Come on, man. Was the WaPo born on January 20, 2021?

I may not fully buy into the idea of a "deep state," but I certainly can recall what happened the last time Donald Trump attempted a seamless transition to the presidency through normal channels. The FBI and DoJ had already begun cooking up the "Russia-collusion" plot that Hillary Clinton handed them, they kneecapped Michael Flynn before he could even begin working for Trump, and the federal agencies involved leaked like sieves during the entire process.

For some reason, though, the Post seems shocked, shocked that Trump has not allowed them a second opportunity to derail his presidential term:

Since his victory, Trump has ignored many of the rules and practices intended to guide a seamless transfer of power and handover of the oversight of 2.2 million federal employees. Instead, the president-elect, who has pledged to fire thousands of civil servants and slash billions of dollars in spending, has so far almost fully cut out the government agencies his predecessors have relied on to take charge of the federal government.

Trump has yet to collaborate with the General Services Administration, which is tasked with the complex work of handing over control of hundreds of agencies, because he has not turned in required pledges to follow ethics rules. His transition teams have yet to set foot inside a single federal office.

In calls with foreign heads of state, Trump has cut out the State Department, its secure lines and its official interpreters.

The next paragraph made me laugh out loud:

As his team considers hundreds of potential appointees for key jobs, he’s so far declined to let the Federal Bureau of Investigation check for potential red flags and security threats to guard against espionage — instead relying on private campaign lawyers for some appointees and doing no vetting at all for others. Trump’s transition team is considering moving on his first day in office to give those appointees blanket security clearances, according to people familiar with the discussions who spoke on the condition of anonymity to disclose private conversations.

Ahem. Does the Post mean the same FBI where agents conspired in 2016 and 2017 to find ways to end Trump's presidency before it even began? The same FBI that not only laid a perjury trap for Flynn over nothing at all, and then lied to the FISA courts to surveil his adviser, Carter Page? That FBI?

Gee, I wonder why Trump won't trust them this time?

Now, is this situation optimal? Of course not. Is it deplorable that Trump can't trust the Department of Justice and the State Department not to sabotage his transition? Yes, indeed it is. But the DoJ, State, and the intel agencies created this situation by effectively derailing the first two years of Trump's presidency with obstruction and false allegations, with the specific aim of removing him from power on the basis of bureaucrats' own political agendas. 

That's precisely what Trump warned about in 2016, which is why they acted to obstruct Trump. Voters sent him back with the explicit agenda of breaking the power of the unelected bureaucracy, and the "deep state" has even more motivation to attempt the same kind of soft coup all over again. Trump would have to be idiotic to allow them the access to try the same thing twice. 

Rather than deal honestly with that history, the Post chooses to let the bureaucrats vent about their "merit":

But his transition alarms some officials who say the president-elect is weakening transparency, eroding checks and balances, and risking national security.

“The Trump team is attempting to convert the government into an instrument of his private agenda,” said Max Stier, president and chief executive officer of the nonpartisan, nonprofit Partnership for Public Service. Instead, Stier said, “We’re seeing a push to revert to the spoils system,” a reference to the 19th-century practice of rewarding supporters with government jobs without vetting and often not based on merit.

Well, pardon Trump for not seeing much merit in the current system as it arrayed itself against his authority as elected president in 2017-18. Even beyond that, though, this framing is entirely laughable. The Post seems to think that readers and others see "merit" as part of the current system at all, rather than featherbedding and unionized drones in thrall to progressive activists. Voters want an accountable executive branch and self-governance, not the rule-by-whim of elite autocrats who can make up rules as they go along to serve their own interests. The spoils system may not have been so bad; at least it was accountable to someone. 

Besides, floating a "trust the bureaucrats" argument so misreads the current moment in politics that it almost qualifies as satire. It can't possibly be meant authentically. The Post earns this Captain Louis Renault award, and a possible ongoing spot at the Babylon Bee.