How Right Wingers Rushed to DEI Hire Pete Hegseth
Pete Hegseth is wildly unqualified to run DOD. He described yesterday the most people he had ever supervised was 100. The non-profit budgets that went broke under his stewardship were in the $10 million range. He has never supervised an audit yet claims he’ll be the guy who finally ensures the Pentagon passes one.
Roger Wicker seemed certain that Hegseth wasn’t man enough to withstand a second round of questioning — a concession that Hegseth is weaker than Hillary Clinton, I guess, since she once sat for 11 hours of questioning.
As such a manifestly unqualified candidate, his increasingly certain confirmation to be Defense Secretary is the quintessential DEI hire, someone hired for his culture and identity rather than his qualifications. The hiring of someone for who he is and not any qualifications he might have is precisely what right wingers have been leading jihads against for years. And yet the entire MAGA world is rushing headlong to install a guy with no qualifications to run DOD.
To be sure, Hegseth is qualified for a few things Trump wants from him. He made it clear yesterday he’ll implement unlawful orders from Trump, including to use the military to support Trump’s mass deportations or to shoot protestors. And he’ll defend those service members who implement those unlawful orders loudly and shamelessly. That’s what Trump saw Hegseth doing on Fox News. That’s why he got hired.
The how of all this — which Rebecca Traitster laid out here — matters.
Sure, Hegseth has worked on cultivating the three women Senators who might oppose him: Joni Ernst, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski. In her statement announcing she will support him, Joni Ernst listed the concessions on women in the military — and that audit Hegseth has no qualifications to deliver.
After four years of weakness in the White House, Americans deserve a strong Secretary of Defense,” said Senator Joni Ernst. “Our next commander in chief selected Pete Hegseth to serve in this role, and after our conversations, hearing from Iowans, and doing my job as a United States Senator, I will support President Trump’s pick for Secretary of Defense. As I serve on the Armed Services Committee, I will work with Pete to create the most lethal fighting force and hold him to his commitments of auditing the Pentagon, ensuring opportunity for women in combat while maintaining high standards, and selecting a senior official to address and prevent sexual assault in the ranks.
After a campaign threatening unlimited donations to ouster her, Hegseth has given Ernst the cover she’ll need to take a vote that she must know is an abdication of her constitutional duty to advise and consent.
But Hegseth pointedly did not meet with any Democrat but Ranking Member Jack Reed (who excoriated his lack of qualifications in an opening statement).
When Democrats asked Hegseth about allegations of sexual misconduct or alcohol abuse, Hegseth never denied any of it; he simply said those were anonymous smears (even when Tim Kaine and Mark Kelly noted there are names attached to some of these allegations)
When Kelly asked Hegseth if he had been under oath when providing those answers, Hegseth again attacked the claims.
When Democrats asked Hegseth if such behavior would disqualify him — which should have elicited a commitment that if and when he is proven to be a drunk or a philanderer going forward, he’d have to step down — he refused to answer.
Tammy Duckworth asked a number of pointed questions (including about whether he had led an audit), including what international negotiations the Secretary of Defense conducts and whether he could name an ASEAN country (apparently Hegseth was so poorly prepared to answer Democrats’ questions, no one thought to warn him Duckworth might ask questions about Thailand, where she was born to an American service member father). Hegseth could only think of South Korea, Japan, and Australia among our allies in the region, none of which is in ASEAN.
Republicans dismissed his bumbling responses by noting that ASEAN is not a military alliance. Democrats did not note, in return, that that nevertheless betrays ignorance about the Philippines, a country at the center of our conflict with China, something that Hegseth (and every Republican on the committee) claim is a paramount concern.
With just a few exceptions, though, Democrats failed to do what they needed to do to create a video confrontation the likes of which might make an effective response to ads (above) already running in Iowa that might dissuade Republicans from supporting him or — when and if his incompetence blows up and harms the US — holds them accountable for their abdication of duty.
WSJ’s editorial board, which would love to find a way to get someone more competent, deemed Tim Kaine’s questioning about Hegseth’s lack of transparency about a sexual assault allegation documented in a police report to be the most effective.
The most effective Democratic questioning came from Virginia’s Tim Kaine, who wanted to know why Mr. Hegseth didn’t disclose to the Trump team a settlement he paid to a woman who accused him of sexual assault. Mr. Hegseth kept saying he was “falsely charged” but never answered the question.
