This is an adapted excerpt from the Nov. 24 episode of “Inside with Jen Psaki.”
I know it might not seem like it, but Matt Gaetz’s very short-lived ride as Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general actually did teach us some very important lessons. For starters, it reminded us that the vetting process for Cabinet members is kind of important. That probably shouldn’t be breaking news given that it’s a process that presidential transitions of both parties have engaged in for decades.
One surefire way to not be “blindsided” is to put your nominees through a vetting process.
For anyone who has been through it before, it can feel a bit like a very invasive exam. Call it a colonoscopy, call it a root canal, call it whatever you want, but the point is it’s not exactly pleasant. Typically, the transition team asks you everything about your background: They ask about your clients, your financial records and your personal life. You’re put through an FBI background check, which often involves them calling your friends and family and asking them even more questions. Then you go through hours of interviews about what they find with a team of lawyers.
That’s just some of what typically happens before you are even offered one of these top jobs that require Senate confirmation, which makes sense because they are some of the most important jobs in our government.
Now, of course, Trump took a bit of a different approach and, as we saw this week, that can come with certain consequences. There are consequences for Trump himself if his picks don’t get confirmed, for Senate Republicans who are put in an awkward spot and, more importantly, for the American people if a number of these picks manage to get through.
Consider the new details about Gaetz that were unearthed in recent days, like this document that, according to The New York Times, was prepared by federal investigators and shows a web of payments Gaetz allegedly made, including thousands of dollars to two women who testified that he hired them for sex. The former Florida congressman continues to deny the allegations, but after a steady drip of highly damaging information, Gaetz dropped his bid for attorney general after just eight crazy days.
Then there’s Pete Hegseth, Trump’s pick for head of the Defense Department, and police records that were recently released that detail an allegation of sexual assault from 2017. Hegseth has said the encounter was consensual.
Hegseth was never charged and denies any wrongdoing; his lawyer did acknowledge the woman was paid in a settlement. The police report paints a vivid and horrifying scene of a woman who alleges she remembers “saying ‘no’ a lot” as Hegseth took her phone. She alleges Hegseth physically blocked her from leaving a hotel room and sexually assaulted her. She later went to the hospital and underwent a sexual assault kit exam.
Trump’s transition team was reportedly blindsided by these new details, but again, one surefire way to not be “blindsided” by things like that is to put your nominees through a vetting process.
And then there’s Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s pick for director of national intelligence. Three sources familiar with the matter told CNN that Gabbard was briefly placed on a government watch list earlier this year that “prompts additional security screening before flights after her overseas travel patterns and foreign connections triggered a government algorithm.” Gabbard told Fox News she believed she was put on the list for criticizing Vice President Kamala Harris.
That report comes as questions continue to swirl about her 2017 meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and her pro-Russia and pro-Vladimir Putin rhetoric. In 2015, for instance, Gabbard tweeted: “Al-Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 and must be defeated. Obama won’t bomb them in Syria. Putin did. #neverforget911.”
So it’s no surprise that Republican senators reportedly want access to her FBI file to see if there’s more unknown information about her.
Now, trust me, these are all things that would have come up in a typical vetting process. These are all questions that would have been asked and answered to some degree. Now, maybe Trump would have moved forward with all of these nominees regardless, but these are all things that the Senate and, most importantly, the public deserve to know about the people who are going to serve in incredibly important, high-ranking government roles.
The stakes are so high and there’s still so much we don’t know about these other Cabinet choices.
The only reason we know any of it right now is because of the press. Trump is clearly not going to do his due diligence; he’s not going to ask the questions and he’s not going to require vetting or the FBI background checks.
So if he won’t do those things, journalists have to. Without a free press, we wouldn’t know about Gaetz’s alleged Venmo payments, Hegseth’s police report or Gabbard’s time on a government watch list. It is because of the free press that we have learned a whole lot about these people that we didn’t know even one week ago.
But here’s the important part: There’s still a lot that we don’t know.
Gaetz dropping out doesn’t mean Trump’s next choice for attorney general deserves less scrutiny. It doesn’t mean Hegseth or Gabbard deserves less scrutiny. It doesn’t mean anyone should stop the questions, stop the digging or stop the pressure. It actually means the opposite.
The stakes are so high and there’s still so much we don’t know about these other Cabinet choices. So we need to keep asking questions — that goes for reporters, members of Congress, their staff, citizens and all of you.
Here’s a good place to start: Just hours after Gaetz dropped out, Trump announced his new pick for attorney general, Pam Bondi. And while, no, she is not Gaetz, there are still a lot of questions everyone should be asking about her, too.
Allison Detzel contributed.