to Israel.

Additionally, organizations such as the Federalist Society, which works to ensure thatconservative Catholic Republicans maintain control over the Supreme Court and other federal courts, are among the special-interest groups with distinct agendas. All these right-wingfactions have their own think tanks, including the Heritage Foundation and the AmericaFirst Policy Institute. Each faction will aim to secure more than its share from the Trump administration, pulling Trump in different directions. Trump’s administration is likely tobecome an arena of political, financial, and commercial conflicts of interest among thesefactions.

For instance, libertarians advocating for “small government” oppose the minimum wage, advocate for the abolition of public schools in favor of expanding private schools, and pushfor taxes to be reduced as much as possible. They also oppose health and other socialinsurance programs funded by the government. It is not difficult to imagine the implicationsof these libertarian policies for the lower-income segments of American society.

THE BEST DEMOCRACY MONEY CAN BUY

At this point, it is necessary to account for the lobbying efforts representing the interests of various sectors, such as the military-industrial complex, energy, finance, pharmaceuticals, cryptocurrency, and next-generation technologies. The influence of “Big Money” in Americanpolitics has always been a matter of debate. So much so that journalist Greg Palast titled his book, published in the early 2000s, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. Palast pursued thetraces of “dark money” in political corridors like a detective. The title of the book alone is enough to illustrate the situation.

The title Palast chose for his book refers to how democratic values and elections aremanipulated by large financial interests. The book exposes political corruption, electionmanipulation, and lobbying influence in the United States while addressing the devastatingeffects these issues have on the functioning of democracy. Palast investigates how voterdecisions are steered against the public’s interests by the power of money and how thisdisrupts the democratic process. While Palast’s book offers a bleak perspective on electionsand the future of democracy, it also serves as a powerful call for systemic reform.

The younger generation of Democrats, who identify as “progressives,” are particularly keen tocurb the influence of “Big Money” in electoral processes. These new-generation Democratsadvocate for lowering the amounts of campaign donations as much as possible. However, these grassroots efforts to democratize campaign financing have been met with indifferenceby the Democratic Party’s Congressional leadership. Republicans, on the other hand, do not view this phenomenon as a problem.

It is no secret that special interest groups pour billions of dollars into the campaigns of candidates in both chambers of Congress to gain influence. These legal or illegal donationsare the most effective way to acquire enough “friends” inside the system to ensure the passageof desired legislation or the prevention of unfavorable bills. The networks of these interestgroups cover candidates from both parties. The repeated failure of attempts to imposerestrictions on individual gun ownership demonstrates the power of the gun lobby. Similarly, the fossil fuel and finance sectors spend large sums to circumvent government regulations. The same holds true for mega-corporations that oppose tax increases and instead push for taxcuts.

In 2023, annual lobbying expenditures were estimated to reach approximately $3.7 billion. According to a study conducted in August 2024, more than $2.2 billion was spent on lobbyingin just the first half of that year. The pharmaceutical and healthcare products industry alonespent nearly $300 million on lobbying in 2024.

Critics argue that the influence of lobbies and Big Money on U.S. elections deepens politicalinequality and exacerbates social polarization. According to this view, large corporations andother interest groups use their influence to shape government policies in line with theirinterests, disregarding public demands. This means that representatives elected by popular vote often do not truly represent the people. The dominance of “Big Money” in politicaldecision-making is the greatest flaw of the American electoral system.

Although lobbying is a legal activity, the increase in lobbying expenditures and the number of lobbyists has led to growing criticism. Discussions about how lobbying is regulated andwhich interest groups wield the most power raise significant questions about the functionalityand fairness of American democracy.

The House of Representatives is completely renewed every two years, while one-third of theSenate is up for election. This two-year election cycle makes new candidates and incumbentlegislators seeking re-election increasingly dependent on campaign donations. This dynamicin the American electoral system encourages foreign governments seeking to advance theirinterests with the U.S. government and Congress to develop close relationships withlobbyists.

Large sums of money flow into lobbying groups and political action committees, bothdomestically and internationally, as well as to think tanks through indirect channels. Thousands of lobbyists in Washington benefit from this financial stream. These lobbyistsengage intensively with members of Congress, government bureaucracies, agencies, and otherbranches of government to advance the interests of their clients, both domestic and foreign. While lobbying activities are legally documented, there are also covert operations conductedoutside these records, which, if exposed, can result in criminal penalties.

