Connect with us

Daily Caller

Now that Trump is president-elect, who could serve in his administration?

Published

7 minute read

From The Center Square

By 

Former President Donald Trump has secured the White House, now raising the question: who will serve in his administration?

Trump admitted on the Joe Rogan podcast just before the election that one of his biggest mistakes in his first term was putting the wrong people around him, a critique that has been widely shared by Trump’s own supporters.

Now, Trump has another chance to stock his administration.

Trump announced Thursday that his campaign co-chair Susie Wiles would serve as White House chief of staff, a powerful, wide-ranging position where she will help form the new administration and steer its policies.

A range of Republican establishment picks are jockeying to lead the U.S. Treasury Department, State Department, Department of Defense and others, but here are a few of the highest profile potential picks to serve in Trump’s administration.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Lifelong Democrat RFK Jr. ran for president as a Democrat and then became an Independent before finally backing the Trump campaign. Trump repeatedly touted Kennedy’s endorsement, saying that Kennedy would be kept far from energy policy because of his liberal views but would be allowed to work on health issues.

Kennedy has declared a war on junk food and speaks passionately about chronic health issues and how the American food industry and the Food and Drug Administration policies have helped create the chronic disease epidemic in the U.S.

RFK is considered a likely leader in the administration, probably in a health role. RFK has recently publicly said that “entire departments” at the FDA need to go because they are failing or even doing harm.

“They’re not protecting our kids,” he told MSNBC in a recent interview. “Why do we have Fruit Loops in this country that have 18 or 19 ingredients and you go to Canada and it’s got two or three?”

Elon Musk

Musk gave Trump a full-throated endorsement and helped propel him to victory with his posts on X and his financial backing. WHile Musk is more than busy running several successful companies, Trump publicly said he would pick Musk to improve government efficiency.

Musk gained a reputation in that department when he bought Twitter, fired much of the staff, and still kept the company running. Musk expressed surprise at just how inefficient and wasteful Twitter was when he took over.

“I will create a government efficiency commission tasked with conducting a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government,” Trump said in September.

Tulsi Gabbard

Gabbard served as a Democrat in Congress but later backed Trump on the campaign trail. Gabbard is known for her foreign policy chops and military service, potentially positioning her for an ambassadorship or State Department position.

Gabbard told Fox News in September that she would be “honored” to serve in Trump’s administration. The same month, she also told a crowd at the Georgia Faith and Freedom Coalition that she could help Trump prevent WWIII and deal with the military industrial complex.

“I feel I can make the most impact in these areas of national security and foreign policy, and work to bring about the changes that President Trump talks about,” she said in her speech.

Vivek Ramaswamy

During the Republican presidential primary, billionaire and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy quickly built his popularity and reputation as an erudite speaker and younger mouthpiece for many of Trump’s ideas.

He also refrained from attacking the President-elect and called for abolishing the Department of Education. He could oversee the dismantling of that agency or be placed somewhere in the Commerce Department or elsewhere, where his business background would serve him well.

Notably, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, will now need to appoint a U.S. senator to replace Vice President-Elect J.D. Vance. Ramaswamy lives in Ohio and could make the cut.

Scott Jennings

Scott Jennings has gone viral online in recent days for his commentary on CNN where he clearly defined Trump’s victory as a coalition of working class people as the mostly liberal panelists fretted over Trump’s victory.

Several viral clips have led to preliminary calls for Jennings to serve as press secretary.

“Scott Jennings = strong candidate for White House press secretary or communications director,” Real Clear Investigations senior reporter and New York Post columnist Paul Sperry wrote on X, one of several to make the same point. “He has been excellent throughout this campaign, arguing effectively as the lone GOP voice on a hostile, biased CNN panel, while keeping his cool and class.”

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.

Sen. Marco Rubio was considered on the short list for vice president. While Trump will need the support in the Senate, Rubio could be repurposed in a position that utilizes his focus on national defense.

North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum

Burgum was also considered a vice president contender. His wealth and business background could put him on the short list for the Small Business Administration or another economic-related role in the new Trump administration.

John Ratcliffe

Former lawmaker and congressman Ratcliffe served as director of National Intelligence and is considered a potential pick to serve as attorney general.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan Ramp Up Pressure On Google Parent Company To Deal With ‘Censorship’

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Andi Shae Napier

Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan are turning their attention to Google over concerns that the tech giant is censoring users and infringing on Americans’ free speech rights.

Google’s parent company Alphabet, which also owns YouTube, appears to be the GOP’s next Big Tech target. Lawmakers seem to be turning their attention to Alphabet after Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta ended its controversial fact-checking program in favor of a Community Notes system similar to the one used by Elon Musk’s X.

Cruz recently informed reporters of his and fellow senators’ plans to protect free speech. 

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

“Stopping online censorship is a major priority for the Commerce Committee,” Cruz said, as reported by Politico. “And we are going to utilize every point of leverage we have to protect free speech online.”

