Tom Boggioni

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee were put on notice on Friday by a highly respected conservative that even the thought of appointing acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to the post should make them sick.

Washington Post columnist George Will argued Friday that Republicans owe no favors to President Donald Trump as he tries to foist his compromised former personal lawyer on the country.

“There are many sufficient reasons to oppose confirming Todd Blanche as attorney general," wrote Will. "Presidents generally are owed some deference in selecting Cabinet members, but ‘some’ implies limits, lest the Senate’s advice-and-consent duty be drained of responsibility. And not all presidents are equally owed. Today’s president is owed little, given his contempt for the unwritten rules of civility that can lubricate a congenial society’s governance.”

Having dismissed the president, Will set about making his case against Blanche by citing multiple Trump appointees who were passed through the divided Senate only to be found lacking in all ways for their jobs.

Will first called out former Attorney General Pam Bondi — ousted over her handling of the Epstein files — and a slew of others, as incompetents.

“If at most four Republican senators had, in committee or floor votes, behaved as independently as the Founders thought senators would," Will wrote, "Bondi, Kristi Noem, Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and others would not have been confirmed to offices far above their competences."

Then he honed in on Blanche

“Blanche was acting attorney general when the Justice Department took seriously Seashellgate,” he wrote.

“Blanche, who serves at the pleasure of the president, signed a memo pledging that the IRS is ‘Forever Barred’ from ‘examinations’ of Trump, certain members of his family, the Trump Organization and ‘related or affiliated individuals.’ This ‘negotiated’ — try not to snicker — settlement between the president and the executive branch he heads exemplifies the administration’s sludge of self-dealing.”

Noting that Blanche received an “embarrassingly backhanded endorsement” from former attorney general William Barr who claimed Trump’s latest appointee “will run the department as effectively as anyone could under President Trump,” Will asked, “Is this sufficient reassurance for Republican senators? Or will, at last, a nominee trigger their gag reflexes?”

Former ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul expressed on MS NOW Friday morning extreme dismay at the sloppiness of President Donald Trump’s nuclear cooperation agreement with the Saudis.

McFaul scoffed at the deal that would allow U.S. companies to help the Middle Eastern nation develop its atomic energy infrastructure and the reason it recently stalled: Trump's sudden demand Saudi Arabia normalize relations with Israel.

“This is so crazy,” McFaul said. “I just just just to step back for a minute: This is a pattern of how they make decisions in the Trump administration.”

McFaul explained his frustration stemmed from the Trump administration's tendency to make big moves without clearing it first in-house.

“There's no interagency process, the National Security Council doesn't meet Secretary [Marco] Rubio's the national security adviser and half a dozen other jobs, so they roll this out,” he elaborated.

“There doesn't sound like there was a discussion with the president, no explanation why they didn't sign the additional protocol that is to give more inspections. I think that's a huge mistake.”

“And then the president finds out what's happening,” he added with a laugh. “He says, ‘Well, no, I want to change the deal.’ And I just think we're suffering from the consequences of this chaos.”

“Same with the decision to invade Iran,” the diplomat exclaimed. “Was there a big decision? They sit down, did they talk about secondary consequences, tertiary consequences? It appears they didn't. And this is yet another case where it just appears that they didn't really talk about what they were doing.”

- YouTube youtu.be

A wife of one of the 18 military personnel killed in the Iran war has described her husband's dismay at how the conflict was unfolding.

Speaking with the New York Times, Jamiah Swinton described the changes her husband seemed to be undergoing since he was deployed over a year ago.

The final conversations between Sgt. Michael Emmanuel Swinton and his wife showed the soldier was deteriorating under the weight of relentless conflict. In his last calls home to North Carolina, the physical and psychological toll was unmistakable, his wife said.

"I could always tell, when the tone would change, that something was going on," Jamiah Swinton told the Times, recounting how she learned to read the subtle shifts in her husband's demeanor.

The danger was constant and inescapable, she said. Stationed at Erbil Air Base in northern Iraq, Swinton faced relentless Iranian drone attacks. "There was no peace," his wife said.

His final video call with his family was heartbreaking in its brevity and tenderness, according to the report. He asked to see their 4-year-old daughter, who was at preschool. It had been a full year since he'd held her in person.

