Washington— President-elect Donald Trump Cabinet and senior staff vote faces an uncertain future as his choice has received mixed reviews so far even from his fellow Republicans — and some have sent shockwaves through Washington.
Trump’s pick for attorney general in former Rep. Matt Gaetza firebrand GOP that is in investigation by the House Ethics Committee for allegations of sexual misconduct and troublehas drawn criticism from both sides of the aisle. And Trump’s pick for defense secretary Pete HegsethArmy combat veteran and former Fox News anchor, also has concerns, especially as is being investigated for allegations of sexual assault to him it has been made public. In addition, the former Democratic Rep. Tulsi GabbardTrump’s pick for director of national intelligence, has no intelligence background and has drawn criticism for his views on Russia and other US adversaries.
Appearing on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Sunday, Democratic Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut The opinion of those who asked whether experience is necessary when asked about Gabbard, said “of course it is necessary.”
“These people are clearly not qualified, and you know, they’re not prepared to run the very complex organization that they’re asking,” Himes said.
But Himes, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Gaetz’s qualifications should also be scrutinized as well as the unreleased House Ethics Committee report.
“How come this is what we’re focusing on?” Himes said. “Matt Gaetz, by any standard, is unfit to be Attorney General, but we’re focusing on this, you know, the cherry on the cupcake of the Ethics report.”
Gaetz resigned from Congress after Trump’s announcement came days before a planned meeting and vote by the House Ethics Committee on whether to release report on the investigation to Gaetz. Speaker Mike Johnson said Friday that he would “very demanding“the committee withheld potentially damaging reports.
Rep. French Hill, an Arkansas Republican as well appeared on “Face the Nation” on Sundaysaid Johnson made “an important point,” warning that “we do not want to set a precedent where we, under any circumstances, will publish documents from that committee.” But he insisted that the decision was committee-only, while noting that in Trump’s selection, the Senate would assume the role of advising and consenting through the confirmation process.
“President Trump has the prerogative to nominate the people he thinks are best to lead the changes that the American people believe they want in every agency of the federal government,” Hill said.
The Arkansas Republican asserted that when Trump took office in 2017, there were members of his Cabinet with no personal connections or work backgrounds.
“He wants to correct this moment by finding someone with whom he has a good working relationship. He knows how he thinks, he knows how he thinks, because he thinks he will make better decisions in the administration,” said Hill.
For his part, Himes offered praise to some of Trump’s other picks.
“I really had a great day Marco Rubio was nominated for the Secretary of State, when John Ratcliffe was nominated for the CIA and when Mike Waltz nominated to be national security adviser,” Ratcliffe said. “It’s a good nomination, not necessarily a nomination I would make if I were president, but this is a serious person with real experience.”
Still, he warned Republicans in the Senate as the confirmation process unfolded, saying he knew “what happened to Republicans who opposed Donald Trump,” but “history is a harsh judge.”
“The Republican senators who voted to confirm Matt Gaetz or Robert Kennedy or Tulsi Gabbard will be remembered by history as the ones who abdicated their responsibility to Donald Trump,” Himes said.
Sue Gordon, who served as the deputy director of national intelligence under Trump and also appeared on “Face the Nation” on Sundaystressed that the vetting will be critical for the process to move forward, in the middle of the New York Times report that the Trump team may bypass the typical FBI procedures and instead choose to use a private firm for nominated vets who will be given security clearances.
“It seems helpful, but I think it’s going to hurt the institution,” Gordon said, noting that private companies don’t have the same standards. “I know it’s inconvenient, but I think it’s a bad and risky strategy for America.”
Meanwhile, the Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan group that is helping with the presidential transition, confirmed to CBS News that Trump’s team has yet to sign documents allowing for security clearances and background checks, among other things, to take place. Gordon said he couldn’t think of a “good reason” for Trump’s team to reject the transition document, saying that “one of the great falsehoods we’ve made in America is that our institutions are wrong.”
“You’re not protecting anybody by not signing the paper, and especially some nominees who don’t have a very deep experience base,” Gordon said. “To start a gig without any foundation, especially when the institution is begging to provide that foundation, seems wrong.”
