Politics
Biden pardon, Patel FBI nomination fuel debate over politics and justice
Democrats have warned for months that Donald Trump, if elected again, would bend the Justice Department to his own political will. But President Biden’s announcement Sunday that he had issued a sweeping pardon for his son Hunter — for any crimes he may have committed over a decade — suddenly left the president’s allies on the defensive.
Biden said he did it, after promising he wouldn’t, because he felt his own Justice Department had treated his son unfairly — that “raw politics” had “infected” Hunter Biden’s prosecution on gun and tax evasion offenses and “led to a miscarriage of justice.”
Trump, who during his first term pardoned a slate of political allies and who has long condemned the Justice Department as politicized and in need of an overhaul, blasted the decision, suggesting the pardon was an “abuse and miscarriage of Justice” itself.
The pardon immediately fed into an already roiling debate nationally around justice and politics and whether the two can adequately be held separate — particularly in the months ahead, as Trump takes office and stands up his next administration.
Outside political and legal experts said the episode is a stark reflection of the perilous moment that the American justice system faces as Trump takes office after escaping multiple criminal cases against him — and with both a long list of political enemies and a short list of law enforcement nominees who have vocally backed his plans to retaliate.
Prior to the pardon, Democrats had been busy denouncing Trump’s nominees as threats to the intended firewall between politics and prosecutions. They had blasted his first attorney general nominee, former Rep. Matt Gaetz, and his second attorney general nominee, former Florida Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, as well as his nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel, all as loyalists who would be willing to break legal boundaries on behalf of Trump.
After the pardon, some Democrats defended Biden’s decision, while others acknowledged that it was a bad look, if not a horrible decision.
Former U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr., who served during the Obama administration, said no U.S. attorney would have charged Hunter Biden based on the facts of his case and the results of a years-long investigation into his actions — making the pardon “warranted.”
Holder said people should be focused on Trump and Patel instead.
“Ask yourself a vastly more important question. Do you really think Kash Patel is qualified to lead the world’s preeminent law enforcement investigative organization?” he wrote on X. “Obvious answer: hell no.”
Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.), who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, said on CNN that there is “legitimate concern” on the president’s part about Trump exacting retribution on his political enemies — including Biden’s own family. And he said Trump’s selection of Patel for FBI director was “a bad omen” of how Trump intends to use the Justice Department to attack his opponents.
But a pardon for Hunter Biden doesn’t do Democrats arguing against such retribution any favors, Ivey said.
“This sort of gives [Trump] ground to argue that, you know, both sides are doing the same thing,” he said. “This is going to be used against us when we are fighting the misuses that are coming from the Trump administration.”
Bernadette Meyler, a constitutional law professor at Stanford University who has written extensively about the use of pardons, called it “a disturbing moment for American justice,” in that the leaders of both major American political parties have now argued that the system is politically biased — so much so that they have had to utilize their executive power to essentially overrule it.
It “suggests that there is just widespread distrust in the system and how the law is being applied,” Meyler said, “and I think that’s quite worrisome.”
Meyler said the most worrisome part of Biden’s pardon of his son was his explanation for it — which she said “seemed in keeping” with Trump’s own approach to pardons during his first term.
Trump used pardons then “for very political aims, in particular to criticize certain laws that he felt were not right or targeted certain kinds of malfeasance that he thought shouldn’t be criminalized, and also to do favors for those he felt were friends and political allies,” Meyler said. Trump “really highlighted” his use of the pardon power “as a way of criticizing the legal system,” she said.
Now, Biden has done much the same, she said.
Pardoning his son could have been viewed as a purely “pragmatic decision” — and “more defensible” — if Biden had merely cited Trump’s stated intentions to exact political revenge on his enemies, or if he had simply granted the pardon without commentary, Meyler said.
Instead, however, he issued an adjoining statement calling the entire Justice Department into question — which Meyler said played right into “Trump’s claims of a really biased system” and “echoes what Trump has been saying about politicized prosecutions.”