Last week, Swinton was among four service members killed during escalating combat operations between U.S. and Iranian forces in the Persian Gulf. The Pentagon said he died Saturday during the disposal of an Iranian drone at Erbil—a controlled detonation now under investigation, according to the Times.

Jamiah and Michael had met during a 2020 deployment to Bahrain, both serving in the military.

"When I did see him on videos, he just looked so tired," Jamiah said. "And he would tell me he wanted to come home so bad."

While Trump claimed the fallen soldiers supported the war, Jamiah chose to focus on remembering her husband rather than engage in political debate about the conflict that claimed his life.

"Nobody can tell you how a military career will go," she reflected. "There's so much uncertainty, and you have to be strong enough to go along with it and hope that it will turn out OK."

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and his fellow Republicans lashed out at Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt after she complained about the latest stalemate with the White House, according to new reports.

Tensions have erupted between the Senate GOP leadership and President Donald Trump's White House over the chamber's inability to pass the president's legislative priorities, primarily the controversial SAVE America Act, The Hill reported Friday.

Leavitt reportedly sparked the backlash this week when she told reporters "patience is running out" with Thune and demanded the Senate "do its job."

The Senate GOP leader later responded with a snappy retort.

"Maybe she or somebody else ought to get on the phone and get the votes," Thune said. "Instead of pointing the finger at Republicans, they might think about going after the people who are stopping it on the floor, which is the Democrats."

Thune added, "And if there are Republicans they think are gettable, get on the phone."

His fellow Republicans in the Senate were quick to chime in.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) countered with a shot at pointed shot at the 28-year-old Leavitt, telling reporters, "I have 1000 percent confidence in Thune, and anybody in the White House who thinks he's not a good leader isn't qualified for their job."

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), who opposed the president's SAVE America Act, also rallied behind Thune. Asked if his job was in jeopardy, Collins responded definitively: "I think he enjoys well-deserved support from the caucus."

Politico also reported on mounting tensions Friday as Republicans rallied around Thune and expressed frustration about the SAVE America Act.

“This idea that he can just command members of the Republican conference to get in line is just a fantasy," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX). “I don’t know who it was that sold the president on this idea, that this was obtainable, but it’s creating a circular firing squad for Republicans.”

Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told Politico, “John can’t put a gun to people’s heads and make them vote a particular way.”

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel called out Friday morning a high-ranking member of President Donald Trump's administration for siccing his staffers on her after she criticized his work.

In a biting new column, Strassel dubbed Vice President J.D. Vance a "sensitive bunny."

Strassel — an unapologetic fan of President Donald Trump’s administration — bashed the veep last week for being AWOL when GOP leadership in the Senate needed him, choosing instead to fly to Austin to plug his book on Joe Rogan’s podcast.

On Friday, she revealed his response.

“Over many years of writing pieces critical of politicians, my Republican targets mostly took the beatings like men, many going so far as to acknowledge—if only in confidence—that they probably deserved it," she wrote.

"Not so Vice President JD Vance, and his dreary band of online enforcers. This egotism—or rather, insecurity—is worth analyzing.”

Vance’s “people” promptly contacted her editors to complain about the column, nitpicking it and “splitting hairs” because he was furious about how he was portrayed, Strassel wrote.

“They wanted a mea culpa for what I didn’t write—namely that Mr. Vance had showed up to the House . . . on Wednesday," wrote Strassel. "Never mind that Congress’s anger stemmed from Mr. Vance’s decision to ditch them for Mr. Rogan’s program. They claimed that wasn’t ‘the reason’ for canceling, though they didn’t provide an alternative explanation. What else was Mr. Vance doing in Austin, Texas?”

Strassel said she also faced pushback from Vance fans online — from his "social media minions."

"They labeled me a spineless leftist, their proof a series of lame rejoinders: Yeah, but the Senate sucks!" she wrote. "Yeah, but you’re a loser."

Strassel doubled down on her criticism Friday, attacking both his sensitivity and his intelligence.