A recent example involves Robert Menendez, who served as a senator from 2006 to 2024 andwas accused of using his political influence in favor of the Egyptian government and itsintermediaries. In a case filed against him in 2023, it was alleged that Senator Menendez had met with Egyptian government and military officials in exchange for financial benefits todiscuss military financing and arms sales. The indictment accused Menendez of using his power and influence, including his leadership role on the Senate Foreign RelationsCommittee, to benefit the Egyptian government in various ways.

When charged with leveraging his influence on behalf of a foreign government, Menendezwas serving as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He first resigned from thisrole and subsequently from the Senate. Menendez also withdrew his candidacy for theupcoming election. In July 2024, the jury in Menendez’s trial found him guilty of all chargesbrought against him. Sentencing for Menendez and the other defendants is scheduled to be announced on January 29, 2025.

THE CRYPTOCURRENCY INDUSTRY

Another sector that has surged ahead in the American lobbying market in recent years is thecryptocurrency industry. This sector now has its own lobbying and advocacy groups. Thecrypto lobby seeks “less administrative regulation” for cryptocurrencies. According to theadvocacy group I Stand with Crypto, 274 pro-crypto candidates were elected to the House of Representatives and 20 to the Senate. The group’s website lists nearly 250 representatives in the House—over 190 Republicans and more than 60 Democrats—as “pro-crypto.” In theSenate, more than 50 senators, including nine Democrats, are also identified as pro-crypto. The group labels Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren and Republican Senator LindseyGraham as among the few “anti-crypto” lawmakers. Pro-crypto politicians form the majorityin both chambers of Congress, which is good news for the crypto industry.

In 2019, Trump tweeted from his “X” account that he was not a fan of Bitcoin or othercryptocurrencies, which he described as “not money” and whose value “fluctuates based on thin air.” In the same post, Trump stated that unregulated crypto assets could facilitate illegal activities, such as drug trafficking. Similarly, in a 2021 interview with Fox Business, Trump called Bitcoin a “scam” that negatively impacted the value of the U.S. dollar. He expressedhis dislike for Bitcoin because it competed with the dollar, which he argued should remain theworld’s primary currency.

However, Trump has since changed his stance and is now listed as “pro-crypto” on the I Stand with Crypto website. It is said that Elon Musk, who reportedly holds a significantamount of Dogecoin, influenced Trump’s shift in perspective.

During his 2024 campaign, Trump not only accepted donations in cryptocurrencies but alsocalled for the U.S. to become the “crypto capital of the planet.” Meanwhile, media reportssuggested that Trump’s sons, in partnership with Trump’s golf friend and Jewish real estatebillionaire Steve Witkoff, launched a crypto initiative called “World Liberty Financial.” Afterthe election, Trump appointed Witkoff as “Special Envoy to the Middle East.” Additionally, Trump nominated crypto advocate Paul Atkins to chair the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Many crypto billionaires made significant donations to Trump’s campaign, following thelogic of “don’t spare the chicken where the eggs are plentiful.” On the I Stand with Cryptowebsite, it was stated: “From January 2025 onward, Washington will be far more crypto-friendly than during Trump’s first administration.”

The cryptocurrency industry has faced challenging times due to lawsuits and sanctionsimposed by the U.S. government. However, Trump’s change in attitude suggests that theindustry might now breathe a sigh of relief. One of Trump’s first executive orders is expectedto prioritize cryptocurrency as a policy issue and grant industry figures a voice in governance.

The core issue here is not whether cryptocurrency is the right option, but rather the politicalinfluence the crypto industry is using—similar to other sectors—to ensure that governmentregulations are shaped in ways that best serve its interests.

THE BIG MONEY’S BIG ELECTIONS

The 2024 elections became the most expensive elections in U.S. history. The “Israel Lobby,” whose influence was jeopardized by declining public support due to the genocide in Gaza, was forced to become more prominent than in previous years. For the Israel Lobby, operatingbehind the scenes had always been safer. Organizations such as the American Israel PublicAffairs Committee (AIPAC) and other components of the Israel Lobby in the U.S. spentsignificant sums to ensure that progressive left-wing Democrats who criticized Israel were not re-elected. Meanwhile, progressive left-wing representatives are demanding sweeping policychanges, including reducing defense spending, ending endless wars, halting fossil fuelproduction, increasing wealth taxes, and expanding social welfare spending. These demands, coupled with their criticism of Israel, have caused divisions and polarization betweenProgressives and Centrist Democrats. The Israel Lobby viewed this division as a convenientopportunity, supporting rival candidates tied to the energy lobby and other interest groupsduring primaries. Progressives describe the alliance between the Israel Lobby and otherlobbies as a “dirty coalition.”

