In W.B. Yeats’ “The Second Coming,” the 20th-century poet describes a world “slouching towards Bethlehem,” symbolizing a descent into upheaval and uncertainty.
In this second interview of “Slouching Towards,” contributor Jack Masliah explores how the Northeastern College Republicans view President Trump’s first 40 days in office — and how they defend his efforts.
Matt Cosentino is a fourth-year political science major and the current president of the Northeastern College Republicans.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Masliah: Last time we spoke, you explained that making “policy within the constitutional framework” was a core conservative value; things like respecting the rule of law, the checks other branches have on one another, and so forth. Seeing Trump’s actions, and hearing him say that, “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law,”
I wonder if you feel confident that this administration is embodying this core conservative tenet, and that the president understands that he is actually below the Constitution?
Cosentino: Obviously regardless of how good your policies are, how good of a leader you are, of course it’s possible to violate the law — and I’m always worried about that logic because that’s a dangerous precedent to set … that you can just act without guardrails. I don’t think he’s violated laws while in office, but it’s wrong [for Trump] to say that he can.
Masliah: The Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, has overseen the closure of the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, gained access to the Treasury Department system and has laid off thousands of federal workers.
They claim to have saved taxpayers $60 billion, but the number is actually closer to $9 billion. They fired — and then rehired — hundreds of workers who oversaw the American nuclear missile arsenal and are in the midst of firing thousands of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) workers during tax season. Is DOGE the proverbial slayer of government waste it was made out to be?
Cosentino: The concept of rooting out waste in the bureaucracy is generally good, and $9 billion isn’t nothing.
I do think the [current] effort is more about speed rather than only going after spending. You have to balance that. Even Elon Musk acknowledged that they had to self-correct on some spending related to Ebola. We obviously don’t want to get rid of that.
So for a lot of these things, I think you have to go at it more with a scalpel than a hammer. That’s something that DOGE is going to have to learn on the fly here.
Masliah: In New York, we have seen what I would refer to as a blatant quid pro quo in which the Trump Administration dropped the corruption case against the mayor in exchange for his help with deportations.
I want to read you an excerpt from the Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who resigned in protest: “Any assistant U.S. attorney would know that our laws and traditions do not allow using the prosecutorial power to influence other citizens, much less elected officials, in this way. If no lawyer within earshot of the President is willing to give him that advice, then I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a fool, or enough of a coward, to file your motion. But it was never going to be me.”
When you look at the Eric Adams-Trump relationship, what do you see?
Cosentino: If what’s being described is completely factual — and I haven’t seen anything to contradict it — then yeah, that is certainly corrupt.
Masliah: Trump moved to end New York’s congestion pricing policy. We often hear Conservatives speak of the importance of states’ rights, an argument that very fundamentally this country is not one federal unit, but instead 50 smaller units given broad independence to enact different visions and policies. Is President Trump infringing on state rights here?
Cosentino: Yeah, while I disagree with congestion pricing, I think that should be dealt with at the state level.
Masliah: When this order was issued by Trump, the official White House account tweeted an AI-generated Time magazine cover of Trump wearing a crown with the statement “CONGESTION PRICING IS DEAD. Manhattan, and all of New York, is SAVED. LONG LIVE THE KING!” Do you take him at his word when he refers to himself as a “king?”
Cosentino: No, because I think he’s trolling. I don’t think he actually thinks that he’s a dictator.
I think the AI-generated image thing is trolling, similar to what he did with Gaza. What he said before about the U.S. taking over Gaza, I think there’s a chance he was doing it to provoke a reaction to get Middle Eastern countries to do more. So, I wonder if it’s a similar tactic.
Masliah: You seem to be saying that Trump is simultaneously trolling but is also a master strategist here. If Biden were saying any of these things, would we be giving him as much slack as you are giving Trump?
Cosentino: It’s really hard, personality-wise, to compare anyone to Trump, especially Biden. Normally, a lot of stuff that Trump says or seems to be wanting to do doesn’t end up materializing, and it’s oftentimes a tactic.
And so Biden usually doesn’t say things, at least on foreign policy, that are completely different from what his actions actually are. He’s just more predictable in that way. I would argue Biden on foreign policy was predictably weak, but nonetheless, he was just much more predictable.
Masliah: On Russia-Ukraine, given that Trump’s objective is to put an end to the war, it follows that engaging with Putin is a necessary, if unpleasant, reality. And yet the way in which Trump is approaching this issue: by voting with Russia at the United Nations, by saying that Ukraine should have never started it, by calling Ukraine’s President Zelensky a dictator — and yet refusing to call Putin one — seems unnecessary to me.
Why is Trump not calling Putin a dictator? Why is he not blaming Russia for the war they started?
Cosentino: As far as his unwillingness to call Putin a dictator, that’s clearly to try to get on Putin’s better side to try to negotiate. Having said that, it doesn’t help with Ukraine to accuse them of starting the war. But either way, I don’t think Ukraine started the war.
People can disagree as to how much we should be helping them or how much we should have helped them in the past, but the reality is that Russia invaded their neighbor for conquest and has done a lot of things where they’re hitting civilian-only targets. So you don’t even want to be seen as justifying any of that.
I think his goal is to try to negotiate an agreement where Russia keeps what they’ve already taken. I think if that’s the case — if Putin does have regret about what he’s done and he agrees to stop fighting — while it’s tragic that much of Ukraine has been taken and it shouldn’t have happened, that would be a victory for us if Putin stops where he is right now.
But I don’t think it requires making false claims about how the war started. Even if someone is against NATO expansion, to say it was provoked and to not lay any blame on Russia, I think that’s just a little bit of a dishonest way of describing how it started.
Masliah: Last time we spoke, I asked you what policies or actions Trump would have to enact for you to regret voting for him. Here’s what you said: “If he didn’t even make a sincere effort to cut out some of the [government spending] waste in an annual spending bill, I think that would be a missed opportunity … I would hope that he doesn’t just completely abandon American leadership on the world stage as president. I would hope that some of his instincts on foreign policy don’t quite come to fruition.”
On government spending, it’s true he’s aiming to cut $2 trillion dollars, but he’s also seeking to cut $4.5 trillion worth of taxes. So on net, he would increase government spending by about $2.5 trillion dollars. On global leadership, Trump has pulled out of the W.H.O, the UN Human Rights Council and the Climate Accords, threatened tariffs against both of our neighbors and against the European Union, and called for Canada and Greenland to become part of the United States. He refuses to rule out military force against Panama.
These scenarios pretty clearly mirror the ones you laid out where you [explained what Trump would have to do] for you to regret your vote.
Cosentino: Yeah, so, as far as global leadership, at the time and now, I support the moves with the [World Health Organization] and with the Paris Agreement, [and] he did it in his first term in office.
I think as far as U.S. leadership, he’s clearly taken an assertive role with the conflict between Israel and Hamas, and he’s clearly trying to negotiate an end of the war in Ukraine, and he’s asserting U.S. power, trying to get some of our allies to be more cooperative on immigration. I think in a number of ways, he is asserting leadership, and he’s trying to create deterrence, and he’s trying to negotiate on the world stage.
I just think he sees it more from a realist standpoint than a more … broadly internationalist standpoint.
Masliah: How is it realist foreign policy to alienate your neighbors, Mexico and Canada?
Cosentino: I think he’s gotten tangible concessions from Colombia and from Canada and Mexico. What I mean by realist is that Trump’s approach to foreign policy is often, “What does the United States get out of this?”
I do agree that the 51st state rhetoric, while some people could argue it’s funny, I think it’s getting to be a little stale at this point and severing relations.
Masliah: Where’s the red line for you here? Let’s say Trump defied a Supreme Court ruling very explicitly. Is that something where you would say, “Okay, maybe we should be putting pressure on the Republicans for the good of the party, for the good of the country?”
Cosentino: Certainly. That’s a pretty fundamental aspect of having a constitutional republic, and an important aspect of conservatism is to acknowledge that that would be wrong.
Jack Masliah is a fourth-year political science and philosophy major. He can be reached at [email protected]