This is right: Democrats need to focus their opposition in a way that it would incur a cost for Republicans. Painting Hegseth as a guy who kept secrets from Trump is a more effective way of hitting his transparency failures than painting the public as a victim. And when they asked about Hegseth’s more fundamental disqualifications — his unwillingness to back the Geneva Conventions, for example — Democrats failed to explain the impact of that, an invitation for others to torture American service members.
Kaine also released the most effective summary of the hearing — a screen cap showing a Republican prop complaining about lowered standards purportedly tied to diversity that misspelled military.
Republicans claim to oppose “DEI” because it lowers standards. At the same time, at a time when DOD increasingly has to rely on a second chance program that Hegseth endorsed to qualify (disproportionately male) candidates with physical, educational, or legal disqualifications, they’re rushing to install someone whose disqualifications may do real damage, even assuming America’s adversaries don’t find a way to use them to compromise the Defense Secretary.
And now, having capitulated to Trump’s demand to install someone who is so obviously unqualified to lead DOD, it’ll make it easier for Republicans to confirm Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. You’ve already put the good of the country behind loyalty to Trump.
Trump and his allies bullied the Senate into backing a DEI Christian Nationalist, one who himself backs DEI for (ha!) fat men with criminal records.
The dynamic needs to be laid out clearly: When pushed, Republicans did precisely what they claim to oppose. They chose to make the US less secure because Trump demanded personal loyalty over loyalty to country.
Update: I made a picture to explain why Hegseth’s utter ignorance about ASEAN matters.
We’re in a war with Russia. We’re using the Ukrainians as our beard.
We have pro-Russian operatives at the ‘highest’ levels.
Russia has fossil fuels. Russia has nuclear power. Russia has a corrupt political environment that is the enemy of freedom.
We have pro-Russian operatives at the highest levels.
Our beard seems to be pretty damn lethal. Ask Putin.
I wonder, does Joni think her daughter can kill better than the sons and daughters of Ukraine who are defending their own homeland?
There’s a part of me who thinks Gabbard, in particular, was somebody that Putin’s underlings contacted Trump’s underlings and said “Yeah, we want this one.”
[Welcome back to emptywheel. SECOND REQUEST: Please use a more differentiated username when you comment next as another community member has already used “Cornelius” as a username. Your username on this comment will be temporarily changed to match the username/date/time of your first known comment until you have a new site-standard compliant username. /~Rayne]
Billionaires probably threatened GOP Senators more than Hegseth courted them, but it was a tag team match.
A hook that might have gotten under some of GOP skins, if anything would, is Hesgeth’s attitude not just towards war crimes but towards the threat that war criminals are to their fellow service members.
On Monday NBC had a good piece,
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/military-officers-worry-pete-hegseth-turn-blind-eye-us-war-crimes-rcna183732
which showed how worried people are in the military about having somebody lead the Pentagon who had lobbied successfully for the pardoning of convicted war criminals.
But the story neglected to say that in the case of Eddie Gallagher, not only had he committed war crimes but he
had threatened to kill any of his SEAL squad members who reported his actions to the chain of command.
The idea that anybody who has defended that conduct should then be in charge of the U.S. military is insane.
That is something that’s pretty easy to lay out, doesn’t go into the weeds, would have made effective TV,
and would have resonated with anybody who supports the military or pretends to.
Why the Democrats didn’t front and center it, who knows.
A shitty omen, indeed.
I agree, and would add that this argument applies also to Donald Trump–the ultimate pardoner of war criminals and their fanboyz like Joe Arpaio.
I have witnessed fellow service members knowingly follow illegal orders that threatened their own lives. I told them about it afterwards they did it again at a later date. Easier to follow orders than stick your head up and be defiant even if your life depends on it. Bad commanders are a threat to everyone.
Brilliant fucking frame, Marcy. Thank you x 100 or so. This should be the Dems mantra for all these incompetent, toxic, noxious bozos in the Trump appointments queue.
As to why the Dems haven’t clued themselves in? The answer is blowin’ in the (GOP) win.
I’m gonna try and spread this one around; it’s absolute polemic gold. If the Dems can’t figure this one out, it bodes long-term-catastrophe.
Hegseth is not a DEI hire. He’s a UPEI hire: uniformity, prejudice, exclusion & inacessibility. You’re co-opting the rightwing label DEI hire as if it’s a legitimate slur.