In the 2024 elections, billions of dollars were donated to both sides of the political spectrum. Most of these donations came from major corporations and billionaire businessmen. Billionaires like Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, were among those who donated toTrump’s campaign. A significant portion of these donors was later appointed to criticalpositions or nominated for key roles in Trump’s administration. Trump’s cabinet willreportedly include an unprecedented number of billionaires, earning it the label of the “ultra-super–rich cabinet.”

Concerns or doubts surround the potential influence of this billionaire cabinet on economicdecisions. For instance, Darrian Stacy, a political science professor at the U.S. Naval Academy, argues that when business elites wield disproportionate influence in policymaking, it often leads to policies that favor tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, and reductions in public funding for social welfare programs. Such outcomes, she warns, could deepeninequality in America.

In the November 5, 2024, elections, more than 80 billionaires supported Democraticcandidate Kamala Harris, while around 50 billionaires backed Republican candidate Donald Trump. However, Elon Musk, who donated over $200 billion to Trump-supporting campaigngroups, overshadowed them all. Musk alone held more wealth than the combined net worth of all the billionaires supporting Harris. His fortune is estimated to exceed $450 billion, whileTrump’s wealth is believed to be in the range of five to six billion dollars. By aligning withthe world’s richest man, Trump gained a significant advantage in the elections. It is alsoundeniable that Musk will expect returns for his closeness to Trump.

Trump’s decision to appoint Musk and another billionaire investor, Vivek Ramaswamy, as co-chairs of the newly established but advisory “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) is a striking move. These positions do not require Senate confirmation. Both figuresare labeled as “techno-libertarians,” and they are expected to reflect these qualities withinDOGE. Musk, in particular, is poised to play a significant role in shaping U.S. foreigneconomic, trade, and technology policies, especially regarding China, where he has substantial investments. Thus, Musk has a vested interest in every issue related to China. Moreover, Musk appears to be courting far-right parties in Europe, signaling that he maymobilize his financial power to support their electoral victories. For this reason, Musk seemspoised to become the “George Soros of the Radical Right.”

Musk’s influence on Trump’s appointments is evident. He is emerging as one of the mostinfluential figures expected to shape Trump’s decisions. Both Musk and Ramaswamy pledgedto cut $2 trillion from the U.S. budget, including reductions in the Defense Budget—an idea that set off alarm bells. During Trump’s first presidency, defense spending increased ratherthan decreased. Musk, however, advocates for prioritizing unmanned aerial vehicles, emphasizing less spending and a more efficient combat capability. This is a matter of prioritization, and Musk will need to convince Trump. Musk has previously described the F-35 projects as inefficient, even “stupid,” and has called for stricter oversight of Pentagon expenditures. This stance appears to have unsettled the components of the “Military-IndustrialComplex.”

However, Musk seems to have retreated from his promise of a $2 trillion budget cut. In a recent statement, he claimed that even achieving $1 trillion in savings from the U.S. budgetwould be a monumental success. This shift highlights the challenges Musk’s cost-savingprogram may face. Because the American defense industry is deliberately spread acrossmultiple states, cuts would result in job losses in those regions. Such an outcome couldmobilize bipartisan defense hawks in Congress, putting Trump in a precarious position. As previously discussed in analyses of the “Military-Industrial Complex,” attempts to reducedefense spending have repeatedly been derailed. Without gaining full control over both thecivilian-military bureaucracy and Republican members of Congress, Trump will find it exceedingly difficult to implement meaningful reductions in military spending.

Trump’s new cabinet will include many billionaire donors. Beyond Elon Musk, VivekRamaswamy, and Steve Witkoff, Trump’s administration will feature Scott Bessen as Secretary of Treasury, Howard Lutnick as Secretary of Commerce, Linda McMahon as Secretary of Education, Doug Burgum as Secretary of the Interior, Kelly Loeffler as Administrator of the Small Business Administration, and Jared Isaacman as NASA Administrator. Chris Wright, a staunch advocate for fossil fuel use and CEO of LibertyEnergy—one of the largest oil companies in the U.S.—has been nominated as Secretary of Energy. Wright is known for his skeptical stance on global warming and climate change. Given his position, Wright may clash with Elon Musk, who, as an electric car manufacturerand major investor in solar energy, represents an opposing viewpoint. How thesediametrically opposed perspectives will shape Trump’s energy policies remains an openquestion. Trump himself is known to favor fossil fuels, as evidenced by his efforts to weakenthe Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during his first presidency.

