[Hoot Gibson]

^^ Point taken and you have a lot of company.

Trump tried to be inclusive in his initial staff and cabinet picks IMO. Right after the historic departure from statesmanship which was the Democrat boycott of his inauguration, Democrats set about denying confirmation to every one of his picks. But Trump went across the aisle and picked up Gary Cohn to serve as his chief economic advisor, and he followed MR Cohn's advice. Pressure from Cohn's cronies eventually caused him to resign his post. Trump tried to play it straight in allowing Jim Comey to continue on as Director of the FBI. Trump rewarded Jeff Sessions for his contributions to the campaign by making him the Attorney General. Then Sessions did his best impression of a matador in dispatching his duties as AG.

You know the back stories to all those cases, I don't believe their actions were tolerable. And I'll give you another one. I would have fired NSA Dan Coats for the comments he made following the Putin Summit in Helsinki. Where does anybody in the President's employ get off with criticizing his actions publicly? And did Trump's chief of staff refer to him as a blanking idiot as reported? Likewise for Jim Acosta, he should have been banned from the White House a year ago. Team player Paul Ryan's lack of support has been a disgrace, and Majority Leader McConnell isn't all that far behind.

Working with people is not the same thing as becoming their stooge. Christopher Wray and Rod Rosenstein have stonewalled Republican committees since the election of 2016. Judges who've known full well the US Constitution visits the President with the unrestricted power to control immigration, have nonetheless defied him and filed injunctions against his lawfully issued immigration orders. It took the SC to straighten all that out. The above are just a few examples of the hundreds that exist. I know for a fact that we've never seen anything like this before.

You are missing my point, although I agree with most of your points. I don't want Trump working with people just to "get things done." I want him to stop public berating people who would likely support him and help him get the right things done, even if they disagree with him on other parts of his agenda. When you publicly and personally attack potential allies over single issues, then you will alienate a large percentage of those individuals to the point where they will not actively support any part of your agenda because they hold a personal grudge.

I am also not criticizing Trump for ridding his administration of people who are not getting the job done. What I am criticizing him for is for the way that he fires many of those people. This is not a reality show and most people will feel some sympathy for people who are fired in a very public way who have done nothing morally or ethically wrong. Those individuals, including Jeff Sessions, should be allowed to quietly resign, or, whenever possible offered another position within the administration where they have a better chance of succeeding.

I always thought Sessions was a bad choice for Attorney General, but nobody was a more loyal Trump supporter than he has been. I agreed with his decision to recuse himself from the Russia investigation because he was part of Trump's campaign and an Attorney General cannot ethically investigate himself - but Trump never should have appointed an AG who could not credibly claim some independence from the campaign.

As for leakers and members of the administration who publicly attack Trump and deliberately undermined his agenda, I have no problem with him firing them in a very public way because it serves as a deterrent to other leakers and it encourages people who have no people skills or common sense to leave on their own before they are tossed out.

Reagan's administration was full of people who thought his strategy to win the Cold War with the Soviets was nuts, and they respectfully shared that opinion with him - but they supported most of his agenda and they remained personally loyal to him throughout his terms as president. A president's staff needs to feel free to provide honest opinions to their boss without those opinions becoming public and without being publicly humiliated for expressing them.

That seems to be a key difference between the Reagan administration and the Trump administration. To paraphrase GWB, Reagan was the "decider," but he surrounded himself with loyal supporters who were not afraid to give him advice that he might reject. Trump's style does not inspire the same kind of loyalty and confidence from his own staff and appointees.