Does Kristi Noem Need To Go?

Recent escalation of the already tense standoff between angry protesters and ICE agents in Minneapolis has resulted in two deaths of protesters who pushed back against lawful orders. Although both incidents are under investigation, there is understandably a great deal of emotion being expressed at the loss of life. As an extension of accusations that the ICE agents allegedly overreacted to a perceived threat, that blame is coming home to roost at the feet of Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, and calls for her dismissal are growing louder. Don’t expect Democrats to shut up about this until Noem is either fired or otherwise pushed to the sidelines, at least for the duration of the Minneapolis situation. 

I don’t normally like engaging in “whataboutism” because it so often becomes a game of “Can you top this?” But the fact is that both Republican and Democrat presidents over the last 50 years (and certainly before that if we wanted to go back that far) chose some clinkers as cabinet members. The difference is that Democrat presidents were usually able to ride out the storm and keep the controversial member in place, while Republican presidents more often than not were pressured into getting a resignation or outright firing the “offending” member. Let’s look at a few examples from each party:

• Under Jimmy Carter, we had significantly different views on foreign policy between his National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and his Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance. To put it simply, Brzezinski was the “hawk” and Vance the “dove,” and this major difference in worldview manifested itself most clearly in the Iranian hostage crisis. As Carter listened to both men, he apparently was indecisive about what to do to resolve the crisis and bring the hostages home. This resulted in the ill-fated attempted helicopter rescue mission, in which half-measures were taken to avoid potential combat while still somehow believing that the hostages could be rescued. After many disagreements with both Brzezinski and Carter, Vance finally decided he’d had enough and resigned in protest, believing that even this measured action went too far.
• James Watt, President Reagan’s first choice for Secretary of the Interior, was a lightning rod for Democrat criticism from the outset of his tenure due to his pro-growth positions that, in the eyes of environmentalists, were going to destroy the planet. Watt was forced to resign when he allegedly made derogatory remarks about minorities and people with physical limitations.
• Alexander Haig, Reagan’s first choice for Secretary of State, made himself infamous with his decree, “I’m in charge here,” at the White House after the attempted assassination of the president, and while the vice president was in travel status. His quote was seen by media and political adversaries as a “power grab” by the retired four-star general and former commander of NATO forces, and this, along with his abrasive personality, led to his resignation after only 18 months.
• In Janet Reno, Bill Clinton made history by selecting the first woman to be Attorney General. However, the most significant event tied to Reno was the disastrous ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms) and FBI attack on the Branch Davidian religious sect in 1993, resulting in numerous deaths of sect members, including some children. Reno survived the fallout because there were two plausible versions of what transpired, and, of course, the MSM ran with the one that was the least damaging to the Clinton administration and, by extension, Janet Reno. Later, Reno was embroiled in another controversy regarding the deportation of young Elian Gonzalez back to Cuba versus allowing the child to remain in Florida with relatives who were lovingly taking care of him. The iconic photo of an FBI agent taking the child at gunpoint left a lasting impression that Reno was, at best, a naïve lackey of Fidel Castro by not standing up for the child’s right to remain in the U.S. Still, Reno continued on until the end of Clinton’s presidency.
• Eric Holder, President Obama’s Attorney General, survived numerous controversies to serve well into Obama’s second term before being replaced. This included his refusal to even consider prosecuting Black Panther members who were intimidating whites in certain voting districts from voting, saying in essence that he would not go after “my people.” He also had a major hand in the operation “Fast and Furious” in which weapons were delivered into the hands of Mexican drug cartel members with the naïve hope of “catching” them in their illegal activities. Holder also survived a contempt of Congress citation for failing to appear when subpoenaed concerning his role in this action and for failing to provide the Congressional oversight committee with requested documents.
• Of course, this wall of infamy would not be complete without mention of Barack Obama’s utterly unfit Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who rode her husband’s coattails as far as she could. The Benghazi debacle and her response to Congress of “At this point, what difference does it make?” in minimizing the avoidable loss of life at the U.S. compound, says it all about Clinton’s capabilities. But let’s not forget the deplorable “Russian reset” either as a massive failure. Whatever price Clinton ultimately paid for her incompetence, it certainly didn’t involve firing or resigning.
• Finally, and probably the two worst. First, the disgraceful Secretary of Homeland Security under Joe Biden, Alejandro Mayorkas, who lied with impunity to Congress and the public about our southern border being “secure” while millions of mostly unvetted illegal immigrants poured over it. How Mayorkas survived through Biden’s disastrous term without impeachment and/or other means of removal is one of many things future historians will puzzle over. Dishonorable mention: Biden’s Attorney General, Merrick Garland, who used his office as a revenge trip for having his nomination to the Supreme Court killed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-KY. He too survived till the bitter ending of Biden’s term.

The point of all this is that those with torches and pitchforks out for Noem’s removal need to be considered for who they are, in their rush to judgment about someone they know so little. At the least, the current investigations need to play out before any major cabinet-level decisions are made.