On this morning’s episode of 1A, the question was raised if the Gaetz withdrawal means that the Senate (and, really, Senate Republicans) are “fighting back.” I have seen some hints of this media narrative forming. We have gone from stories about possible recess appointments and loyalty tests to “fighting back.” It feels (and when I use that word, I am being deliberate) like typical horserace coverage. Who’s up? Who’s down? One news story means this dramatic thing, while that story means yet another dramatic thing!
Here’s the deal: Gaetz was, to quote John Bolton, “the worst nominee for a cabinet position in American history.” While maybe some historians of the executive branch can provide a counter-example I think that Gaetz would be hard to beat for his mixture of lack of qualifications and having a character and biography as diametrically opposed to the office’s role as one can get.
The WSJ headline asserts Botched Gaetz Nomination Shows Limits of Trump’s Hold Over GOP. That may well be. But it is Bizzaro-World-level amazing to state that it is a power move to have blocked an AG nominee who barely practiced law, certainly used illegal drugs, and paid for sex (including with a 17-year-old). The fact that this is the outer boundaries being established is hardly evidence of Trump’s limitations, now is it? It’s something, to be sure, and I am grateful that at least that boundary exists. But let’s not pretend like normal has come to town.
As such, Gaetz not making it through is not evidence of the Senate asserting itself. I noted the other day that I figured that he was a bridge too far (although, I will admit that I always thought there was a non-zero chance he would make it through, which was itself a terrible sign of the times).*
I cannot stress enough that the president-elect of the United States nominated a man to be AG of the US who was credibly accused of illegal drug use and sex with a minor. It isn’t as if this was a post-nomination revelation. And, moreover, the appointment seems to have been part of a scheme to block the release of a House Ethics Committee report about the behavior in question.
So, there is some substantial dysfunction in play regardless of the outcome.
Now, it may well be that Senate Republicans eventually do fight back, but I have my doubts.
Let’s just consider the following list. The test is not whether Trump can get Gaetz through. The test is how many of these he can get through.
- Pete Hegseth for SecDef: Unqualified, possible White Nationalist, serious sexual assault allegations.
- RJK, Jr. for HHS: Unqualified, conspiracy theorist (which is putting it mildly), anti-vaccine.
- Tulsi Gabbard for DNI: Unqualified, possible security risk.
- Kristi Noem for DHS: Unqualified, bragged about cruelty to animals, including putting done a puppy in her bio.
- Linda McMahon for DOE: Unqualified, facing a lawsuit that she turned a blind eye to child sexual abuse.
And that is off the top of my head. I would note that we are not talking about the bar for criminal convictions or civil liability. I am noting the bar of passing the scrutiny of public opinion and the Senate. It used to be that since there were multiple people who could fill a given slot, presidents nominated qualified and/or people with no skeletons. And there was a time that one skeleton, often minor, was enough to derail an otherwise qualified nominee (or would have been enough to forestall a nomination in the first place).
Now, it is a cavalcade of people who lack expertise in the given policy arena and no experience in running large, complex organizations that also have problematic biographies.
Most of these people have two characteristics that Trump likes: they are loyal to him and they have been on TV.
So far the only skeleton that is bad enough to cause a withdrawal is a second allegation of sex with a minor. Indeed, Gaetz didn’t have his skeleton in the closet; rather, they were lawn ornaments, and he still got nominated.
To repeat a Hannah Arendt quote from The Origins of Totalitarianism: “Totalitarianism in power invariably replaces all first-rate talents, regardless of their sympathies, with crackpots and fools whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty.”
The list above is made up of persons who have enough embarrassing problems that would have kept them from being nominated under any circumstance in a normal administration. That doesn’t even include the list of nominees who are simply unqualified by any standard other than the thinnest of pretenses.
- Matthew Whitaker for UN Ambassador: he has no background to justify this appointment.
- Mehmet Oz for CMS Director: yes, he is an MD, but he is mostly an entertainment figure who has no experience with administration, let alone with Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, etc.
- Pam Bondi for AG to replace Gaetz: She is at least far more qualified than Gaetz, but was an election denier with clear loyalty to Trump that is stronger than her loyalty to the law.
I expect this list to grow.
The question of how much the Senate is fighting back is how many of the truly awful list make it through and then how many of the simply unqualified make it. Losing Gaetz is not enough to even ask the question of whether they are fighting back or not. And even if he loses more, what does he replace them with? As noted, Bondi is better than Gaetz, but she is still not what we should want in an AG.
I fully expect a cabinet full of the unqualified whose main feature is loyalty to Trump.
And look, Rubio for State is a legitimate and normal pick. Sean Duffy for Transportation is unimpressive, but nothing to get all upset about. Else Stefanik for UN Ambassador is a normal political pay-off kind of pick (although I think she is a hack with limited experience). I personally don’t like, for example, Mike Huckabee for Ambassador to Israel, but it is not off the wall (although, again, someone with TV experience, which is not the kind of through-line I think of when I think of good government). Several others are standard issue.
*To quote a post from earlier in the week: “So here’s a marker: how many of these people make it through? None of the four I listed are qualified save in the sense that there are no constitutional requirements for the offices in question. While I think that Gaetz will prove a bridge too far, I am not convinced that Trump can’t whip up 50 votes plus VP Vance to get him through.”