“Can Mr. Vance possibly think this is smart?" she wrote. "Successful politicians seek to find new allies, not to alienate longstanding ones, whether elected colleagues, interest groups, the entrepreneurial class or conservative media. Winning is hard enough without a right-on-right cage match. One answer is simply that Mr. Vance is a sensitive bunny. If he wants to be president, he’ll need to get over that.”

Republican lawmakers fleeing Washington, D.C. for their summer recess were put on the spot by MS NOW over President Donald Trump’s performance — which they struggled to defend.

Some fled reporter Jack Fitzpatrick, some stumbled their answers, and one sneered at the news network for covering the president, a video montage shows.

Each lawmaker was asked if they disagreed with anything Trump has done during his rocky second term.

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) blurted, “I’m not going to play that game. That’s an absurd game.”

“We’re not going to speculate on that,” a stumped Rep. Keith Self (R-TX) said, adding, “No comment.”

As he ducked into a car, Rep. Darell Issa (R-CA), who is also not running for reelection, stated, “He’s been overcoming organizations like MS NOW finding something wrong with everything he does.”

Rep. Lauren Boebert, also ducking into a car replied, “Maybe just vetoing my bill. But don't worry, I'm still fighting.”

A flustered looking Rep. Mike Haridopolos, (R-FL) did not answer and quickly walked away from MS NOW’s Fitzpatrick.

Outgoing Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX) couldn't think of anything.

“I suggest we probably try to give him a third term," Nehls said. "Actually, really should be a fourth."

He also said, "We need to protect Greenland.”

- YouTube youtu.be

A decision by President Donald Trump’s administration to delete the names of four US service members from the Iran war dead was slammed Friday on MS NOW as “among the more offensive moves that the administration has made."

The panel was responding to a New York Times report that the number of dead listed by the Pentagon mysteriously dropped from 18 to 14, ostensibly “because their deaths occurred after President Trump declared a cease-fire in the war in April.”

The “Morning Joe" panel said they didn't buy it, calling the move both “outrageous” and “despicable,” with co-host Jonathan Lemire reminding viewers of the president’s low opinion of American service members who die in wars.

“I mean, this wouldn't be the first time that the government, that the Trump administration has tried to doctor things to make the president look better,” Lemire stated.

"It is a nonsensical argument that these four lives would matter less because they happened after a ceasefire was declared, when obviously the ceasefire is over; there are major strikes happening in the region now for well more than a week. To me, this was particularly outrageous and disgraceful.”

MS NOW contributor Sam Stein offered, “Well, to me too. It's both not shocking that the Trump administration would do this, and it's shocking that it happened. What is the actual goal of doing something like this is to try to limit your political exposure for the war.”

“It's despicable, honestly,” he added. "It's failing to own the consequences of their actions, or at least trying to avoid the consequences of their actions. And honestly, it's insulting to the people who sacrificed to say, ‘Hey, this was not actually a war casualty.’ It was what a casualty of a — what's the word he uses? — skirmish. I found this to be among the more offensive moves that the administration has made politically, but it obviously reflects a larger thinking that they have internally, which is that this is politically problematic.”

“The callousness here is off the charts,” Lemire agreed. “And but perhaps not surprising. I agree with you, Sam. Remember, President Trump and his first term called those who were reportedly killed in combat ‘suckers and losers.’”

- YouTube youtu.be

Four months into his tenure as the head of the Department of Homeland Security, Markwayne Mullin is not meeting White House expectations.

According to a report from NBC News, the former Republican senator from Oklahoma serving as secretary of the troubled agency is getting buffeted on all sides over making moves that have not been okayed by the White House.

Mullin's problems stem from a fundamental violation of White House protocol: making major policy decisions without explicit presidential approval. Administration officials are openly critical of his independence, viewing it as tone-deaf to the way things are handled.

The breaking point came when Mullin unilaterally ordered ICE agents nationwide to halt vehicle stops following fatal shootings in Texas and Maine. The policy pause was announced without White House consultation—a cardinal sin in Trump's command structure.

As the report noted, Trump reversed Mullin's decision within 24 hours, publicly contradicting his own DHS secretary and asserting that traffic stops remain essential to immigration enforcement.

"We must be strong, tough and smart and we CANNOT give up one of ICE's most important and effective Crime Fighting tools, THE TRAFFIC STOP!" Trump declared on social media. "Once we do, we are playing right into the criminal's hands."