Trump during his first term pardoned various members of his own campaign and administration, including for crimes associated with their work for him. They included advisor Stephen K. Bannon, former campaign manager Paul Manafort and former national security advisor Michael Flynn. He also pardoned his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s father, Charles Kushner.
In his second term, Trump has promised to pardon many if not all of the people charged in the storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 — whom he called “hostages” in a post condemning Biden’s pardon on Sunday.
Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to tax charges in Los Angeles, and was convicted by a jury of illegally purchasing a handgun in Delaware. Republicans have long suggested he also acted corruptly in dealings with foreign corporations, peddling his family’s influence for cash.
Meyler said the president’s rationale for pardoning his son bolsters the argument Trump has been making for years that the various federal charges brought against him — for trying to steal the 2020 election, for hiding classified documents at Mar-a-Lago — were the result of a politicized Justice Department, while undermining the opposing argument by Democrats that those cases were the outcome of an unbiased prosecution by an independent counsel.
Biden’s statement “just makes it very hard to turn around and say there is no bias in these other cases,” she said, and even calls into question the very nature of special counsels — which Trump has long criticized.
Mark Geragos, Hunter Biden’s attorney, raised similar concerns about special counsels in response to questions about the pardon. He said that after Trump’s classified documents case was tossed out in part over the appointment of a special counsel, Hunter Biden’s indictment should have been tossed as well.
He said Justice Department officials had passed on charging Hunter Biden before special counsel David Weiss decided otherwise — which he said “smacks of politics.”
Weiss in a court filing Monday argued against the dismissal of Hunter Biden’s case based on the pardon, saying he was not unfairly targeted.
Jessica A. Levinson, director of the Public Service Institute at Loyola Law School, said Biden’s pardon of his son may provide Trump with additional political cover to pardon his own allies moving forward, allowing him to say, “Look, everybody does it.” It also bolsters his argument that the Justice Department has been politicized and needs overhauling, she said, allowing him to say, “Even Joe Biden says there’s a problem.”
However, the effect of Biden’s pardon on Trump’s actions ahead should not be overstated, she said, as Trump had already made clear — including during his first term — that he would politicize the Justice Department and use the pardon power to protect his allies.
“I just don’t feel like this now opens the floodgates for Trump to act in a way that he otherwise might not have,” Levinson said.
Levinson said Biden’s actions do muddy the political message of Democrats arguing that Trump is uniquely lawless, comparing it to the discovery of classified documents in the home or offices of both Biden and former Vice President Mike Pence after Trump was charged for having — and allegedly hiding — such documents at Mar-a-Lago.
The existence of documents in Biden and Pence’s possession allowed Trump to say, “See, everybody does it,” Levinson said, even though his underlying actions with the documents in his possession were distinctly different than Biden’s and Pence’s.
Biden’s pardon of his son similarly allows for headlines that put him and Trump on a level playing field in terms of their use of pardons, Levinson said — even if the underlying relevance of those pardons to the proper functioning of the criminal justice system are starkly different.
At such an intensely polarized time in the country politically, that likely means that Americans will come away with two very different versions of the truth based on which politicians or political party they trust, Levinson said.
“It’s so hard because these moments force us to go below the headline and the first paragraph and to really dig in and figure out where there are similarities and where there are differences,” she said, “and it’s very hard to do when we live in a society that tends to be us-versus-them.”
Margaret Love, who served from 1990 to 1997 as the U.S. pardon attorney, said the sweeping nature of Hunter Biden’s pardon is unique, too, in that it preemptively clears him of offenses he has not even been charged with. In that way, it could be challenged — if Trump wants to question the limits of the presidential pardon power.
In that sense, it could bring about positive change, she said — because the system of pardoning individuals has devolved in recent years into a muddled process, rather than the clear and orderly one it should be under the pardon attorney’s office.
“I hope at least this will provide an occasion for talking about how the president — how the pardon power — operates in our system of justice,” Love said. That conversation, she said, is overdue.
Times staff writer Stacy Perman contributed to this report.
Politics
DOGE chief Musk bashes massive government spending on illegal immigrants: ‘Boggles the mind!’
Entrepreneurs Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has signaled that funding for services for illegal immigrants is on the chopping block as the agency prepares to hack away at government spending.
The department, which is not an official part of the government, is expected to be empowered by President-elect Trump to audit and implement sweeping changes within government agencies.
DOGE called out U.S. spending on illegal immigration in an X post by saying it cost taxpayers $150.7 billion “in 2023 alone.”
DOGE noted that when adjusted for inflation, U.S. spending on illegal immigration in a single year is comparable to government spending during the entirety of World War I ($334 billion), the Apollo space program ($257 billion) and significantly more than what was spent on the Manhattan Project ($30 billion), the Panama Canal ($15.2 billion) and the Hoover Dam ($1 billion).
COLORADO REPUBLICANS SOUND OFF ON IMPACT OF MIGRANT SURGE ON CITIZENS: ‘THEIR SOULS ARE CRUSHED’
Elon Musk, left, and Vivek Ramaswamy are leading the Department of Government Efficiency. (Getty Images/File)
Musk also weighed in, posting on X that “the scale of spending on illegal immigration boggles the mind!”
The data referenced by DOGE is from a 2023 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). FAIR’s latest report, published in March 2023, estimated that the net cost of illegal immigration – including federal, state and local spending – was “at least” $150.7 billion, amounting to $1,156 per taxpayer. This was up by nearly $35 billion since 2017 when it was $116 billion.
FAIR said it landed on this number by “subtracting the tax revenue paid by illegal aliens – just under $32 billion – from the gross negative economic impact of illegal immigration, $182 billion.” By its estimates, the federal government spent $66 billion while state and local expenditures amounted to well over $115 billion.
The U.S. government does not appear to have any recent estimates on how many taxpayer dollars are being spent on illegal immigrants.
Jessica Baxter, a representative for the U.S. Government Accountability Office, told Fox News Digital that the office “does not have any recent work addressing the federal government’s overall cost estimate on immigration-related efforts.”
‘THEY ARE FED UP’: DEM MAYOR’S OFFICE DEMANDS SOLUTION ON KEY ISSUE VOTERS SENT ‘RESOUNDING MESSAGE’
Migrants are shown at the southern border in Arizona. (U.S. Border Patrol)
“We have a few reports that provide information on costs associated with specific border security or immigration-related efforts, such as estimates of costs for incarceration of noncitizens, but these do not provide overall estimates,” she said. “The two reports I’m referring to are from 2018 and 2011, so the data is somewhat dated. Our team is currently working on an update to the 2018 report, but the work is underway, and the report isn’t expected to issue any time soon.”
Julie Kirchner, FAIR’s executive director, told Fox News Digital that the $150.7 billion number is actually a “very conservative estimate” and is likely much higher now that the undocumented migrant population has continued to rise.
“The population we cited in the study was 15.5 million. We now estimate that it’s over 16.8 million, and we’re in the process right now of doing another estimate on the illegal alien population, and I’m sure it will be higher,” she explained. “So, we know the costs are going to go up.”
She also said the 2023 study did not even include state and local spending on sheltering migrants. Though DOGE’s focus is primarily on the federal government, she said state and local spending – including on education, health care and incarceration – accounts for the largest share of government spending on illegal immigrants.
BERNIE SANDERS ADMITS ‘ELON MUSK IS RIGHT’ TO SLASH PENTAGON WITH DOGE: ‘LOST TRACK OF BILLIONS’
Hundreds of asylum seekers line up outside the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building in New York City on June 6, 2023. (David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
Though exact numbers are hard to come by on the local level, America’s cities are carrying a large part of the burden. New York, the country’s biggest city by population, estimates that with nearly 100,000 asylum seekers having entered the city and “with no end in sight,” it will spend more than $12 billion through fiscal 2025. Chicago, meanwhile, has reportedly spent $400 million on migrant services in the last two years.
