A series of firings and appointments - with rumors of more to come - has created a sense of deep uncertainty in the US intelligence and national security communities.
Although some outside that world expressed fear that it was part of the president's attempt to retain power, many inside perceived it more as a desire for personal revenge and the last stage of the conflict that largely defined the entire presidential term of Donald Trump.
But fears remain that the uncertainty of the polarizing transition of power may bring with it some real dangers.
The firing of scores of senior civilian leaders in the Pentagon, including the defense secretary, was, many believe, just the beginning.
- Trump also dismissed the head of the cyber security agency
- What if Trump refuses to leave the White House
- A catastrophic scenario that arouses fear in Americans
In some cases, it could have to do with the president's desire to implement specific policy goals during his final days in office and remove those who previously opposed his plans, such as withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, for example.
But in many ways, to some observers, this appears to be both the result of pent-up anger and the final act of a long struggle.
The US national security community has come under fire from President Trump, who has accused it of being a "deep state" conspiring against him.
He perceived the intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections in support of his candidacy as a threat to the legitimacy of his victory and almost immediately went on the offensive.
And he never stopped.
In recent months, he has been pressing hard for the release of classified information that he believes will support his claims that the assessment was wrong.
The White House appointed a political ally, Richard Grenell, as director of national intelligence, who supported the initiative but continued to face strong opposition.
CIA Director Gina Haspel is often mentioned as someone who is currently in the crosshairs. She has deftly walked a fine line since her appointment.
Critics say she was too close to the White House, citing, among other things, her appearance and applause for the president during his State of the Nation Address.
But her followers say she has played a very careful game, trying to stay close enough to the president to protect the agency from politicization, fearing that if she is fired, a more partisan figure will be chosen to replace her.
And her apparent refusal to disclose some classified intelligence aspects of Russian meddling in the 2016 election has recently led the president's supporters to open fire on her.
And even more controversial would be the firing of Chris Wray, the director of the FBI.
Trump is understood to be angry over the federal agency's refusal to investigate Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden and his business ties, wanting a repeat of 2016 when then-FBI Director James Comey's public statements about Hillary Clinton's emails did a lot of damage to the last phase of her campaign.
And while the directors of the CIA are often, but not always, immediately replaced by the new president, the directors of the FBI are elected for ten years.
- Why Donald Trump lost
- What Joe Biden did and did not say about Serbia
- Obama to the BBC: Let's stop the crazy conspiracy theories
The highly regarded head of the Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) Chris Krebs also fell out of favor because a Cis-run website called Rumor Control made it clear that claims of rigged elections and election theft, including those made by the president and his followers, were false.
The government is very concerned about some new appointments just as much as about departures.
Political operatives were given high positions in the Pentagon, and one of them, Michael Ellis, made it to the general council of the National Security Agency (NSA), allegedly against the wishes of its head, General Paul Nakasone.
This has raised concerns that Trump's team is trying to "bury" individuals deep into the national security system where they could continue to play a role beyond January 20, when Joe Biden is inaugurated as president.
Another option is a simple desire to reward loyalists and allow them to "decorate the resume" with the expectation that they will soon be removed, but that in the meantime they will implement more conservative policy decisions.
And while a new president could quickly remove many of these individuals and pick his own team, there are still concerns about the implications.
- The president is elected - what next?
- What Biden's victory means for the rest of the world
- The African-American woman who brought a key victory to Biden
The refusal to recognize Joe Biden's victory means that the former vice president has not yet begun receiving, as is customary, daily presidential intelligence briefings on the threats facing the United States.
The longer this goes on, the greater the danger of real-world consequences, as the new national security team may face problems it was not prepared for.
There is also the risk that other countries may also want to take advantage of this period of uncertainty, for example Iran, which may want revenge for the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani in January.
Difficult transitions can have concrete consequences for national security.
The September 11, 2001, commission concluded that the short handover period from President Bill Clinton to President George W. Bush due to the disputed 2000 election may have contributed to the failure to prevent the attacks on New York and Washington, making it difficult for the new team to begin work. and be informed about everything in time.
Follow us on Facebook i Twitter. If you have a topic proposal for us, contact us at bbcnasrpskom@bbc.co.uk
Bonus video:
