Congress

Record-setting personnel issues are marring Trump’s second term

Published

7 months ago

December 1, 2025

On the surface, President Donald Trump’s second-term personnel operation has been a smoothly running machine. The Senate has confirmed more than 300 civilian nominees since January, even changing the chamber’s rules to move them faster.

But there are clear signs of breakdowns behind the scenes. Trump has withdrawn a record number of nominees for a president’s first year in office as he faces a combination of GOP pushback against some picks, vetting issues, White House infighting and, in some cases, the president’s own mercurial views.

Trump has withdrawn 57 nominations, according to Senate data — roughly double the 22 nominations he withdrew during the first year of his first administration and the 29 his immediate predecessor, Joe Biden, withdrew during his first year.

The pace of withdrawals, the highest since at least the Ronald Reagan presidency, has flown below the radar in the day-to-day churn on Capitol Hill, with many Republican senators expressing surprise at the data in interviews. But they also acknowledged the obvious: In some instances, the White House just isn’t making sure Trump’s nominees can get the votes.

“It would appear that some nominees haven’t been vetted, and … somebody says, ‘Go with them anyways,’” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said in an interview.

Perhaps the most vivid example was the monthslong intraparty drama over Paul Ingrassia’s nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel.

After Blue Light News reported he made racist comments in a group chat, Ingrassia withdrew despite telling senators he had “no recollection of these alleged chat leaks, and do not concede their authenticity.” But Senate Republicans had already privately telegraphed to the Trump administration for months that his nomination was in serious peril.

Asked about the withdrawals, a person close to the White House granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal dynamics pointed to Ingrassia as a key example.

“Would I say some vetting has been questionable? One thousand percent,” the person said, adding of Ingrassia: “That was a vetting nightmare that was only allowed to happen based on certain relationships and acquaintances with people that are making the decisions.”

Trump faced similar pushback from Republican senators over Ed Martin’s nomination to be the U.S. attorney in Washington. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a key vote on the Judiciary Committee, essentially killed Martin’s nomination after he told the White House that he couldn’t support him over his past defense of accused Capitol rioters. But even before that, Martin was on thin ice with GOP senators.

A Senate aide who was granted anonymity to speak frankly about White House personnel issues said that in several cases the nominees were being withdrawn not because of issues with GOP senators but intra-administration snags. A White House official, granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the withdrawals, acknowledged the presidential personnel office had recently strengthened its background checks for nominees.

Ed Martin was pulled after it became clear his U.S. attorney nomination would fail in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The person close to the White House said that “not all of these nominations were done so in good faith” under Sergio Gor, who served as the director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office until his confirmation as ambassador to India. The person suggested Gor’s successor as personnel chief, longtime Trump loyalist Dan Scavino, would oversee fewer withdrawals.

“I think Dan is a little bit wiser and less inclined to give out jobs like candy to people who haven’t earned them or would not pass vetting,” the person added.

Gor and the U.S. Embassy in India did not return messages seeking comment. The White House official said the 57 withdrawals, which include instances where the same nominee was put forward for multiple positions, were done “for a variety of reasons — clerical changes, new positions or adding new responsibilities to their original role.”

Frank Bisignano’s nomination for Social Security commissioner, for example, was withdrawn and immediately resubmitted to the Senate in January.

The official added that Trump is nominating new individuals at a “record pace” and noted he has gotten more nominees confirmed at this point than he did during his first term or than Biden did by this point.

Republicans were already confirming Trump nominees at a faster clip than in his first administration. But in September they enacted a party-line rules change, allowing most nominees to now be confirmed in groups of unlimited size. One group of 108 was confirmed in September; a group of 48 more followed in October.

Tillis, who described himself as surprised by the total number of nominees withdrawn, pointed to Trump’s fast pace in making nominations as one possible reason for the sloppy vetting.

“Obviously, when you move more quickly and you’ve got new folks in play, then you are going to run into people who have lifestyle issues,” Tillis said, adding that he believes only “outliers” have run into issues in the Senate.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), who like Tillis expressed surprise at the number of nominees withdrawn, added that “part of our responsibility is advise and consent.”

“And sometimes the advice is to maybe reconsider something,” Rounds said. “You don’t have to make a big deal out of it, but you can share that with the administration. And sometimes they take a second look at the nominee, and they say, ‘You know, yeah, you’re right.’”

Asked about the withdrawals, White House spokesperson Liz Huston said in a statement that Trump is “nominating the most talented patriots to successfully carry out his America First agenda.”

“Under President Trump’s leadership, these appointees are delivering on his core campaign promises in record time from securing the border, ending Joe Biden’s inflation crisis, unleashing American energy, and restoring common sense policies,” she added.

While Martin and Ingrassia are two high-profile examples of nominees running aground in the Senate, there have been other quieter examples — including Joel Rayburn, who had been nominated to be an assistant secretary of State but faced fierce public opposition from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

Activist Laura Loomer took credit for Trump's recent backtrack on his pick for IRS chief counsel.

Trump has also withdrawn nominees for his own reasons. He abruptly withdrew Rep. Elise Stefanik’s nomination to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations earlier this year amid concerns about how the New York Republican’s departure would trim the House majority. He later pulled Jared Isaacman’s nomination to lead NASA over his “prior associations,” only to renominate him five months later.

Late last month, he withdrew Donald Korb’s nomination as top IRS lawyer after a pressure campaign led by right-wing activist Laura Loomer. She publicly boasted that Korb had been “Loomered” after Trump’s announcement.

Others have been snagged by the blue-slip precedent, which allows home-state senators to effectively block district court and U.S. attorney nominees. For instance, Democratic Sens. Cory Booker and Andy Kim refused to return a blue slip for Alina Habba, who was nominated to be U.S. attorney for New Jersey. Trump withdrew her nomination and attempted to place her in the role as an acting U.S. attorney, which sparked a legal battle.

Trump is so far standing by other nominees subject to blue-slip objections, and he is pressuring Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley to get rid of the practice altogether. Republicans did away with it for appeals court judicial nominees during Trump’s first term, but Grassley and many other GOP senators remain opposed to a wholesale elimination.

Trump told Senate Republicans last month that he ousted one official after finding out that he had been backed by Virginia’s Democratic senators. Trump recently withdrew nominations for Todd Gilbert, whom he had nominated to be U.S. attorney for the Western District of Virginia, and Erik Siebert, who had been nominated to be U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

“I had one Republican who got two great letters, but it turned out that he was a RINO,” Trump said during a White House breakfast with senators. “When I saw that the two senators from Virginia gave him glowing remarks … I said let me see this, I read the most beautiful letters I’ve ever seen. I called him up; I said, ‘Sorry, you’re fired — get the hell out of here.’”

Dasha Burns contributed to this report.

Congress

Johnson-backed plan to combine Pentagon and election bills advances to floor

Published

3 hours ago

June 30, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Rules Committee advanced a procedural measure aimed at breaking an intra-Republican deadlock Monday night. But GOP leaders are still facing a major battle Tuesday to regain control of the House floor.

The panel approved on party lines a measure to set up Republicans’ $1.1 trillion defense policy bill, a government funding bill and other GOP bills for floor debate. It would then combine the Pentagon bill, once passed, with the contentious elections overhaul known as the SAVE America Act and send it to the Senate as one piece of legislation.

That maneuver, telegraphed by Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Monday, is aimed at appeasing House GOP hard-liners who have blockaded the floor, demanding the Senate pass the elections bill that has languished there for months.

However, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, the Republican leading the blockade, said in an interview Monday before the Rules Committee acted that Johnson’s plan is not sufficient — raising the possibility she and allies could vote down the measure on the floor. Other House GOP hard-liners say there are other outstanding issues to battle over Tuesday.

Rep. James McGovern of Massachusetts, the top Rules Democrat, called the merger move “a big waste of time.” The panel voted down a motion by McGovern to remove the provision to combine the two bills in a party-line vote.

The Senate is set to debate its own version of the defense bill next month, and it is likely that the elections overhaul will be removed in negotiations between the two chambers — as McGovern acknowledged Monday and House GOP leaders privately concede.

“The Senate will just strip the SAVE Act out,” he said at the meeting. “There is a zero percent chance SAVE ends up in the [Pentagon bill] because of this rule today.”

The defense bill faces a tight vote if Republicans can pass the procedural measure. Most Democrats are expected to oppose the measure over its massive price tag, which they contend is wasteful.

The panel is set up debate on 312 amendments to the bill. The slate includes GOP measures to codify a Trump executive order to block transgender people from serving in the military, prohibit coverage of gender-affirming care, block aid to arm Ukraine and strip Democratic-backed protections for collective bargaining for Pentagon civilian workers.

The committee also voted down Democratic proposals to slash $150 billion from the bill’s topline and limit the war against Iran.

Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Congress

Pentagon and elections bills could be combined in bid to unfreeze House floor

Published

5 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday he plans to deploy an unusual procedural maneuver in a bid to unfreeze the House floor this week, seeking to send the annual Pentagon policy bill and the GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act to the Senate in a single package.

