Respond to prefers-color-scheme dark in app web views

Whether leaderboard ad sticky behavior is disabled

Follow section front redirects in Spectrum

Enable NLP source in PCS for load testing

Switch off the News Alerts Survey Widget when we have enough responses

Poll to determine if new LUF updates are available

Allows the winning A/B test variant to be turned on without Spectrum deployment

Show expanded byline information on articles

Show infinite scrolling sections in Assembler MultiView

Show option for NLP article summaries in Action Bar

Show NLP summaries collection recirc on article pages

A general feature flag for Recipe Features that aren't yet released

Show the Balance of Power component on the new Election subnav component

Feature flag for media team features that aren't yet released

Enable new Elections subnav on Site pages

Use new Orca video player for preroll plugin in Spectrum

If true, will use a spoofed user agent to scrape and summarize content from paywalled sources

flip back to old full page reload when new updates come in

Show the snow tracker (instead of the heat tracker) on Spectrum

Trump transition live updates: President-elect raises prospect of pardons for Jan. 6 crimes

Trump Campaign

Commentary on the latest in news and culture

See more on this topic in your recommendations

Opinions on the news

Make sense of the news — fast. Sent weekdays.

Today’s Opinions newsletter

Opinions alerts

Jabin Botsford

You’re reading the Prompt 2024 newsletter. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/newsletters/prompt/?method=SURL&location=ART&initiative=TOP&auto=true" target=_blank>Sign up to get it in your inbox. </a>

President-elect <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/donald-trump/" target="_blank" class="contextual_link">Donald Trump</a> has nearly finalized his fleet of picks for his incoming administration. So far, each appointee is a committed MAGA loyalist, and with Republicans having a 53-47 advantage in the incoming Senate, the majority of Trump’s picks will likely be confirmed.

So, can Senate Democrats resist a complete Cabinet makeover? I’m joined by my colleagues <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/ruth-marcus/" target=_blank>Ruth Marcus</a> and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/dana-milbank/" target=_blank>Dana Milbank</a> to discuss Democrats’ best strategy for thwarting one (or more) of Trump’s incoming department heads.

Jim Geraghty: Dana, Ruth — thanks for joining. First, a table setter: If you had a magic wand that could block one named Cabinet appointee, which one would you use it on and why?

Dana Milbank: Technical question: Can this same wand be used to block the president-elect?

Jim: No! Just one Cabinet appointee, with no guarantee on who replaces that nominee.

Ruth Marcus: Thanks very much for the wand. Now that I’ve expressed gratitude, I’d like to fruitlessly resist the premise. Blocking just one nominee, when there is a swarm of intolerable ones, is (a) playing Trump’s game and (b) the Senate failing to do its constitutional duty. This sets up a structure where as long as Trump or any future president goes super crazy on one — see: Matt Gaetz — the others can sail through (even if seas get a bit bumpy). So, having gotten that off my chest: Pete Hegseth. He is poised to do the greatest damage to the greatest number.

Dana: For me, it’s a toss-up among Tulsi Gabbard (for fear she would share intelligence with Vladimir Putin), Hegseth (for fear he’s out of his depth) and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (for fear he’d do something horrible in a bird-flu pandemic).

Ruth: Geez, Dana, talk about arguing with the hypothetical. Pick one, for Pete’s sake.

Dana: My wand is extra magical, Ruth, and the ricochet can hit all three of those I named.

Ruth: For me, Gabbard is a close second because of her access to secret information and the risk that allies will stop or limit intelligence sharing for fear of her blabbing — on purpose or by mistake. RFK Jr. is a ludicrous nominee, but he’s likely to be an ineffective one, sitting atop a massive bureaucracy that he barely comprehends.

Dana: I think there’s an argument for pocketing the magic wand. Trump won. Elections have consequences. He has appointed several people who are unqualified. Let him, and the senators who confirm them, stew in their own juices.

Jim: For Senate Democrats, what’s a realistic expectation for how many nominees they can block or persuade wavering Senate Republicans to reject? You could argue Gaetz already counts as one.

Dana: I don’t necessarily expect Democrats to block any. Even if they could persuade a few wavering Republicans to join them, Trump can simply recess-appoint them. Is that a better outcome?

Ruth: I’m a little cheerier than Dana. Although I have been <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/11/11/trump-senate-recess-appointments-powergrab/" target=_blank>sounding the alarm on recess appointments</a>, I think the Senate’s performance on Gaetz is a welcome warning shot to Trump that there are limits to how far the president-elect can go. I am still worried, in part because the House could help engineer a disagreement that would theoretically allow Trump to adjourn Congress, but I think that’s less likely in the aftermath of Gaetz.

Jim: Does the swap of Gaetz for Pam Bondi make you think that when Trump gets a second pick, the replacement is an upgrade, or do the improvements seem pretty marginal?