Administration insiders were blunt about Mullin's "misstep," telling NBC News, " "The decision to pause vehicle stops was '100%' a bad move and that it was done without White House sign off."

The message to cabinet secretaries is unambiguous: check with the president before implementing major policy shifts. "Every Cabinet secretary knows that they have to come to the White House for major policy decisions," the official stated. "The president sees, hears, reads everything."

According to NBC News, "Mullin misspoke in a CNN interview last month about a Supreme Court ruling on immigrants from Haiti and Syria, saying roughly 350,000 could be eligible to apply for legal status when they weren’t, annoying some in the administration, the DHS official said."

Questions about Mullin's fitness for the role are mounting like his predecessor, Kristi Noem, with NBC pointing out that Trump cycled through four homeland security secretaries during his first term, frequently blaming them when border crossings spiked.

There are currently no announced plans to replace Mullin, the report states, but internal concerns are escalating over his choice of Lance Schroyer to lead ICE. Schroyer, nominated as ICE director, is viewed as dangerously "unprepared" for the role.

DHS insiders describe Schroyer's knowledge of immigration law and policy as "extremely limited." Multiple officials privately worry his nomination hearing will expose dangerous gaps in his expertise.

The nomination has generated friction at the highest levels. White House border czar Tom Homan and other senior officials are reportedly unenthusiastic about Schroyer's selection.

"Homan and others aren't particularly thrilled with him," according to administration sources.

President Donald Trump's "fix is in" rhetoric could compel his biggest fans to skip voting, a new analysis contends.

Miles Taylor, chief of staff in the Department of Homeland Security during the president's first term, argued Thursday that Trump's constant pushing on the SAVE America Act is fundamentally flawed.

That's terrible news for GOP candidates on the November ballot who are already looking at an uphill battle, Taylor said.

Trump's approval ratings have collapsed to disastrous levels, recent reports show.

A recent poll shows just 30 percent of Americans approve of his performance—catastrophic territory achievable only when millions of your own supporters have abandoned you. Most damaging: his economic approval ratings hit their worst marks of either his term.

With that in mind, Taylor argued Trump was making a big mistake.

"The real headline is that the president is sabotaging his own side’s turnout in the very act of seeking to meddle in the election," he wrote. "It’s like a burglary that’s backfiring in real time. Trump is trying mightily to break into democracy’s back door but making such a racket with his crowbar that he’s woken up the whole neighborhood."

Pointing to Trump's infamous 2024 claim he would fix elections "so good, you're not gonna have to vote," Taylor argued the president's boast will boost complacency when he should be pushing for his MAGA fans to get off the couch.

Meanwhile, Trump has motivated Democrats.

"Every lever he pulls to 'tilt' the playing field risks convincing his own voters they don’t need to show up at all," he wrote before predicting, "Again, each of these election-rigging maneuvers tells the MAGA base: relax, the fix is in! Unfortunately for the Republican Party, the data shows its voters are getting the message. They’re becoming more indifferent."

He then quipped, "The president wanted to mount the biggest midterm election operation in modern history. Well, congratulations, Mr. President. You did it. Your 'get out the vote' operation is massive. The only catch is that it’s inspiring the opposition, not your own team."

Late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel hit CBS with backhanded praise after its canning of Stephen Colbert sent ratings at its rival network soaring.

In an interview with Variety, Kimmel — whose show airs on ABC — credited an almost 20 percent increase in viewership to the head honchos at CBS who pulled the plug on Colbert's show to gain favor with President Donald Trump.

"The ratings are very strong, which we are very grateful to CBS for their wisdom," he sarcastically told Variety. "We were doing pretty well before that, but that really helped."

According to the Variety report, Kimmel's June performance was historically high: 3.15 million viewers averaged per episode — the show's best monthly audience in 23 years.

Compared to May, viewership jumped 17 percent. Among adults 18-49, the numbers were even more dramatic — a 109 percent surge.

CBS blamed poor performance for its cancellation of "The Late Show With Stephen Colbert," though the decision was widely criticized as being part of its broader effort to appease Trump, whose allies have targeted the network for alleged bias. Colbert's displaced audience appears to have migrated directly to Kimmel's timeslot.