That is likely a recipe for a continued standoff between the two chambers over the SAVE America Act, which has stalled in the Senate for months due to internal GOP divides. Under Johnson’s plan, the annual defense policy bill, which typically passes every year with large bipartisan majorities, could become a collateral victim of the impasse.

Asked in brief interview if he had talked to Senate Majority Leader John Thune about his plans, Johnson replied, “I have to do my job in the House, and they’ve got to do their job in the Senate, so we’ll see what happens.”

Johnson is seeking to placate House conservative hard-liners, led by Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, who have threatened to oppose the procedural measures that give Republicans control of the floor unless they agree to tougher tactics meant to force the Senate into passing the elections bill.

House GOP leaders discussed the plan to merge the two bills over the weekend as Luna pushed to amend the defense bill directly.

She did not say in an interview Monday whether Johnson’s gambit would suffice: “We want it baked together, not able to be stripped out,” she said.

But the Senate is free to work its own will, and members of that chamber are likely to reject any defense bill that has the partisan elections bill attached. That would set the stage for GOP leaders to strip it out when the House and Senate hash out the differences between their competing Pentagon bills later this year.

Johnson, meanwhile, is pushing a separate plan to pass a slimmed-down version of the SAVE America Act through the party-line budget reconciliation process — an option hard-liners have all but rejected.

“I don’t think that that can be done,” Luna told reporters Monday.

He’s also facing another complication: The version of the SAVE America Act he is proposing to attach to the Pentagon bill doesn’t include the latest demands for the bill from President Donald Trump — including a near-total ban on mail voting that is opposed by many Republicans.

Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

Congress

Top Trump officials face bipartisan questions in first all-member Iran briefings

Published

6 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Lawmakers of both parties questioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio and top Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff Monday in the first broad congressional briefings on President Donald Trump’s Iran deal.

While Democrats asked some of the sharpest questions, participants in an afternoon conference call with House members said, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) at one point pressed the administration officials on the fate of Iran’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium.

According to two people granted anonymity to disclose the private remarks, Witkoff and Rubio repeated assurances the administration has privately made to select lawmakers in prior briefings — that the goal is to negotiate a final deal that would prohibit Iran from keeping its highly enriched uranium.

The memorandum of understanding Trump signed earlier this month, they said, was meant to launch those negotiations. Witkoff, the people said, added that the technical team involved in that part of the talks was traveling from Switzerland to Qatar, where talks between the U.S. and Iran are set to happen Tuesday.

Democrats, meanwhile, pushed the administration for more details on what financial benefits Iran could reap under the memorandum — including proceeds from previously sanctioned oil sales.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) went back and forth with Rubio and Witkoff over the lifting of the oil sanctions, two other people granted anonymity on the House call said. The officials eventually cut off the conversation and ended the call.

At another point, Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) raised concerns about Witkoff’s business interests in the Middle East as he’s negotiating with Iran, prompting a sharp defense from Rubio, those people said.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer asked Rubio and Witkoff about the oil sanctions during a separate all-senators call Monday, saying in a statement afterward that they “confirmed to me that Iran will reap billions in oil revenue while retaining dangerous leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.”

“If this is the administration’s defense behind closed doors, Secretary Rubio should make it under oath, in public, before the Foreign Relations Committee,” Schumer added, calling the briefing “delayed, deficient, and devoid of details.”

An administration official granted anonymity to speak candidly countered on Schumer’s characterization, noting that he had previously gotten a briefing of the deal as part of a group of top leaders engaged on national security matters. Schumer, the official said, had the opportunity to ask multiple follow-up questions on the Senate call.

A separate group of White House officials briefed top congressional leaders and key committee chairs in a classified briefing in the Capitol later Monday.

The administration has faced bipartisan skepticism over multiple provisions of the memorandum of understanding — particularly the lifting of oil sanctions and a $300 billion reconstruction fund that many Senate Republicans fear will help fuel Iran’s military and regional proxies.

Rubio and Witkoff sought to ease concerns about the slow reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — the critical trade route whose closure has sparked higher fuel and fertilizer costs. Both officials said more mine removal is required, and Witkoff indicated that Iran broke the terms of the Trump-signed deal by launching a drone attack on a passing ship over the weekend.

They also sought to assure lawmakers that Iran has received no money under the memorandum — especially not directly from American sources. Administration officials have previously pledged in smaller briefings that the reconstruction fund won’t include U.S. funds.

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) called the Senate briefing a “productive conversation” but said “much of what I heard today is similar to what I heard last week” during a dinner at Vice President JD Vance’s residence.