Trump campaigned on promises to “eliminate” and “revoke” EPA regulations aimed at combating global warming by limiting fossil fuel pollution from vehicle emissions, powerplant smokestacks, and oil and gas wells. Trump plans to dismantle one of the Biden administration’s most significant climate rules, which aims to accelerate the transition fromgasoline-powered cars to electric vehicles. To this end, Trump nominated Lee Zeldin as headof the EPA. During his tenure in the House of Representatives, Zeldin voted against cleanwater legislation at least a dozen times and against clean air legislation half a dozen times. When Trump nominated Zeldin for the EPA, Zeldin stated on “X,” “We will restore Americanenergy dominance, revive our automotive industry to bring back American jobs, and make theU.S. the global leader in artificial intelligence. We will do this while protecting access toclean air and water.”

Scott Bessen, a hedge fund investor nominated for Secretary of Treasury, previously heldsenior positions in companies owned by George Soros, a liberal, globalist billionaire and a major Democratic donor. It’s safe to say that Trumpists are not thrilled with this appointment.

Technology investor David Sacks, known for his close ties to Elon Musk, has been appointedas the “Chief Advisor on Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency” in the White House. Meanwhile, financier Stephen Feinberg has been nominated for the Pentagon’s second-highestposition, Deputy Secretary of Defense. In a statement, Trump praised Feinberg as an extremely successful businessman who will contribute to “Making the Pentagon Great Again.” If confirmed by the Senate, Feinberg will play a critical role in shaping themodernization of the U.S. military. Another billionaire businessman and art collector, John Phelan, has been appointed as Secretary of the Navy.

Trump’s notable appointments also include members of his extended family. Charles Kushner, a billionaire real estate mogul and the father of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, has been named Ambassador to France. Trump’s other in-law, Massad Boulos, has beenappointed as “Middle East Advisor.” The roles of Boulos and Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Special Envoy to the Middle East, overlap. While Boulos, a businessman with close ties to Arabcountries like Lebanon, brings a broader regional focus, Witkoff has stronger connections toIsrael. Additionally, billionaire donor Warren Stephen has been nominated as Ambassador tothe United Kingdom.

Frank Bisignano, President and CEO of the multinational payments and financial technologycompany “Fiserv,” will head the Social Security Administration. Bisignano’s wealth is estimated to be slightly under $1 billion. A significant donor to both Republicans and centristDemocrats like Chuck Schumer, Bisignano was ranked the second-highest-paid CEO in theU.S. in 2017, according to a report by The New York Times. He previously held executiveroles at major financial firms such as Shearson Lehman Brothers, JPMorgan Chase, andCitigroup.

Kelly Loeffler, nominated to lead the Small Business Administration, also served as co-chairof Trump’s second inauguration committee. Loeffler is the former CEO of Bakkt, a commodities and cryptocurrency trading platform that Trump’s media company “TruthSocial” has reportedly been in talks to acquire. Loeffler is married to billionaire JeffreySprecher, CEO of Intercontinental Exchange and a significant Trump donor.

For Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, Trump has nominated Michael Faulkender, a financeprofessor who served as the chief economist at the Treasury Department during Trump’s firstterm. Faulkender is also the chief economist at the America First Policy Institute. He will actas the second-in-command to Scott Bessent at the Treasury Department.

Daniel Driscoll, a venture capitalist and close friend of U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance, has been appointed as Secretary of the Army. Driscoll is a former military officer who served in combat operations in Iraq. Susie Wiles, whom Trump has named as his White House Chief of Staff, is a prominent lobbyist. Wiles was also the co-chair of Trump’s 2024 presidentialcampaign. Analysts describe Wiles as a mainstream Republican.

An article published on November 21, 2024, by Kate Kelly and Kenneth P. Vogel, titled “TheInside Story of Trump’s New Chief of Staff’s Lobbying Career,” highlighted that “Susie Wiles, before managing President-elect Donald J. Trump’s campaign, represented a tobaccocompany and a mining project, among others.” The article referred to the “revolving door” mechanism between lobbying firms and federal government roles. It also noted that theconsumer advocacy group Public Citizen raised concerns about Wiles’ lobbying background, calling for her to recuse herself from policy matters that could affect her former clients.

In the same report, Wiles’ past activities were contrasted with a statement Trump made duringan August 2024 podcast interview with Theo Von, where Trump said, “You know, I’m not a fan of lobbyists. If they have even a little access to a president, senator, congressman, orcongresswoman, they take a lot of money—and sometimes, they just take the money and do nothing.”

The article also highlighted Sean Duffy, Trump’s newly appointed Secretary of Transportation, who was noted for his lobbying work in 2020 for an airline coalition and, more recently, for a group of investors holding Venezuelan government debt.

We will continue our analysis of Trump’s team and his potential policies…