When asked if "orphaned" Colbert viewers found refuge on ABC, Kimmel told Variety, "I've always thought of our show as an orphanage."

Making the case for late-night comedy, Kimmel observed, "It's silly how people go wild about a podcast that's No. 5, and the numbers still don't even compare to a television show. There’s still a lot of people watching late night television, and I include the other shows in that. And there are still a lot of people looking at our shows on YouTube the next day, and there’s a lot of people who are interested in what we have to say."

A Fox News poll that delivered devastating news to Republicans left a panel of MS NOW experts stunned speechless that they agreed with the conservative network about President Donald Trump.

“Morning Joe” co-host Jonathan Lemire admitted Thursday that commentator Brit Hume's response to new poll numbers aligned with his own.

“Hume, the commentator going through some of these poll numbers, said something along the lines of like, 'Well, there's not really much in the way of good news for Republicans in there,'" said Lemire. "I think we can agree with Brit on that."

Fox News reported Trump’s job approval remained at a "near a record low."

"Republicans join Democrats and independents in rating the economy negatively, and 4 in 10 voters want 'dramatic' or 'revolutionary' change," the report stated. "Plus, more view the GOP as tied to elites than the Democratic Party.”

Lemire argued Trump is failing to meet campaign promises — and voters are well aware.

“He was elected to fix this economy, to bring down prices, to bring down inflation and none of that has happened,” he said. “And these are, as we put them on the screen here, these are really rough numbers. We're in late July now, it's no longer early, the midterms are on the horizon.”

Journalist John Heilemann argued Trump had a slew of problems ahead of Election Day.

“Essentially going back to last summer, around the time when the Epstein files started to become central to Trump's administration, you've seen Trump basically descending on every issue,” Heilemann said. “He's been not just declining, but underwater really for almost a year now.”

“I agree with Brit Hume just this once,” he added. “There's not a silver lining on any of these clouds.”

- YouTube youtu.be

President Donald Trump's controversial nuclear deal with the leadership of Saudi Arabia is now in doubt after the president threw the Middle Eastern nation a curve on Thursday morning.

Trump abruptly inserted a bombshell condition into a nuclear agreement that was supposedly finalized just 24 hours earlier: Saudi Arabia must normalize relations with Israel to receive U.S. nuclear technology, The Washington Post is reporting.

The move has thrown the entire agreement into chaos, according to the report.

Trump announced via Truth Social that the civil nuclear deal—which would allow Saudi Arabia to develop nuclear power plants and pursue enrichment programs—is "totally subject" to Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords, the initiative from his first term designed to normalize Israeli-Arab relations.

“The Civil Nuclear Deal (There will be no enrichment of material!) being made between the United States Department of Energy and Saudi Arabia, which pertains only to non-military use such as the ones that Iran and UAE (and others) already have, will be approved,” Trump wrote on Truth Social Thursday.

“But is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords.”

The problem is monumental: Saudi Arabia has consistently refused to join the Abraham Accords and shows no signs of capitulating now.

According to the Post, "That attaches a major string to the deal. Saudi leaders were nearing a normalization agreement with Israel in 2023, just before the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7 of that year. Since then, however, talks have been paused. Saudi leaders have said they would want guarantees of an eventual Palestinian state, and Saudi public opinion has soured toward Israel because of its handling of Gaza. Any nuclear deal tied to Saudi-Israel diplomatic breakthroughs has seemed remote."

The nuclear technology deal itself has generated controversy in Congress. Lawmakers worry that expanding enrichment programs across multiple nations increases proliferation risks and could eventually result in more countries possessing nuclear weapons capabilities.

Trump's sudden new condition transforms an already contentious agreement into a political landmine—potentially derailing both the nuclear deal and his broader Middle East diplomatic agenda.

President Donald Trump's election theft speech put his CIA director in the spotlight — and now calls are mounting for him to push back, according to a new report.

Questions are being raised about Director John Ratcliffe's conduct during the initial investigation into foreign election tampering and his silence now as the president fires off "Looney Tunes" accusations, MS NOW's David Rohde reported Thursday.