Ruth: This replacement was a significant upgrade. Still quite troubling to me, but so much more qualified in terms of experience and temperament than Gaetz. (Although the same could be said of my Bernedoodle.)

Jim: Yes, “better than Matt Gaetz” is a low bar cleared by most carbon-based lifeforms.

Dana: It does seem that the appointments were made for shock value rather than because of their qualifications. That we are now praising the relative quality of Bondi as a nominee shows that the shock strategy is working fairly well.

Ruth: Dana, are you saying the Gaetz nomination was a savvy move on Trump’s part?

Dana: I don’t know about savvy because he’s going to hobble his own administration with all these incompetent choices. I don’t think Gaetz was a strategic decision but an impulsive one.

Ruth: The part that still troubles me is Bondi’s <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/pam-bondi-trump-attorney-general-b2652604.html" target=_blank>fundraising from Trump</a> while her office was weighing the Trump University lawsuit when she was Florida attorney general. Even more troubling are her comments that Trump will prosecute the prosecutors and investigate the investigators. That is extremely chilling and the Senate should seriously question her about what she meant and how she intends to proceed.

Dana: In a way, he’s trying to pick a fight with Democrats, and I wonder how they can give him that other than to vote in opposition and make the case against them.

Ruth: Remember, a recess appointment can last only until the end of the next congressional session, and it will come with an asterisk (in addition to looming legal questions). So fighting on these, from the Democratic point of view, is well worth the effort. Jim, can you tell us who, if anyone, you think should be blocked?

Jim: Blockables, in order of declining priority: RFK Jr., Mehmet Oz (it’s a number cruncher job!), Gabbard, Hegseth. RFK Jr. would be my top priority to block.

Ruth: Would you explain why? I think he’s egregious, but he would be toward the bottom of my list.

Jim: RFK Jr. is in love with too many quack medical ideas — vaccines most notably, but also eating roadkill — to have the platform of running the Department of Health and Human Services.

Dana: Well, now that Jim has said RFK Jr. is most-blockable, I’m going to use my magic wand on him.

Ruth: On Jim’s list of blockages, I’m really glad to see Oz, who has been nominated to head the agency that runs Medicare and Medicaid. He shouldn’t be there, for the reasons that Jim said, but also because he seems to me to be a shill for Medicare Advantage, the private — and budget-busting — alternative to Medicare.

Jim: Last night I called these Cabinet nominees “the greatest episode of Celebrity Apprentice ever.” A lot of them are familiar faces from TV: Oz, Hegseth, Kennedy. Are these people going to actually like the duties of running a federal department? I figure long meetings with bureaucrats will have some of them wanting to go back to the glamorous world of television by 2026.

Ruth: This is a good point and raises another question: A lot of the day-to-day operations of the departments and agencies is done by the deputy. Some of these deputies aren’t subject to Senate confirmation; this includes the CIA and FBI, where Trump is reportedly weighing Kash Patel. We need to keep an eye on these second-ranking officials, who are going to really be in charge.

Jim: Do either of you think some Senate Democrats would vote for RFK Jr.? I’m thinking of how Colorado Gov. Jared Polis offered <a href="https://x.com/jaredpolis/status/1858600564302708793" target=_blank>an initial positive assessment.</a>

Ruth: If they have a chance of blocking him I think they would line up against him because of the damage it would do to Trump. And, overall, he’s so unqualified.

Dana: I agree with RFK Jr.’s position on Froot Loops, as I’m sure many Senate Democrats do, but it’s hard to see any of them voting for quackery.

Ruth: Can we just call him Froot Loops?

Dana: I bet he’d get some Democratic votes if he testifies in a multicolored beak.

Jim Geraghty is National Review’s senior political correspondent, where he writes the daily “Morning Jolt” newsletter, among other writing duties. He’s the author of the novel "The Weed Agency" (a Washington Post bestseller), the nonfiction "Heavy Lifting" with Cam Edwards and "Voting to Kill," and the Dangerous Clique series of thriller novels.

Jim Geraghty

Trump’s appointees: Who should the Democrats defeat first?

the-washington-post

The Washington Post

Editorials

Columns

Guest opinions

Cartoons

Letters to the editor

Submit a guest opinion

Submit a letter

Opinions

washpost

prism://prism.query/site,/opinions?limit=20

Make sense of the latest news and debates with our daily newsletter

Washington Post Opinions

The Washington Post Opinions section features opinion articles, op-eds, editorials by the Editorial Board, global opinions and letters to the editor on the issues of the day. Offerings include columns by Washington Post opinion writers, political cartoons by editorial cartoonists Ann Telnaes and Michael de Adder and podcasts by Jonathan Capehart.