“There are more and more states using state taxpayer dollars to subsidize illegal immigration,” she said. “What we are seeing is state and locals are being forced to absorb all of these costs.”
She believes that once Trump retakes office, DOGE and the administration should immediately work to end government health care plans for illegals and close the loophole allowing illegal migrants to get income tax and child tax credits. By doing this, she believes DOGE can save taxpayers around the country “billions and billions of dollars each year.”
“There is a lot we can do,” she said. “They are taking our own tax dollars and giving illegal aliens benefits and encouraging more illegal immigration. It is a crazy, crazy scenario where we’re seeing people welcome lawlessness, and it’s got to stop, and we’re hopeful that the DOGE will.”
Politics
Column: President Biden's pardon of his son Hunter is understandable. It's also unforgivable
It came as a surprise that President Biden unconditionally pardoned his son Hunter, a convicted felon, after repeatedly vowing that he would not. For the past few months, each time Biden or his press secretary was asked whether a pardon was in the cards, they both emphatically said no.
So much for one of the president’s favorite lines, “I give you my word as a Biden.”
Hunter, who was facing a potential sentence of years in prison for tax evasion and lying on a federal firearms application, is now free to pursue his career as a middling painter of overpriced art.
I admit that when I first heard the pardon news, I thought, “Good for you, Joe! Why should you follow the rules when no one on Planet Trump does? Let the people who voted to return a sex-offending, defaming, defrauding felon to the White House get a tiny taste of their own medicine.”
On second thought, however, it’s more complicated than that.
How can any of us be outraged at the way Trump and those in his circle seem immune from the consequences of their malign actions if we applaud Biden’s pardon of his son for crimes he has either been convicted of or pleaded guilty to?
How can we be outraged that Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner received $2 billion from the murderous Saudis if we think it’s perfectly fine for Hunter Biden to be paid millions of dollars for sitting on the board of Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company that was under investigation for corruption while his father was vice president and overseeing White House policy on Ukraine?
The real outrage is the general lack of accountability for the illegal, unethical or immoral behavior of children born into wealth and privilege whose only “talents” are their ability to exploit their proximity to powerful people. Nepo babies gonna nepo baby.
Hunter Biden was charged with lying on a gun purchase form, having claimed on penalty of perjury that he was not using drugs when, as he recounts in his memoir, he was a raging coke and meth addict. He was also charged with evading more than $1 million in taxes, which he has since paid, along with penalties and interest.
Was he unfairly singled out? Maybe, but he still broke the law.
As President Biden stated in announcing the pardon, “Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form. Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions.”
All true, which is why the government originally offered Hunter a deal that would have allowed him to avoid prison. He was to plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of failing to pay his 2017 and 2018 taxes on time, and to agree to a diversion program that would allow him to avoid prosecution on the charge that he lied when he bought a handgun in 2018.
But a federal judge put the plea deal on hold last year, saying she did not want to “rubber stamp” an unorthodox and complex agreement that was reached without her input. Republicans piled on, filing an amicus brief complaining that the deal was too lenient and that the investigation was tainted by political interference from the Biden administration.
At that point, with the plea deal in tatters, Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to the case. A month later, in September 2023, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy opened his sham impeachment investigation of the president, claiming Biden lied about his knowledge of his son’s business affairs.
The House’s eventual report basically found that Hunter used his daddy’s name to enrich himself. Yawn.
Last summer, after a salacious trial that, as the New York Times put it, “made painfully public Mr. Biden’s crack addiction, reckless behavior and ruinous spending,” a federal jury found Hunter guilty of three felony counts related to the gun application. In September, Hunter Biden avoided tormenting his family with another trial by pleading guilty to nine federal tax charges.
“There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution,” President Biden’s statement said. “In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.”
Hunter may have been singled out for prosecution, but Hunter did in fact screw up. And President Biden, who has often said that Americans in the Trump era are engaged in a “battle to save the soul of the nation,” has shown that he, too, will warp justice for his own ends. I thought he was better than that.
Bluesky: @rabcarian.bsky.social. Threads: @rabcarian
A number of patterns have emerged among the people President-elect Donald J. Trump has indicated he wants to fill his cabinet and other senior-level positions in his administration.
Some points of commonality are historically typical among senior White House and cabinet officials — Harvard, Yale and Princeton are well represented among his selections’ alma maters, for instance. Other uniting factors are unprecedented: Many on the list have denied or questioned the results of the 2020 presidential election, often a prerequisite for gaining Mr. Trump’s favor. And some lack the traditional qualifications shared by their predecessors.
Indeed, it appears that the most important qualifier in Mr. Trump’s mind has been fealty to him, which many of his picks have demonstrated in various ways over the past few years.
See some of the links between more than 60 potential members (in some cases pending confirmation) of the incoming administration, below.
At least 5 are billionaires.
Mr. Trump has picked two billionaires to lead key economic departments, raising questions about whether his administration will follow through on promises to boost the working class.
Scott Bessent, his choice for treasury secretary, is a hedge fund manager who invested money for George Soros, a liberal philanthropist, for more than a decade. Howard Lutnick, his pick for commerce secretary, is a Wall Street executive. Both Mr. Bessent and Mr. Lutnick have been vocal in their support for Mr. Trump’s plan to impose tariffs on imports, although they may prefer a more targeted approach.
Billionaire entrepreneurs Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy will lead what Mr. Trump is calling the Department of Government Efficiency. Mr. Trump has said the new initiative would operate outside of the government and offer input to federal officials.
At least 8 have been major Trump donors.
The president-elect has also selected major campaign donors for key positions, including four to lead cabinet agencies: Mr. Lutnick and Mr. Bessent, as well as Chris Wright to lead the Energy Department and Linda McMahon to lead the Education Department. (Ms. McMahon and Mr. Lutnick are also co-chairs of the Trump transition.) As of the last federal filing, their contributions to support Mr. Trump during the 2024 election cycle ranged from $350,000 to $20 million.
John Phelan, Mr. Trump’s pick for Navy secretary, and his wife, Amy, donated more than $1 million to Mr. Trump’s joint fund-raising campaign committee.
Steven Witkoff, a billionaire real estate mogul who has given nearly $2 million to Mr. Trump’s political causes over the past decade, was named special envoy to the Middle East. He was on the golf course with Mr. Trump in September during a second assassination attempt.
Mr. Musk poured at least $75 million into a new pro-Trump super PAC and promised on Oct. 19 to award one voter $1 million every day through Election Day. The Justice Department warned Mr. Musk that the giveaway might be illegal, but a judge in Philadelphia refused to halt the sweepstakes.
Charles Kushner, Mr. Trump’s pick for ambassador to France, is a real estate executive who gave at least $2 million to support Mr. Trump.
At least 12 hosted or co-hosted events at Mar-a-Lago.
After Mr. Trump left the White House, Mar-a-Lago became the headquarters of the MAGA movement. Events hosted by right-wing organizations and politicians there largely replaced traditional Palm Beach society galas on the resort’s calendar, as a visit became an essential rite for many Republican candidates.
Many of Mr. Trump’s recent picks were regular fixtures at Mar-a-Lago during this time. Some did more than visit, choosing to host expensive receptions on the property. As Mar-a-Lago’s owner, Mr. Trump is the beneficiary of its profits.
Several of the proposed officials have held campaign fund-raisers or served on the host committee to support another candidate’s event. Others hosted or co-hosted larger events for organizations they lead or champion.
At least 13 made appearances at Trump’s criminal trial in New York.
