Matt Gaetz and Donald Trump (center) (WaPo)
Did a solid majority of Americans go to the polls on Nov. 5 with the intention of burning down our country? If so, it is working. After making a string of abominable choices for important positions -- think RFK Jr. over health-care policy, Elon Musk over "government efficiency," Kristi Noem (the "puppy killer") as Secretary of Homeland Security, Pete Hegseth, of Fox News, as Secretary of Defense (heck, even officials at the Pentagon, and with our European allies, had never heard of him. "This is not an entry-level position for a TV-commentator," one of them said."), and Lee Zeldin as Secretary of the Environmental Protection Agency, whose voting record in Congress indicates his idea of protecting the environment involves consistently voting AGAINST us having clean air and clean water (not joking!). Speaking of joking, one could call Trump's parade of nincompoops jokes, bad jokes.
But the real toppers came yesterday when he picked U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Florida) as Attorney General and former U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (R-Hawaii) as Secretary of National Intelligence. Gaetz' background includes a federal sex-trafficking investigation and an ongoing House Ethics Committee probe for sexual misconduct. Allegations of illicit drug use also cloud the picture. Sounds like just the guy we want to be the "people's lawyer."
An article at The New York Times suggests Trump's choice of Gaetz as attorney general likely is driven by the president-elect's desire to seek retribution against his perceived political enemies -- and he wants Gaetz to be the point person in that effort, knowing Gaetz almost certainly will do as he's told, without asking any uncomfortable questions. From the article:
President-elect Donald J. Trump on Wednesday named Representative Matt Gaetz, the firebrand Republican from Florida, as his nominee for attorney general, a provocative move to install a compliant ally at the helm of the Justice Department as he seeks retribution against those who prosecuted him.
The pick reflected Mr. Trump’s determination to choose as the nation’s top law enforcement official a fierce defender who would not resist his directives or question his claims, as William P. Barr, his last confirmed attorney general, did in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
Gabbard is a former lt. colonel in the U.S Army reserve and served in Iraq. But she also met with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria who is known in international circles as a mass murderer. Gabbard has a tendency to embrace Russian talking points, which tend to emanate from, you know, the Kremlin. In short, she has a tendency to tout Russian propaganda. Will that help you sleep at night? Probably not.
What does this say about the American electorate? Well, anybody who was paying attention knew Trump was going to pick loyalists, with barely a concern about competence. Voters should have known Trump was going to produce a clown car of an administration, one that likely will have to function in an environment of unrelenting chaos.
But was that what voters really wanted? Well, maybe not. In recent days, news outlets have been producing a deluge of stories about why Trump won and Harris lost. In so doing, they might be putting the "proverbial cart before the horse." After all, do we know that Trump actually won and Harris actually lost? I have doubts about that. And given that I try to think well of my fellow Americans, I find it hard to believe they went to the polls meaning to vote for a man who was the subject of numerous stories about him being unfit for the job, who admires Adolph Hitler and hopes to replace our democracy with a dictatorship.
More importantly, an election-security expert named Stephen Spoonamore has written that the 2024 presidential election shows signs of being hacked. He spelled this out, primarily, in a "duty to warn" letter to Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. If you take Spoonamore seriously -- and his background indicates he's a serious fellow -- you don't know that Trump won an election that was conducted in a fair and lawful fashion. He might have won by cheating, or having several someones cheat on his behalf. Spoonamore makes it clear that the activities of Nov. 5 need to be investigated. Does anyone in authority have the guts to take on such a task? We need to find out -- soon.
With every nomination of a Matt Gaetz or a Tulsi Gabbard, a sense of legitimacy and inevitability grows around Donald Trump, and it's not because his nominees are qualified. But the more presidential actions he takes, the more he looks like a legitimate president -- even though Stephen Spoonamore tells us he might be an imposter.
As for the Gaetz and Gabbard nominations, how did staff members of The New York Times react to them? Let's say they were underwhelmed. This is from a Times article titled "Trump Transition Updates: President-Elect Wants Matt Gaetz for Attorney General":
President-elect Donald J. Trump continued his flurry of personnel announcements by making his most surprising decision yet, saying on Wednesday that he would nominate Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida to be his attorney general, putting one of his fiercest defenders in line to be the country’s top law enforcement official. And hours later, Republicans cemented their House majority, giving the party full control of Congress when Mr. Trump takes office.