In my opinion, DEI is a legitimate slur. It’s the flip side of cancel culture and, apart from no god being worshipped, it’s no better than the many religions built upon a bullshit premise.
For my support, I’ll point to “Woke Racism” by John McWhorter and “White Fragility” by Robin DiAngelo.
It seems that McWhorter disagrees with DiAngelo: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/
I think many of the reactions to discussions of racism and white privilege are in the eye of the beholder. To me, white privilege is the set of empirical results that Caucasians are treated better than POCs. Essentially a scalar; score of how Caucasians are treated minus the score of how POCs are treated. Some people deal with this data emotionally, declaring it a Caucasian original sin. Others object that Caucasians are treated the way everyone should be treated, so there is no privilege. Others are more extreme in their rejection of this data: https://www.naacpldf.org/woke-black-bad/
To an extent, they do agree, and I agree with you to an extent, as well.
As you point out, and as with so many human inventions and conventions, there’s a spectrum of behavior and belief. As DEI moves beyond the narrow context Marcy mentions below, it becomes more extreme, more knee-jerk, and more quasi-religious. In its most extreme form, it’s Original Sin for caucasians, along with a heaping helping of quasi-Catholic guilt to wash it down.
You are stating that nothing should have been done because there was no problem.
Your comment really needs clarification, not just pointing at books most commenters are unlikely to read as a shortcut to avoid owning your point. Are you saying the term DEI should be flipped on Republican bigotry or that you believe equity and inclusion for all persons is a “bullshit premise”?
Because authentic DEI programs aren’t just about race. They’re about all marginalized groups too frequently excluded including LGBTQ+ and disabled persons. Let me point to FL Gov. DeSantis’ “anti-woke” agenda as a example of inclusion for the purposes of exclusion, ex. Don’t Say Gay policy.
So long as majority cis-het able-bodied whites don’t grasp this, it’s going to be difficult to discuss equity and inclusion for all.
I believe I clarified my position in my reply to PensionDan, but to put a finer point on it, DEI is a valid concept that is both spurned by MAGAts and spun into an overblown caricature of itself by those on the extreme left.
Are you characterizing the NAACP as “extreme left”? O_o
I’m with @PensionDan here. If DEI is adopted as a right-wing slur, then its original meaning–and purpose–will get washed away. This is not a trap we want to fall into.
It already is a right-wing slur. It morphed from Affirmative Action. It is just like the words liberal and woke. Liberals were for civil rights in the 1960s, the laws passed and then the backlash started. Now I am a Progressive. The term woke emanated from black churches during the CIvil Rights movement as it was derived from the Bible. The pastors would admonish we young black males not to act with violence and to listen to the elders while they were alive and can still give us advice. Both words are now perjoratives.
DEI is a real term, with very limited application.
The Rufo changed the meaning of that term to mean, “unqualified person hired bc of their identity.”
Yesterday’s hearing got awkward when Hegseth basically conceded he’s unqualified for the job. Calling him a DEI hire disrupts the way they misuse the term and forces them to take it on its own.
I call all the assistance Republicans get from the nations courts “Affirmative Action” using similar reasoning. An example is Rudy Giuliani being in contempt of court continuously. It’s Affirmative Action from judges that keeps him out of a holding cell for couple of nights to jog his memory as to where his dumb Yankees stuff is at.
Fillibuster Hegseth is the lowest form of worm*.
Mary Trump on Pete Hegseth…”If Donald Trump is the standard by which everybody else is judged, by definition nobody can be unqualified. The standards have been set so low that the bar currently resides at the molten core of the earth.”
*Sorry, worms.
Would you accept a friendly amendment, suggesting that we refer to Pete Hegseth as a “DUI hire”?
Hegseth was arrogant, smarmy with no straight answers. His mother said, “You are an abuser of women — that is the ugly truth and I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around, and uses women for his own power and ego, you are that man (and have been for years) and as your mother, it pains me and embarrasses me to say that, but it is the sad, sad truth… your abuse over the years to women (dishonesty, sleeping around, betrayal, debasing, belittling) needs to be called out.” Penelope Hegseth
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/29/us/politics/hegseth-email-text.html
FYI: In the military adultery is illegal and punishable under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) resulting in separation or discharge from the military.
Exactly! Well said!
