Trump’s Second Term: A Shift to Stronger Control and Retaliation

Months into his first term as president, Donald Trump expressed clear frustration with the ongoing Russia investigation, going so far as to instruct White House Counsel Don McGahn to ensure that special counsel Robert Mueller was dismissed. McGahn, however, chose not to act on this directive, and surprisingly, Trump never revisited the subject in future meetings. Such dynamics characterized Trump’s early presidency, where aides often tempered or overlooked his more extreme impulses, leading to a lack of decisive action.

The landscape appears drastically different in Trump’s second term. Far from his previous hands-off management style, the Republican president has adopted a more assertive approach, consolidating authority and rallying his supporters throughout the federal government. Despite moments of disarray, his administration exhibits a relentless determination to overcome perceived hurdles. Trump is not merely intent on reversing the policies of his predecessor, Joe Biden; his team is actively obstructing funding that congress had approved under Biden.

Notably, the Trump administration instructed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to cease its operations and established a tip line for citizens to report any unauthorized actions by agency personnel. This direct interference is reflective of Trump’s broader strategy. In a dramatic move, the president also dismissed all board members of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, assuming the chairmanship himself. This time, Trump seems adamant that his directives will be followed, promoting the mantra within the White House of “promises made, promises kept.”

While administration officials reject fears about excessive presidential control, offering the argument that Trump has every right to impose his vision on the government, some observers warn of a more troubling trajectory. Historian Timothy Naftali from Columbia University notes that, while Trump’s core instincts remain unchanged, he appears to be both angrier and more effective this time. In his first term, Trump frequently claimed he was hindered by what he termed the “deep state,” a reference to civil servants and long-standing officials. In response, he is now moving fast to dismantle federal agencies, enlisting allies like entrepreneur Elon Musk to lead efforts to reduce the federal workforce.

Naftali comments on the unprecedented nature of Trump’s intent, stating, “We’ve never had a president come into office with such a deep desire for revenge.” Key institutions, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, originally designed to safeguard Americans against financial misconduct, are now functionally paralyzed. Similarly, the U.S. Agency for International Development, a crucial provider of humanitarian assistance, finds itself inactive under Trump’s directives.

The Department of Justice stands as a primary target of Trump’s ire, particularly following its investigations into his actions both during and after his first term. After facing indictment twice—charges that were subsequently dropped upon his reelection due to his status as a sitting president—Trump has strategically filled key DOJ roles with loyalists. Emil Bove, for instance, serves as the acting deputy attorney general and has previously acted as Trump’s defense attorney. Recently, Bove argued for dropping corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, framing it as vital for Adams to focus on stricter immigration measures—a move that incited resignations from several prosecutors in New York and Washington.

While Trump denies being involved in the decision regarding Adams, he has previously claimed that the mayor faced political targeting. Furthermore, Trump’s administration has taken an aggressive stance on those who participated in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot. Just hours after taking office, Trump issued pardons to around 1,500 individuals, including some who attacked law enforcement. His government has continued to pursue scrutiny of thousands of FBI agents linked to the January 6 investigations, suggesting potential repercussions for those involved.

Bove clarified that agents who acted ethically wouldn’t face repercussions, asserting, “The only individuals who should be concerned … are those who acted with corrupt or partisan intent.” This shift marks a significant departure from Trump’s first term, which featured several establishment figures whose influence often curtailed his more drastic inclinations. Former national security official Olivia Troye recalls a climate of caution during their initial term: staff members frequently deliberated on whether to act on Trump’s instructions or to see what further developments might unfold.

Troye highlights the difference in experience between now and then, noting that the current administration is populated by individuals seasoned by their previous roles. “During the first administration, quite frankly, they had no idea what they were doing,” she said. “Now they have people in place who were there the first time around. They’ve been preparing to execute for several years.”

Moreover, Trump has aggressively targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, enacting executive orders to eliminate these programs. Even this action has been met with further measures—messages from the Office of Personnel Management have warned employees against attempting to conceal such programs under ambiguous language, urging them to report any evidence of DEI initiatives promptly. The serious tone of these communications underscores a commitment to root out these policies, with warnings that failure to comply could lead to adverse consequences.