The announcement on attorney general came as Mr. Trump made a triumphant return to the seat of American power that he grudgingly left four years ago, meeting in the Oval Office with President Biden and observing a decades-old tradition that he defied four years ago when he refused to accept his 2020 loss.
Mr. Gaetz, who has already submitted his letter of resignation from the House to Speaker Mike Johnson, is a provocative choice for attorney general, a position that will have direct oversight of the department that Mr. Trump has railed against for prosecuting him in a pair of cases: for retaining government documents after leaving office and for attempting to overturn the result of the 2020 election. Mr. Gaetz was himself the subject of a sex-trafficking investigation that concluded in 2023 when Mr. Biden’s Justice Department declined to bring charges.
Earlier in the afternoon, Mr. Trump said he wanted Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman who became one of his most enthusiastic backers, to serve as the director of national intelligence, and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida to be his secretary of state.
In their meeting, Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden were gracious to each other in brief remarks in front of a roaring fire inside the Oval Office. After a brief handshake, Mr. Biden said he would make sure Mr. Trump had what he needed for a smooth transition. “Welcome back,” he concluded — an acknowledgment of his failure to prevent Mr. Trump’s return to power, which he had long said was a threat to the core of American democracy.
The president-elect made his own oblique reference to their differences in his response. “Thank you very much,” he said. “And politics is tough, and it’s in many cases, not a very nice world. But it is a nice world today and I appreciate very much a transition that’s so smooth, it’ll be as smooth as you can get. And I very much appreciate that, Joe.”
Shortly after the meeting, Republicans in the Senate chose John Thune, the senior senator from South Dakota and their No. 2 in the chamber, to lead them in the chamber in the next Congress. Mr. Thune will replace Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate’s longest-serving leader. He defeated Senator John Cornyn of Texas, another well-respected establishment Republican, and Senator Rick Scott of Florida, who had been supported by right-wing allies of the president-elect.
Gaetz, the hard-right Republican provocateur, resigned from Congress on Wednesday after being tapped by President-elect Donald J. Trump to be the attorney general, effectively ending a House investigation into allegations he engaged in sexual misconduct and illicit drug use.
Even as Republicans on both sides of the Capitol expressed shock at Mr. Gaetz’s selection and skepticism about whether he could be confirmed, his rapid exit brought to a close an inquiry that has hung over his head for years.
Mr. Gaetz, who led the successful effort last fall to oust Speaker Kevin McCarthy of California, is one of the most reviled members of his conference. For two years, the Justice Department looked into allegations that he had an inappropriate sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl and possibly violated federal sex trafficking laws. The department closed its investigation last year without filing any charges against Mr. Gaetz.
Still, the House Ethics Committee opened an inquiry in 2021 into the sexual misconduct allegations along with claims that Mr. Gaetz misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, accepted impermissible gifts under House rules, and shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, among other transgressions.
With his departure from Congress, the committee no longer has jurisdiction to investigate Mr. Gaetz. It was not immediately clear whether it would still release its findings. Tom Rust, the chief counsel and staff director for the panel, declined to comment.
Mr. Gaetz has tried to turn the allegations against him into a badge of honor. “I am the most investigated man in the United States Congress,” Mr. Gaetz said of the ethics inquiry when it began, insinuating that the inquiry was merely punishment for undermining Mr. McCarthy’s leadership.
Earlier in the day, some of Mr. Gaetz’s colleagues made no secret of their joy to see him depart.
“Most people in there are giddy about it. Get him out of here,” said Representative Max Miller, Republican of Ohio, speaking about his G.O.P. colleagues who were gathered to vote in leadership elections. He said Mr. Trump had plenty of other good options for nominees, but probably went with Mr. Gaetz to reward his loyalty.
Before Mr. Gaetz’s resignation was publicly announced, Mr. Miller suggested that if the Senate hearings unearthed new and convincing evidence that the misconduct allegations against Mr. Gaetz were true, his colleagues could expel him, as they did Representative George Santos late last year.