Adultery is no longer an automatic reason for being court-martialed. It’s now circumstance dependent. Plus, the SecDef, by definition, is a civilian, not part of the uniformed military, and is not subject to the UCMJ. He should be an avatar of its standards, however. But Trump and his people have no standards.
It still violates Article 133 (Conduct unbecoming of an officer) and Article 134 (General article). If any coercion is involved or consent is impaired, then Article 120 applies.
As a bonus, Article 112 covers drunken behavior and Article 113 covers operation of equipment while drunk.
To EoH’s point, it also has to be prosecuted by the JAGs which is not guaranteed.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/1/15/2297046/-Marcy-Wheeler-Identifies-the-GOP-Coffin
Just trying to get this proliferated a bit more. It’s absolutely brilliant. Thanks again, Marcy.
Already #2 on the rec list.
And now Jen Rubin chimes in, on her new post-WaPo blog, “The Greatest DEI Disaster Ever”:
https://substack.com/home/post/p-154867647
And the dKos diary is now at the top of the rec list, beating out Dworkin’s piece about Hegseth!
(not sure if you’re letting substack links stand here, Rayne. If not, the comment alone is enough.)
Brilliant! Now that you mention it that way; every one of Trump’s cabinet nominees are “DEI Hires”!
Once I LIKE BEER was confirmed, the bar for any republican was lowered to nanometers. There is no universe where they reject any of the rest. Gaetz was sacrificed because everyone in Congress literally despises him. Pete H. has no such enemies. They have said for decades they want to destroy the federal government and here is their chance with all three branches of the government under their control and an Imperial President.
[Welcome back to emptywheel. SECOND REQUEST: Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You attempted to publish this comment as “leftyodets” triggering auto-moderation; it has been edited to reflect your established username. Please check your browser’s cache and autofill; future comments may not publish if username does not match. /~Rayne]
At least the Roman Senate was spared the indignity of confirming Caligula’s horse.
True, and that means no one threatened to primary the Roman senators if they didn’t vote to confirm.
I’m just wondering which of these highly-unqualified upcoming Trump-loyalist hires is going to drop the ball first. It’s just a question of time. Not least a personally vulnerable Secretary of Defense with full-on Russian military aggression now unleashed on the world. That cookie is surely going to crumble.
Every voter for, including Ernst, must own this.
Agreed.
I expect the turnover in Trump’s cabinet to be higher than during his first term, especially during the election years of 2026 and 2028 as the billionaire financial backers and their House & Senate Republicans scramble to remain the majority in both legislative bodies.
As for Putin and MBS learning more US secrets from Trump et al, Trump likely gave them all of the US secrets during his first term.
The USG generates new secrets every day. It’s been four years since Trump was president.
I thought the incoming president is updated with virtually all the information given to the existing president. Is that no longer the case?
This is an obvious reply, but my guess is “all of them, Katie”. The ball dropping will put synchronized swimmers to shame.
Benjamin Wittes calls it “The Cult of Unqualified Authenticity”.
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-situation–the-cult-of-unqualified-authenticity
Wittes buys into Trump’s propaganda, though, when he writes, “Hegseth denied as “anonymous smears” any suggestion that he had shown up drunk for work or engaged in sexual misconduct.”
Hegseth was more careful than that, His use of “anonymous smears” is non-responsive. It’s not yes or no, true or false. It’s a non-denial denial. It has the appearance of a denial without the legal liability of one.
Wittes’s comment that GOP Senators still need a fig leaf to cover their approval of an obviously unqualified man to be SecDef, and their likely future approvals of equally unqualified nominees, is also flawed. All they need is Donald Trump and his passel of billionaire intimidators.
“Hegseth was more careful than that, His use of “anonymous smears” is non-responsive. It’s not yes or no, true or false. It’s a non-denial denial. It has the appearance of a denial without the legal liability of one.”
Wittes seems to understand this, based on his Lawfare Live discussion with Anna Bower following the hearing.
Pity he didn’t write his column that way.
Markwayne Mullin excuses Hegseth’s drinking by asking whether any of the senators knew one of their colleagues was drunk during a late night vote and if so, why didn’t they ask them to resign. Glad he has such high standards for public service. Do you think the Dems just assumed they would be given another round of questioning where they could ask questions about the depth of his knowledge of the world? Many Republicans seem to be under the impression it doesn’t really matter that Hegseth has no experience as other people will really be doing that job. Who would that be? Do we have any idea? How do we breakthrough to a public that buys into Hollywood movies and thinks if you just kill enough “bad” people, the “good” people will live happily ever after? Israel is trying that and Hamas is already reconstructing.
