Getty Images

Yankees president Randy Levine being considered for Trump’s Chief of Staff


MSNBC is reporting that Yankees team president Randy Levine is being considered for President Trump’s vacant Chief of Staff position.

File that under “Weird, but yeah, I can see that.”

Levine has long been active in conservative politics, spending part of his early legal career in the Reagan administration’s justice department. He was also New York City’s Labor Commissioner when Rudy Giuliani was mayor. He has been known to pen conservative columns, some flattering Trump, though not all of them have been complimentary of the president or his policies.

Running a baseball team — such as Levine even does; there are a lot of cooks in the Yankees’ executive kitchen — is likely nowhere near the job being the President’s Chief of Staff is. My guess is that Levine likewise has nowhere near the level of rigorous executive organizational experience to prepare him for the gig. Indeed, he strikes me as the kind of guy whose secretary has an elaborate filing system tailored to just his level of organizational dysfunction. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but he sort of fits the type.

Then again, President Trump doesn’t exactly fixate all that much on things like “qualifications” for important positions. My guess is that he likes that Levine is kind of a tough-guy type and that Levine has said some nice things about Trump in his presence in the past and that’s all that really matters. It likewise can’t hurt that, like Trump, Levine tends to lie about easily verifiable things.

Does he get the job? Probably not. And I question whether he’d even take it if offered. Being the Yankees’ president is probably one of the coziest jobs around and doing that makes you far, far more money than being Trump’s punching bag in meetings. Added bonus: far less chance of, you know, getting indicted due to being in the general vicinity of what’s going down in Washington right now.

Fun to think about, though.



Donald Trump wants Curt Schilling in the Hall of Fame

Getty Images

We’ve talked a lot about Curt Schilling’s Hall of Fame candidacy over the years.

Bill has argued that, if voters are going to use the character clause to keep certain players out, they should keep Curt Schilling out. I’ve differed on that, not because I think Schilling is a good person — he’s loathsome, actually — but because I find the character clause to be illegitimate and would never, if I had a vote, use it to impact my vote. So, yes, I’d put Schilling on my ballot if I had one.

I’m not alone in this, of course. At the moment Schilling has support on about 72% of ballots which have been made public. My guess is that he’ll fall a tad short when results are announced tomorrow — non-public ballots tend to include fewer players on them — but we’ll see.

I am not the only non-BBWAA member who would vote for Schilling. He’s got some top level support too. From the President of the United States:

Ballots had to be submitted by December 31, so it’s not like this is gonna have any impact on the vote totals. If it came earlier, though, one wonders if it would. And one wonders if that’d help Schilling or hurt him.