Following his meeting with Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai last month, Cruz told the outlet, “Big Tech censorship was the single most important topic.”

Jordan, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sent subpoenas to Alphabet and other tech giants such as RumbleTikTok and Apple in February regarding “compliance with foreign censorship laws, regulations, judicial orders, or other government-initiated efforts” with the intent to discover how foreign governments, or the Biden administration, have limited Americans’ access to free speech.

“Throughout the previous Congress, the Committee expressed concern over YouTube’s censorship of conservatives and political speech,” Jordan wrote in a letter to Pichai in March. “To develop effective legislation, such as the possible enactment of new statutory limits on the executive branch’s ability to work with Big Tech to restrict the circulation of content and deplatform users, the Committee must first understand how and to what extent the executive branch coerced and colluded with companies and other intermediaries to censor speech.”

Jordan subpoenaed tech CEOs in 2023 as well, including Satya Nadella of Microsoft, Tim Cook of Apple and Pichai, among others.

Despite the recent action against the tech giant, the battle stretches back to President Donald Trump’s first administration. Cruz began his investigation of Google in 2019 when he questioned Karan Bhatia, the company’s Vice President for Government Affairs & Public Policy at the time, in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Cruz brought forth a presentation suggesting tech companies, including Google, were straying from free speech and leaning towards censorship.

Even during Congress’ recess, pressure on Google continues to mount as a federal court ruled Thursday that Google’s ad-tech unit violates U.S. antitrust laws and creates an illegal monopoly. This marks the second antitrust ruling against the tech giant as a different court ruled in 2024 that Google abused its dominance of the online search market.

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Daily Caller EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s Broad Ban On Risky Gain-Of-Function Research Nears Completion

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Emily Kopp

President Donald Trump could sign a sweeping executive order banning gain-of-function research — research that makes viruses more dangerous in the lab — as soon as May 6, according to a source who has worked with the National Security Council on the issue.

The executive order will take a broad strokes approach, banning research amplifying the infectivity or pathogenicity of any virulent and replicable pathogen, according to the source, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the anticipated executive action. But significant unresolved issues remain, according to the source, including whether violators will be subject to criminal penalties as bioweaponeers.

The executive order is being steered by Gerald Parker, head of the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy, which has been incorporated into the NSC. Parker did not respond to requests for comment.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

In the process of drafting the executive order, Parker has frozen out the federal agencies that have for years championed gain-of-function research and staved off regulation — chiefly Anthony Fauci’s former institute, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health.

The latest policy guidance on gain-of-function research, unveiled under the Biden administration in 2024, was previously expected to go into effect May 6. According to a March 25 letter cosigned by the American Society for Microbiology, the Association for Biosafety and Biosecurity International, and Council on Governmental Relations, organizations that conduct pathogen research have not received direction from the NIH on that guidance — suggesting the executive order would supersede the May 6 deadline.

The 2024 guidance altered the scope of experiments subject to more rigorous review, but charged researchers, universities and funding agencies like NIH with its implementation, which critics say disincentivizes reporting. Many scientists say that researchers and NIH should not be the primary entities conducting cost–benefit analyses of pandemic virus studies. 

Parker previously served as the head of the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB), a group of outside experts that advises NIH on biosecurity matters, and in that role recommended that Congress stand up a new government agency to advise on gain-of-function research. Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield has also endorsed moving gain-of-function research decision making out of the NIH to an independent commission.

“Given the well documented lapses in the NIH review process, policymakers should … remove final approval of any gain-of function research grants from NIH,” Redfield said in a February op-ed.

It remains to be seen whether the executive order will articulate carveouts for gain-of-function research without risks of harm such as research on non-replicative pseudoviruses, which can be used to study viral evolution without generating pandemic viruses.

It also remains to be seen whether the executive order will define “gain-of-function research” tightly enough to stand up to legal scrutiny should a violator be charged with a crime.

Risky research on coronaviruses funded by the NIH at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through the U.S. nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance typifies the loopholes in NIH’s existing regulatory framework, some biosecurity experts say.

Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 2023 indicated that EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak submitted a proposal to the Pentagon in 2018 called “DEFUSE” describing gain-of-function experiments on viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2 but downplayed to his intended funder the fact that many of the tests would occur in Wuhan, China.

Daszak and EcoHealth were both debarred from federal funding in January 2025 but have faced no criminal charges.

“I don’t know that criminal penalties are necessary. But we do need more sticks in biosafety as well as carrots,” said a biosecurity expert who requested anonymity to avoid retribution from his employer for weighing in on the expected policy. “For instance, biosafety should be a part of tenure review and whether you get funding for future work.”

Some experts say that it is likely that the COVID-19 crisis was a lab-generated pandemic, and that without major policy changes it might not be the last one.

“Gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens caused the COVID-19 pandemic, killing 20 million and costing $25 trillion,” said Richard Ebright, a Rutgers University microbiologist and longtime critic of high-risk virology, to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “If not stopped, gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens likely will cause future lab-generated pandemics.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X