Presidential judgment

A man is known by the company he keeps and whose counsel he accepts, because both reflect upon his judgment.  Arguably, no where is judgment more important than for the President of the United States.

The immediate past and current presidents have demonstrated exceedingly poor judgment in the company they keep and counsel they accept.  For Obama, it was Valerie Jarrett.  For Trump it is Steve Bannon.

Jarrett brought no distinctive credentials or skills to the position of Senior Advisor to the President of the United States and Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental.  Reports swirled around her and the Obama administration concerning the extraordinary influence she seemed to hold over the president.  She was present is virtually every critical meeting.  She would take the place of agency experts at high level meetings.  She was provided Secret Service protection.  She reportedly was the one who persuaded (that is, told) the president to delay on multiple occasions the mission to get Osama bin Laden.  And the list goes on.  It became known that nothing would happen if Jarrett did not approve.


Now comes Bannon in a similar role.  If anything, it has been expanded upon, as evidenced by his being included in the Principals Committee of the National Security Council.  Bannon, like Jarrett before him, brings no distinctive credentials or skills to the West Wing of the White House (despite what some may say).  Like Jarrett, he is an ideologue.  Like Jarrett, he is of seriously dubious character.

Thus, there is justifiable reason to question President Trump's judgment.

Mr. President, please jettison Bannon immediately.  He is not the type company you should keep, nor is his counsel that which you should accept.  Your administration does not need, and should not have, a male version of Valerie Jarrett.