Mr. Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan was a staging ground for allies to prove their loyalty. Several of his recent picks traveled to New York in the spring to show support. Some were there in a professional context. Todd Blanche, Mr. Trump’s choice for deputy attorney general, was one of his trial lawyers, and Susie Wiles, Mr. Trump’s incoming chief of staff, was co-chair of his 2024 presidential campaign.
Others, like Vice President-elect JD Vance and Doug Burgum, Mr. Trump’s pick for interior secretary, attended the trial as spectators and attacked members of the presiding judge’s family on behalf of Mr. Trump, who was under a rule of silence. Both were considered potential running mates at the time.
At least 17 are associated with the America First Policy Institute or Project 2025.
Mr. Trump spent much of the campaign distancing himself from Project 2025, a sprawling initiative spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation that included a “blueprint” document for a new conservative administration that was authored in part by former Trump staffers. But since winning the election, Mr. Trump has picked at least seven people with ties to the controversial conservative policy initiative to serve in his administration.
Project 2025 also includes a database of Heritage-vetted personnel intended to help a Republican president build rank-and-file staff. It remains to be seen to what extent those candidates will be hired in the new administration.
The America First Policy Institute, which like the Heritage Foundation is a pro-Trump think tank, is also heavily represented in his picks so far. At least 11 of the people among his picks have ties to the upstart policy group. Much like Project 2025, the think tank has prepared staffing plans and a policy agenda, and it reportedly has drafted nearly 300 executive orders ready for Mr. Trump’s signature.
At least 11 are or have been Fox hosts or contributors.
Some of Mr. Trump’s appointees are closely linked to Fox as either hosts, former hosts or contributors. Pete Hegseth was a host on “Fox & Friends” until he became Mr. Trump’s pick for defense secretary. Mr. Hegseth’s co-host was Rachel Campos-Duffy, who is married to Sean Duffy, Mr. Trump’s cabinet pick for transportation secretary. Mr. Duffy also co-hosted a show on Fox Business.
Mr. Trump’s choice for ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, hosted a show on Fox for seven years. More recently, Mr. Ramaswamy was tapped to host a five-part series on Fox Nation.
Many more figures in Mr. Trump’s orbit are frequent guests on Fox News, and several not counted here have contributed digital columns to the Fox News website. Mr. Wright caught Mr. Trump’s attention in part through his appearances on Fox News.
At least 9 are or have been registered lobbyists.
The revolving door between lobbying and government is a tradition in Washington — and one of the practices Mr. Trump pledged to eliminate when he said he would “drain the swamp.” But some of the people Mr. Trump has tapped for his administration have deep ties to that very swamp.
Ms. Wiles was registered as a lobbyist until early this year. Pam Bondi, Mr. Trump’s choice for attorney general, joined a lobbying firm run by a prominent Florida fund-raiser after she finished her second term as Florida attorney general. Mr. Duffy lobbied for a coalition of airlines in 2020.
Some of Mr. Trump’s selections not shown here have acted as lobbyists without officially registering — another longstanding custom in the nation’s capital. Russell T. Vought, Mr. Trump’s choice to lead the Office of Management and Budget, noted in paperwork for his 2017 Senate confirmation hearing that he had “engaged in grassroots lobbying.”
At least 28 served in or advised the previous Trump administration.
More than two dozen of Mr. Trump’s cabinet and other senior-level picks also served in some capacity in his first administration.
Some have been chosen for roles related to their previous jobs. Thomas Homan was the acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during Mr. Trump’s first term and has been named the border czar, a position that does not require Senate confirmation, for the coming term.
Others have been tapped for roles less related to their previous positions. Ms. McMahon was the administrator of the Small Business Administration from 2017 to 2019, and she is now Mr. Trump’s choice for education secretary.
Several on this list did not have official, full-time jobs during Mr. Trump’s last term, but they were chosen by him to sit on advisory boards. Those people include Mr. Witkoff, Mr. Huckabee and Mr. Musk.
