The deeper meaning of Trump's appointments

Trump's staffing choices seem like a joke, part of his reality show. But here's how his loony choices fit into his authoritarian project. Plus: we rank the selections from dangerous to unimaginable

It may be hard to remember now, but many of Donald Trump’s cabinet picks back in 2016 were considered pretty conventional. At the time, Trump seemed determined to quiet his critics by selecting respected mainstream figures like Gens. James Mattis and John Kelly who could – so we were promised – erect guardrails around the erratic incoming president.

Many of these picks, of course, would go on to denounce Trump: Mattis describes Trump as a threat to the country, and Kelly has compared him to a dictator.

This time around, an emboldened Trump seems unconcerned with placating whatever GOP establishment still exists. Instead, he is selecting nominees whose primary qualification is loyalty to their dear leader – and daring Republicans to defy him.

It is an autocratic show of strength designed to send a message to his party: You will fall in line no matter what I do. It doesn’t matter, he is saying, if my nominees are cartoonishly unqualified, potential criminals, or even suspected Russian agents. They bent their knee. And so will you.

It remains to be seen whether Republicans will fight back. But the early signs are not encouraging. GOP Rep. Troy Nehls emerged from a meeting with Trump this week with this inspiring message: “If Donald Trump says jump three feet high and scratch your head, we all jump three feet high and scratch our heads and that’s it.”

There are always degrees of awfulness, of course. And a key indicator for just how much Republicans will capitulate during Trump’s second term will be whether the worst of these nominees can be confirmed.

Here our quick guide to Trump’s major cabinet picks so far, in order from bad, to worse, to basically unimaginable: