Watch Darrell Issa Obliterate Jasmine Crockett's Self-Righteous Performance About Protecti...
Matt Taibbi Lays Out Biden-Era Censorship of Conservatives on Social Media
Right Before Corey Booker Began His Crying on the Senate Floor, His Staffer...
Let's Keep One Thing in Mind on 'Ghost Gun' Case, Despite California's Worries
Israel Drops All Tariffs on U.S. Goods Ahead of Trump’s 'Liberation Day'
GOP Achieves Another Special Election Win With Jimmy Patronis' Victory for FL 1st...
Secret Service Hired Applicant Who Failed Polygraph—Now He Reviews Clearances
Dems' Hopes Dashed As Republicans Hold Onto Florida's 6th Congressional District With Rand...
LIVE RESULTS: It's Time for Special Elections in America
Jim Cramer Goes On Ridiculous Rant About Trump Economy
Trump: ‘Maybe 30’ People Interested in UN Ambassador Role
Macron Regime Imprisons Right-Wing Opposition Leader Marine Le Pen, Bans Her From 2027...
Israeli Woman Once Held Hostage by Hamas Receives Prestigious Award From the State...
Voters in This State Show Support for Creating a State-Level DOGE
Madness: Why British Cops Showed Up at a Family's Home and Arrested Both...
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