“
No doubt, many Senators suffer from toxic masculinity, Markwayne Mulllin included, and have suffered from addictions to womanizing and alcohol. But those aren’t the only reasons the majority of them would be unqualified to serve as SecDef.
This is an excellent post from EW. It put into words what I was thinking and feeling about yesterday’s Hegseth hearing.
Masha Gessen is being proven correct, and the Trump goons are consolidating power.
The Bondi hearing today is exactly what you would expect it to be.
This is all part of the performative, professional-wrestling level show that Trump is producing. Hegseth may be unspectacularly qualified, but hey . . . he looks the part. I mean, look at those biceps!
Tim Sheehy actually asked him how many pushups he can do, which tells you everything you need to know.
I’ll bet RFK Jr. can do more pushups than Hegseth. That reminds me, would Hegseth do away with the vaccine requirements for military?
No doubt. He wasn’t to bring back the people who were drummed out for not complying with Vaccine orders and give them back pay.
…but Pete can do more beer curls.
The Crossfit Caucus
They should get a caucus room lined with mirrors. 360 degrees.
In Trumpworld picking unqualified people is known as “disruption.” See Mehdi Hasan’s interview with Trump puppet Adolfo Franco. Caution: Do not watch within 3 hours of eating.
When I was a kid, I spent a few summers rural Oregon. Pretty bucolic, except for this one distant cousin who, as a kid back then, did stuff like try to mow tree stumps with a gas powered lawn mower, kind of hatchet away with the mower blades at it. The youngster, again my somewhat distant relative, once decided to dispatch a hornets nest with a firecracker. The dude’s now a GOP House Member (not that I follow her and/or him). Disruption was their prime M.O. as a grade school child. Makes sense.
What was that Brit series, 7 and up? or something?
Sidenote: Not that people can’t change.
Sometime last year I attended a town hall meeting with (who I believe is )that guy. He managed to — errrr — “misstate” the language of the immigration legislation that was being considered. In this case is was by selectively not stating one of the key considerations.
Yes it was 7 Up, (May 1964)
The 9th set of documentaries in the series, 63 Up was broadcast June 2019
Micheal Apted who directed the sequence from 1970 to 2019, died aged 79, in 2021. So who knows whether there will be a 70 Up in 2026.
I rather hope there will be.
I thought Ms. Duckworth’s questions were fairly effective. She should have tried some other basic questions that he’d probably fail. Like “who is Chesty Puller?”
Or demonstrate an even basic understanding of the Russian bounty program for killing US soldiers.
I notice that the mantra about the 2020 election is to say that
“Joe Biden is the President” but none of the Senators ask the nominees “Why do you think so?”, which would force the admission that Joe won.
Off Topic – is anyone else as alarmed about the suggestions being floated that Musk would buy TicTok? More consolidation of control over means by which so many get (mis/dis)information. I admit I did not see this one coming – it is scary as f*** – how do we fight back against all of this propaganda?
Don’t go off topic when there is a still-active open thread.
No replies to this, folks, stay on topic. Hegseth’s nomination is extremely problematic and the Senate will likely vote tomorrow. Contact your senators no matter their party affiliation and protest his nomination. Congressional switchboard: (202) 224-3121
Nice update and excellent map. That sort of thing should have been in Hegseth’s briefing papers. That it seemingly wasn’t suggests his handlers opted for phrasing and filibustering, not factual preparation.
An obvious thing that jumps out from your graphic is how high a percentage of the world’s shipping must transit the narrow straits and seas adjacent to ASEAN countries. That’s one helluva fulcrum through which to lever power. And that’s before you get to the exceptionally valuable resources that could be extracted from those countries and their exclusive economic zones. It’s a part of the world an American SecDef should know well.
The crushing irony of opposition to MAGA is that one is left defending institutions, the DOD, the FBI, the State Department, and on and on and on.
Where is the irony? Denigration of institutions and experts in any field, along with reflexive contrarianism, are among the few consistent tenets of MAGA ideology (well, such that it exists beyond being a Donald Trump cult of personality). One result is that if there is an “establishment” consensus about something, the MAGA faithful say it must be wrong, evidence be damned. Another result is that they love ignorant assholes like Pete Hegseth.
Not really. You can support and criticize an institution without trying to tear it down. MAGAts want to tear them down.
I agree with the overall tenor of the piece and thoroughly agree that Hegseth is woefully unqualified.
However, I would note that this description of DEI accepts right-wing definitions: “the quintessential DEI hire, someone hired for his culture and identity rather than his qualifications.”
I would correct this by noting that real DEI policies seek to correct the lack of cultural and identity diversity while hiring qualified persons who might not be considered due to existing structural inequality.
Equating DEI to simply hiring based on race and ignoring qualifications is falling into the right-wing trap.
The point is turning the right-wing’s own Rufo-generated definition on themselves. It’s what they mean by DEI so they can own it like a flaming tire around their necks.
From the C-Span link Marcy provides at the top:
REED questions HEGSETH:
[I’ll have more when this gets out of the pokey]
Ha ha. Womanizer, drinker and dissolute, Pete Hegseth, plays to the Sunday school crowd by trying not to explain an epithet he would have used a thousand times. Ironically, his definition abundantly confirms Sen. Reed’s concern: Hegseth puts his own priorities above the rule of law, leadership, good discipline, and morale.
Anna Bower was confused by this exchange when she was live-posting the Hearing,
so she researched a bit afterwards:
https://bsky.app/profile/annabower.bsky.social/post/3lfq2vra24k2a
January 14, 2025 at 3:15 PM
From the screenshot, Hegseth book: “War on Warriors”:
That sounds like the OPPOSITE of “discipline and respect for lawful authority?”
Slotkin [who was really good in her first Senate Hearing!] brought this JAG officer question up in relation to respect for the Uniform Code of Military Justice:
REED begins his questions with:
REED then says that current officers are receiving threatening emails, and quotes:
Reed then asks: Mr. Hegseth, are you aware of these emails being sent to officers?
HEGSETH: [Afghanistan accountability blahblahblah]
AND after being asked a SECOND time:
HEGSETH: Certainly, I’m not aware of that.
That’s not one of my efforts, BUT
[Afghanistan accountability blahblahblah […]]
After White Guy DEI finishes with [Afghanistan accountability blahblahblah]
Some excerpts from Angus KING’s questioning:
Note to PETE: We were NOT attacked by seven hundred people on 9-11.
According to Wikipedia, HEGSETH was at Guantanamo during 2004-2005.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Hegseth
Marcy wrote this about that time period:
DOD’s Empty Vessel for Torture Authorization
https://www.emptywheel.net/2010/03/21/dods-moving-target-for-torture-authorization/
March 21, 2010
And then, in 2016, Marcy wrote:
False Reassurances: On Pixie Dusted Executive Orders, Appendix M, and Proxy Detention and Torture
https://www.emptywheel.net/2016/11/11/false-reassurances-pixie-dusted-executive-orders-appendix-m-proxy-detention-torture/
November 11, 2016
There’s a comment in the pokey that quotes Marcy in 2016:
Thinking of BRADBURY again…uggg!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_G._Bradbury
TRUMP has nominated BRADBURY again for Dept. of Transportation.
So, I’ll stop now.
Not quite… one other thing about BRADBURY:
He IS a Clarence [INSURRECTIONIST SPOUSE] THOMAS clerk…one of the first.
We continue to pay a very high price for Bush v Gore
and the resulting DEI presidency of Dubya…
including “Shock and Awe” and people like HEGSETH.
The ROBERTS COURTesan Majority Faction and Bush v. Gore
1991 THOMAS [GHWBush]
– 2000 voted in 5-4 majority of BvG
– 2013 THOMAS cites BvG in a footnote in solo dissent
2000 SCOTUS: Bush v. Gore [BvG]
2005 ROBERTS [GWBush]
– 2000 worked for Bush on BvG
2006 ALITO [GWBush]
– 1990 3rd Circuit [GHWBush]
2017 GORSUCH [Trump]
– 2005 GWBush DOJ
– 2006 10th Circuit [GWBush]
2018 KAVENAUGH [Trump]
– 2000 worked for Bush on BvG
– 2001 GWBush Admin
– 2003 DC Circuit [GWBush]
2020 BARRETT [Trump]
– 1997 clerked for Silberman, DC Circuit
– 1998 clerked for Scalia, SCOTUS
– 2000 worked for Bush on BvG
– 2017 7th Circuit [Trump]