Ratcliffe's complicity—or silence—has become impossible to ignore, according to Rohde.

As Trump's current CIA director, Ratcliffe served as Director of National Intelligence from May 2020 through January 2021, controlling what intelligence reached the president's desk and what remained hidden.

The timing, Rohde argued, is damning.

Trump claimed in his recent speech that U.S. intelligence agencies discovered Chinese interference in the 2020 election but deliberately concealed it from him.

Yet Ratcliffe was the gatekeeper deciding what Trump saw and didn't see during that exact period, Rohde noted.

Trump's declassified documents, released to support his election fraud narrative, claim U.S. intelligence learned in 2020 that China had "bought, stolen or hacked" tens of millions of Americans' voting records.

According to Trump, spy agencies kept this bombshell secret.

But Ratcliffe was one of the officials who decided what warranted inclusion in Trump's daily briefings, Rohde wrote. He argued if the intelligence existed as Trump claims, then Ratcliffe bore responsibility for either including or excluding it.

"Critics say that Ratcliffe should stand up to Trump and threaten to resign — or actually resign — as cabinet members did in his first term, including former Defense Secretary Gen. Jim Mattis, former Attorney General Bill Barr, and former CIA director Gina Haspel," Rohde wrote.

Instead, Ratcliffe has maintained silence—enabling what former CIA analyst Julia Curlee describes as a "conspiracy of silence" enveloping Washington.

Curlee, who recently resigned after 20 years of service, told MS NOW, "To me, it was crossing a Rubicon where the institution itself was being conscripted into the creation of a product to reinforce the president's messaging. I never thought that I would see the CIA participating in a presidential effort to delegitimize elections in the eyes of Americans."

Former senior CIA official Marc Polymeropoulos acknowledged Ratcliffe's impossible position: protecting both his job and the CIA's institutional integrity while serving a president hostile to both.

"Ratcliffe certainly does need to play it both ways in some respects, as he's got a workforce at CIA that will not react well to sources and methods being compromised based on cherry-picked intelligence to promote Looney Tunes conspiracy theories," Polymeropoulos, an MS NOW contributor added.

"But at the same time, he's gotta protect his job from the mercurial Trump. So far, he's managed to successfully dance through the raindrops on this issue."

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's path to removing "acting" from his title is facing a new hurdle as a Senate Judiciary Committee vote looms, according to a new report.

While much of the focus has been on the votes of outgoing Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Thom Tillis (R-NC), Politico reported Thursday that Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) may be the one who derails President Donald Trump's nominee to replace fired former Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Murkowski has emerged as an unexpected wildcard in Blanche's confirmation process, Politico reported.

The Alaska senator has held multiple meetings with the nominee but has strategically refused to reveal her voting intentions—a calculated silence that Politico labeled a "warning sign" for GOP leadership.

Trump formally nominated Blanche on June 8, and the acting attorney general has spent months meeting with senators individually.

Two separate sessions with Murkowski—one in June and another this week—suggest she's taking the nomination seriously rather than rubber-stamping it.

"Right before Blanche’s confirmation hearing last week, Murkowski said she was hopeful for 'specific follow-ups' from the nominee," Politico reported. "She noted that she had some concerns about Blanche serving previously as Trump’s personal attorney and that she was interested to hear how Blanche’s visit to Alaska went."

Murkowski, speaking with reporters, made it clear her evaluation would be substantive, not perfunctory, according to Politico.

"So I've got some follow-ons that I want to visit with him about," she said. "He was able to get out to one of our smaller, isolated villages where there's very limited public safety. [I] want to gain his impressions."

Politico argues the math is unforgiving. In the Judiciary Committee, a single Republican defection could sink Blanche if all Democrats vote no.

Already, Cornyn and Tillis have refused to publicly commit to supporting him. Add Murkowski's ambiguity, and Trump's nominee is in genuine peril, the report stated.

Murkowski has a history of "leveraging her swing-vote status" to extract concessions from presidents across party lines. Her spokesperson released a carefully neutral statement Wednesday: the senator will evaluate Blanche "by reviewing his hearing and determining whether he has the appropriate qualifications, experience, temperament, and independence necessary for this important role."