- 'placing someone, who sued the EPA several times and wants to destroy it, in charge of it is no problem - because you know... everyone has special interest, why even bother with such things as nuance?'
- 'putting someone who frequently railed against the CFPB and advocated for deregulation and less consumer protection over and over again in charge of that agency is just "fine", consumer protection is not something you should make a big deal about.'
- 'someone who acquired stock of tobacco and health care companies shortly after being appointed to head of the CDC? what's the big deal? every politician is corrupt so just stop pointing fingers at particularly outrageous cases.'
"everything is equally bad" is the typical lazy narrative when you can't deny the facts anymore. the apologists' rhetoric and "logic", trying to make excuses for their cult leader is really the pinnacle of hypocrisy. not only that those are examples represent a truly unprecedented degree of corruption, it's also lead by someone who they claim is NOT the "typical" politician (whenever they need an excuse for his divisive rhetoric, lack of competence and knowledge, and inability to get things done), someone who's actually "draining" the swamp and has the "best people".
same logic: every country has weapons, why not let iran and north korea have their nuclear bombs? it's all the same anyway, what's the big deal?