Democrats Are Really Going with 'Graham Platner Was Too Stupid to Know What...
Chris Cuomo on the Dems' Latest Line for the Schumer Shutdown: They're Lying
Oh, Maine Dem Senate Candidate Also Trained With an Antifa-like Rifle Group?
Dem Who Said the Quiet Part Out Loud About the Schumer Shutdown Now...
Yes, a Hunting Stand Was Found With a Clear Sight Line to Trump's...
Texas Dem Suggests She’ll Slash Republicans in the Throat If They Try to...
Another Deadly Crash Tied to Gavin Newsom’s DMV: Illegal Immigrant Trucker Kills Three...
Inflation Smashes Economists Expectations in September As Prices Hold Steady and Wages Ros...
'Sophia Strong': 12-Year-Old Annunciation Shooting Survivor Finally Returns Home After Mir...
Schumer Shutdown: Democrats Block Pay to Use Pain As Political Leverage While Donor...
Following Day Long Demonstration, Coast Guard Security Opened Fire on U-Haul Driver Outsid...
NYC Mayoral Frontrunner Zohran Mamdani Linked Again to Anti-LGBTQ Figures — This Time...
Nobody Asked for This: The IRS’s Plan to Take Over Tax Filing
With China and Trade, America Is Winning Again
'Gates of Hell?' More Like a House of Cards: Iran’s Bluster Does Not...
Tipsheet

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

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