Explore the members of Mr. Trump’s proposed senior staff below.
Treasury secretary
—
National Institutes of Health director
— White House deputy chief of staff
—
Deputy attorney general
—
Attorney general
Member of board of trustees of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
Senior adviser for Arab and Middle Eastern affairs
—
White House legislative affairs director
Deputy to the associate director for White House deputy chief of staff
—
Interior secretary
—
F.C.C. chairman
F.C.C. commissioner
Labor secretary
—
White House communications director
White House director of strategic response Veterans affairs secretary
—
Transportation secretary
—
Director of national intelligence
—
White House director of personnel
—
Deputy assistant to the president and senior director for counterterrorism
Deputy assistant to the president and strategist U.S. trade representative
Chief of staff to trade representative
Director of the Domestic Policy Council
Deputy assistant to the president
Director of White House National Economic Council
Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers
Defense secretary
—
Ambassador to Canada
Ambassador to the Netherlands Border czar
Acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Ambassador to Israel
Member of board of trustees of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
Special envoy to Ukraine and Russia
National security adviser to the vice president
Health and human services secretary
—
Ambassador to France
— White House public liaison director
Special assistant to the president
White House press secretary
Assistant White House press secretary
Commerce secretary
—
F.D.A. commissioner
—
White House counsel
White House cabinet secretary Education secretary
Small business administrator
White House deputy chief of staff
Senior adviser
Co-lead, government efficiency
Member of Great American Economic Revival industry group
U.S. surgeon general
—
Homeland security secretary
— Deputy secretary of health and human services
—
Medicare and Medicaid administrator
Member of president’s council on sports, fitness and nutrition
F.B.I. director
Chief of staff to acting defense secretary
Navy secretary
—
White House political affairs director
— Co-lead, government efficiency
—
C.I.A. director
Director of national intelligence
Agriculture secretary
Acting domestic policy adviser
Secretary of state
—
U.S. solicitor general
— White House deputy chief of staff
White House deputy chief of staff
White House staff secretary
—
U.N. ambassador
—
Housing and urban development secretary
Executive director of White House opportunity and revitalization council
Vice president
— Office of Management and Budget director
Office of Management and Budget director
National security adviser
—
C.D.C. director
—
NATO ambassador
Acting attorney general
White House chief of staff
— Middle East envoy
Member of Great American Economic Revival industry group
Assistant to the president and principal deputy national security adviser
Deputy special representative for North Korea
Energy secretary
—
E.P.A. administrator
—
Methodology This list reflects 61 cabinet and senior-level position picks that Mr. Trump had announced as of noon Eastern on Dec. 2.
To determine ties to Project 2025, The Times checked Mr. Trump’s proposed staff members against the authors, editors and contributors to the Project 2025 playbook, as well as the instructor lists in Project 2025’s training programs. Ties to the America First Policy Institute were determined by whether an individual had a listed role on the conservative group’s website or has served as a fellow for the group.
To determine ties to Fox News, The Times searched for each staff pick on Fox’s website, which lists individuals’ affiliations with Fox News. In instances where a biographical page was not available for a nominee, The Times attempted a further search on the Internet Archive and consulted news articles that described other relationships between the potential nominees and appointees and Fox News. In many cases, nominees had a presence on the Fox News website in the form of submitted opinion articles, but were not described as Fox contributors, so The Times did not classify them as being tied to Fox directly.
Accounts by Times reporters and photographers who covered Mr. Trump’s trial in New York were used to determine whether one of Mr. Trump’s picks attended the trial.
Those labeled billionaires have been referred to as such in other Times coverage. Major donors include people who gave at least $250,000 to support Mr. Trump during the 2024 election cycle.
The Times used congressional lobbying disclosure databases to determine whether an individual is or has ever been a registered lobbyist.
