I dont think it is political to make the observation that Trump Is not the type of person to go into detail on much of anything, he doesn't read reports, and seemingly is swayed by the last people he spoke with. He doesn't seek out information.
So if GA is not represented in the meeting, even though he owns some planes, I seriously doubt he will seek out or hear from any advisers to consider the total implications of privatization of ATC. I.e. He will make a decision being uninformed, and without a lot of consideration.
As an aside, I have read in several different source that his brother that passed away who he actually seemed to be very fond of, was ridiculed by him and his father for being an airline pilot. Both Trump and his father Fred saw being an airline pilot as they put it, "like being a bus driver". I don't get that. Even before starting to learn to fly I knew that it was a rigorous and highly skilled job that took a lot of knowledge to do safely. Not dissing bus driving, but there is a LOT to learn to pass the exams, and the skills required are not simple.
Also, he had a "fight" going on with that airport he is impacting in Florida, when he goes most weekends there, and I read he had tried suing them for flying over mar a lago which irritate him apparently. That might indicate no love for GA flying.
The only upside I can see, it's reported he does speak with his own private pilot a good deal.
Unlike Trump, even though I believe I am not dumb, and have some smarts, I know that I don't know enough about privatization of ATC to even evaluate it. I am an American living in Norway, and am mostly learning about this issue from right here on POA and I see points on both sides of the argument. In general, gut feeling is it is a mistake. Profit can make for a conflict of interest in general. Airspace safety seems to me to be something that a profit motive could have adverse affects but I know that I don't know enough about the issue to really weigh in. Trump believes he instinctively "knows" everything without doing the actual work of weighing the arguments.
Again, not political, I was no fan of Nixon but one thing, human and insightful, that I was impressed with, the man knew that he too was susceptible to impassioned people, or great presentations, and he apparently had insight enough to know that had a good chance to sway him on issues, so he demanded that when his advisors were in disagreement that they submitted written arguments, thus negating flashy or charismatic presenter influence. I wish more people in power could be that self aware.
