During Axios’ Sunday show that airs on HBO, it was revealed that the site had acquired all of the documents and research used to determine who the incoming administration should pick to help lead departments. What was uncovered, however, is what the researches were afraid of and prioritized the most when considering the appointees.
Axios reporter Jonathan Swan called the documents one of the most significant leaks that the site had ever received.
What the transition team did is put together documents on each of the possible nominees and hires that outlined the downside to each person. The vetting gave details about vulnerabilities that could be red flags for the appointees.
“The Trump transition team was understaffed, under-resourced,” said Swan, noting that no one thought Trump would win, so no one prepared for him winning.
Their other major problem was in firing Chris Christie, who had put together tons of documents and prepared for the transition. When Christie was gone, his research went with him, leaving the incoming administration with nothing but a few 20-something RNC staffers to do research.
According to Swan, they were using Google and LexisNexis “on the fly” to research people for cabinet jobs. He noted that there was a section in every document that said: “red flags” showing all of the downsides.
Gen. David Petraeus, for example, was under consideration for Sec. of State. The “red flag” in his case was that he doesn’t believe in using torture. Which means, the Trump administration only wanted to consider those who would approve of the use of torture in interrogation.
“Kris Kobach, he was under consideration for Homeland Security Secretary,” Swan read off. “He had a heading under political vulnerabilities titled: White Supremacy.”
“Past political opponents have accused Kobach of aligning himself with groups that had connections to white supremacist groups,” Swan read from the report. He went on to say that the report on Kobach suggested anyone interviewing him as him “do you have any connections to white supremacists, and would you be willing to renounce them?”
Read Swan’s report at Axios.
Watch the full clip below:
‘I don’t care’: Watch Kamala Harris shut down Chris Hayes for asking a dumb question about Trump
Sen. Kamala Harris shut down MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes during a post-debate interview on Tuesday evening.
Hayes questioned Harris about her call for Twitter to follow their terms of service and kick President Donald Trump off of the platform.
"Do you think he puts people’s lives in danger when he targets them in tweets?" Hayes asked.
"Absolutely," Harris replied.
"Do you think he knows that?" Hayes asked.
"Does it matter?" Harris replied.
"The fact is he did it. The fact is that he is irresponsible, he is erratic," she explained. "He is like a 2-year-old with a machine gun."
Democrats blast Trump and demand his impeachment at CNN debate
Democratic White House hopefuls united in searing condemnation of Donald Trump during their fourth debate Tuesday, saying the president has broken the law, abused his power, and deserves to be impeached.
From the opening moments, most of the dozen candidates on stage launched fierce broadsides against Trump over the Ukrainian scandal at the heart of the impeachment inquiry.
"The impeachment must go forward," said Senator Elizabeth Warren, who is neck and neck with former vice president Joe Biden at the head of the 2020 nominations race.
"Impeachment is the way that we establish that this man will not be permitted to break the law over and over without consequences," she thundered.
Here are 3 winners and 4 losers from the CNN/NYT Democratic presidential primary debate
Twelve Democrats took to the stage Tuesday night for yet another debate in the party's 2020 president primary hosted by CNN and the New York Times.
After only ten candidates qualified for the previous debate, an additional two — Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and wealthy donor and former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer — made it to the stage this round for an even more crowded event.
The candidates discussed a range of important policy issues, but since the format was a debate, and they're all competing for the same nomination, it is ultimately most critical who won and who lost the night. Here are three winners and four losers — necessarily a subjective assessment, of course — from the debate: