Watch How These ICE Agents Responded When a Psycho Doctor Confronted Them at...
Trump Just Ordered That All DHS Employees Impacted By Dem Shutdown Get Paid
You Cannot Make Up What Maine's Nazi-Tattooed Dem Senate Candidate Did During Passover
Two US Planes Were Shot Down in Iran Yesterday, One Pilot Is Still...
We Know Why Justice Samuel Alito Went to the Hospital Last Month
Iran Has Two Days to Meet Trump's Demands Before 'All Hell' Breaks Loose
The Moon Belongs to Those Who Reach It
Democrats' Open Borders Policies Caused a Massive Spike in Chicago's HIV Cases
A Thief’s Final Surrender
White House Wrecks Wrong Rumors That Trump Is Hospitalized
Convicted Felon Ran $50M Real Estate Fraud Scheme From Prison, Authorities Say
Borrower Flees Country Over $60 Monthly Loan Payment—NYT Story Draws Backlash
Will Trump's New Executive Order Finally Save College Sports?
Georgia Urologist to Pay $14M in Alleged Medicare, Medicaid Fraud Scheme
Sec. Rubio: The Family of Iran's Famous General Were 'Living Lavishly' in U.S....
Tipsheet

Shockwave in Washington: WaPo Editorial Board Endorses 19 Trump Nominees

Shockwave in Washington: WaPo Editorial Board Endorses 19 Trump Nominees
AP Photo/Alex Brandon

In a surprising shift, a liberal outlet’s editorial board issued a mass endorsement of 19 of President-elect Donald Trump’s judicial nominees— a move that has so many Democrat bureaucrats resistant to his picks. While the liberal-leaning newspaper has often been critical of Trump, this endorsement highlights his picks' quality and sound qualifications, many of whom have been praised for their expertise and commitment to the Constitution. The decision also signals a potential turning point in the broader political landscape, as even some traditionally left-leaning outlets acknowledge the lasting impact of Trump’s legacy. 

Advertisement

The Washington Post’s editorial board published a detailed chart demonstrating a readiness to assess nominees based on their qualifications and potential performance rather than adhering to partisan biases. Despite spending the past eight years attacking Trump and warning about his so-called threat to “democracy,” the WaPo acknowledged that the incoming president deserves recognition in forming his administration. 

“The president-elect won the election. He deserves deference in building his team,” the editorial board wrote. 

The board included brief descriptions of each endorsed nominee, noting attributes such as "one of Trump’s most reasonable picks," "lacks experience running a large organization, but that’s not disqualifying," and "a natural fit for a role typically held by a presidential ally.”

The liberal outlet deemed 19 of the 23 individuals “acceptable” for the perspective roles, including Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R), who is being considered for Trump’s Secretary of State; former Attorney General Pam Bondi, who would head the Justice Department; and former Gov. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.), who would lead Homeland Security.  

The editorial board gave Bondi a thumbs-up, describing her as a respected and competent legal expert. The writers recognized Rubio for his diplomatic insight and understanding of the U.S.’s global leadership responsibilities. Meanwhile, Noem was commended for her broad experience in governmental leadership.

Advertisement

Related:

TRUMP TRANSITION

On the other hand, the editorial board viewed Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s pick for the Director of National Intelligence, and Russell Vought, the president-elect’s top choice for the Office of Management and Budget, as unfit to serve in the incoming administration. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement