Reports: Pentagon Is Ramping Up Plans for a Potential Military Operation Against Cuba
Senate Republicans Hold Firm in Motion to Rein in Trump's Iran Campaign
Scott Bessent Confirms Operation 'Economic Fury' Is Part of the Campaign Against Iran
You Won't Believe Who Just Invaded Israel
Thanks, Abby! Spanberger Just Handed the GOP the Key to Ending Leftist Organizations
Mediaite’s Media Analyst Media Newsletter on Media Analysts Gets Suspended (We Swear That...
The College Campus Antisemitism Problem Hasn't Gone Away
Swalwell Spoke at Gun Control Gala Evening Before One of His Alleged Rapes
Amid Rising Anti-Semitism in the US, Jewish Americans Are Turning to the Second...
JD Vance Responds to the Pope's Opposition to the War in Iran
Stephen Miller: Trump Just Reasserted American Power for the Next 100 Years
How Biden's DOJ Went After Pro-Lifers
Illegal Alien Who Allegedly Bit Agent Sentenced to 15 Months for Identity Theft...
Illegal Alien Charged With Assaulting Federal Officer
Florida Nursing Assistant Sentenced to 9 Years in $11.4M Medicare Brace Fraud
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