To determine whether one of Mr. Trump’s picks hosted or co-hosted an event at Mar-a-Lago, The Times used permits from the town of Palm Beach; federal, state and county campaign finance records; tax records; social media posts; and promotional materials from organizations that held events.
The Times used the official White House archive from the first Trump administration to determine whether people selected for the second administration also served in the first. Some held multiple positions during the course of the administration. In most cases, the chart reflects the last position they held.
Scott Bessent
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Jay Bhattacharya
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
James Blair
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Todd Blanche
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Pam Bondi
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Massad Boulos
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
James Braid
first term
legislative affairs
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Taylor Budowich
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Doug Burgum
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Brendan Carr
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Lori Chavez-DeRemer
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Steven Cheung
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Doug Collins
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Sean Duffy
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Tulsi Gabbard
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Sergio Gor
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Sebastian Gorka
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Jamieson Greer
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Vince Haley
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Kevin Hassett
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Pete Hegseth
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Pete Hoekstra
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Thomas Homan
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Mike Huckabee
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Keith Kellogg
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Charles Kushner
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Alex Latcham
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Karoline Leavitt
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Howard Lutnick
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Martin A. Makary
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Bill McGinley
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Linda McMahon
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Stephen Miller
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Elon Musk
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Janette Nesheiwat
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Kristi Noem
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Jim O’Neill
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Mehmet Oz
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Kash Patel
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
John Phelan
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Matt Brasseaux
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Vivek Ramaswamy
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
John Ratcliffe
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Brooke Rollins
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Marco Rubio
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
D. John Sauer
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Dan Scavino
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Will Scharf
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Elise Stefanik
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Scott Turner
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
JD Vance
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Russell T. Vought
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Michael Waltz
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Dave Weldon
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Matthew Whitaker
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Susie Wiles
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Steven Witkoff
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Alex Wong
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Chris Wright
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Lee Zeldin
first term
event(s)
N.Y. trial
to Fox
Man hit with child pornography charges in Southern California free on bail
Metro Detroit high school boys and girls basketball scores from Tuesday, Dec. 3
San Francisco Giants Predicted to Sign Japanese Star Roki Sasaki
Mavericks Rally From Down 15 To Beat Grizzlies, 121-116, Likely Advance in NBA Cup
Heather Dinich explains scenario where Alabama, Miami both miss College Football Playoff
Colorado Rockies game no. 116 thread: Zac Gallen vs José Ureña
See it: Tesla crashes into Columbus convention center at 70 mph
Why Marjorie Taylor Greene was ‘kicked out’ of the Freedom Caucus according to Rep. Buck
Fox News Politics: Georgia the whole day through
Death of missing Oregon girl found in stream ruled homicide
DOGE chief Musk bashes massive government spending on illegal immigrants: ‘Boggles the mind!’
36 MEPs want to deny Knesset member entry to European Parliament
Some GOP senators seem tepid on Hegseth nomination as allegations pile up
Joe Wilson gifts 'chip of the Berlin Wall' to GOP lawmakers in bid for top committee spot
Georgia protests: What’s behind them and what’s next?
-
Science1 week agoDespite warnings from bird flu experts, it's business as usual in California dairy country
-
Health1 week agoCheekyMD Offers Needle-Free GLP-1s | Woman's World
-
Technology7 days agoLost access? Here’s how to reclaim your Facebook account
-
Entertainment6 days agoReview: A tense household becomes a metaphor for Iran's divisions in 'The Seed of the Sacred Fig'
-
Technology5 days agoUS agriculture industry tests artificial intelligence: 'A lot of potential'
-
Sports4 days agoOne Black Friday 2024 free-agent deal for every MLB team
-
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23906797/VRG_Illo_STK022_K_Radtke_Musk_Scales.jpg "Elon Musk targets OpenAI’s for-profit transition in a new filing")
Technology3 days agoElon Musk targets OpenAI’s for-profit transition in a new filing
-
News2 days agoRassemblement National’s Jordan Bardella threatens to bring down French government