Mr. Miller said he and other House Republicans were shocked that Mr. Gaetz had agreed to participate in the Senate confirmation hearings, which involve rigorous and invasive background checks.
“I’m surprised that Matt would do this to himself,” Mr. Miller said. “I want to go get a big bag of popcorn and pull up a front-row seat to that show.”
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said Gaetz was “not a serious candidate,” and compared him to the disgraced fabulist who was expelled from the House last year, saying, “If I wanted to make a joke, maybe I would say now I’m waiting for George Santos to be named.”
Murkowski added that if Trump wanted to get his nominees through, he needed to pick serious candidates.
“It’s his right to name those who he wants to have serve in his cabinet — we get that. But it is also our role to determine whether these individuals have what it takes in these departments, and it is up to us to confirm them. That’s why I think it is really important that we don’t roll over on that role of advise and consent and we move through the nomination process. If we get good candidates, we will be able to move through the nominations process, hopefully, really readily and that’ll be good for the president, good for him to get his team. But when you put forward picks that are really going to generate controversy, and not just controversy on one side of the aisle, it is going to take longer."
Gabbard's nomination also drew a less-than-enthusiastic response from Times' reporters and editors:
President-elect Donald J. Trump on Wednesday chose Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman who became one of his most enthusiastic backers, to serve as the director of national intelligence.
Ms. Gabbard, a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve who served in Iraq, has been a longtime critic of the foreign-policy establishment. Her nomination is another sign that Mr. Trump intends to give top foreign policy jobs to supporters who are deeply skeptical of the effectiveness of U.S. military intervention abroad.
The news of Ms. Gabbard’s appointment was first revealed by Roger Stone on his X account. Mr. Stone, a longtime friend and adviser to Mr. Trump who was pardoned by the president in 2020, posted the statement about Ms. Gabbard and said Mr. Trump had just sent it to him.
Along with John Ratcliffe, Mr. Trump’s choice to lead the C.I.A., she would be a top intelligence adviser to the White House. She would oversee 18 spy agencies and would be responsible for preparing the President’s Daily Brief, a written intelligence summary assembled each morning. In his first administration, Mr. Trump did not often read the written summary. But he held in-person intelligence briefings, often twice a week or more, engaging his briefers on world affairs, at least on topics that interested him.
It is unclear whether Ms. Gabbard will have a difficult confirmation, but Democratic senators are expected to ask her about her decision to meet with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria and her past embrace of Russian talking points.
“These are extraordinarily serious jobs,” said Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia and the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “It’s why the Senate has an advise and consent process. I have a lot of questions.”
Ms. Gabbard left the Democratic Party after a failed run for the presidential nomination in 2020. Her subsequent enthusiasm for Mr. Trump made her a celebrity among his supporters.
During her 2019 campaign, Ms. Gabbard sparred with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Ms. Clinton had said Russia was backing Ms. Gabbard, and that she was a Kremlin favorite who was supported by its propaganda apparatus. Ms. Gabbard shot back that Ms. Clinton was the “queen of the warmongers.”
After Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Ms. Gabbard posted a video on social media repeating a false claim pushed by the Kremlin that the United States was funding biological weapons labs in Ukraine.
The post prompted Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, to say that Ms. Gabbard was “parroting false Russian propaganda.”
Many questions hang over Trump and his nomination process for top government jobs. The choices of Gaetz and Gabbard indicate the president-elect is looking almost entirely at loyalty, with little or no thought given to competence and qualifications. The Gaetz pick indicates Trump is serious about seeking retribution against a wide range of people he believes have wronged him.
Will these nominees serve the American people well? Is this the kind of slipshod operation voters wanted when they cast votes on Nov. 5? And, of course, we have the most important question of all: Did Trump win a fair and honest election, is he really president-elect? Stephen Spoonamore has doubts, and based on that, I suggest all Americans should, at the very least, support a thorough investigation.
As for retribution, does Trump even have lawful authority to instruct Gaetz to go after perceived enemies? Do our Constitution and other laws allow for such ventures? We will address these issues and more in a series of upcoming posts here at Legal Schnauzer.