The Lawfare Podcast: President-elect Trump's National Security Appointments

Original Air Date: (Archive from November 16, 2024; rebroadcast December 13, 2025)
Panel: Benjamin Wittes (host), Scott R. Anderson, Quinta Jurecik, Alan Rosenstein, Mary McCord

Overview

This episode, curated from the Lawfare Podcast archives, features an in-depth panel discussion about then-President-elect Donald Trump's 2024 national security cabinet appointments. The panel dissects the qualifications and implications of headline-grabbing nominees—such as Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense, Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence, and Matt Gaetz as Attorney General—analyzing their potential impact on U.S. policy, the stability of institutions, and the possibility of circumventing Senate confirmation through recess appointments.

Tone: Deeply concerned, analytical, and at times incredulous, the panel scrutinizes the strategic (or lack thereof) thinking behind the choices and what it signals about Trump's intended governance style.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Patterns and Buckets in Trump’s Appointments

[04:47] - [10:24]

• Scott R. Anderson categorizes the cabinet picks into:
  • Normie Republicans: Recognizable, traditional picks (e.g., Marco Rubio for State).
  • Trump Loyalists Achieving Promotion: Previously mid-tier, now elevated by loyalty (e.g., Trump's defense attorneys).
  • Wild Cards/Eccentrics: Unexpected, unvetted, or controversial individuals (e.g., Matt Gaetz for Attorney General, Pete Hegseth for Defense).

Quote:

"There's really not a rush... Instead, we're seeing this really, really rapid series of people thrown out of all sorts of ranks, all sorts of positions. In a way that strikes me as a little unusual."
— Scott R. Anderson [04:52]

2. Analysis of ‘Normie’ Picks: Rubio, Kristi Noem, and Others

[11:19] - [18:48]

• Marco Rubio: Seen as qualified, reassuring to the GOP mainstream.
• Kristi Noem: Her lack of seriousness and “extremism” raises doubts about her ability to run the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) independently.
• The panel highlights the “mixed mission” and inbuilt challenges of DHS, making strong, principled leadership even more crucial.

Quote:

"Particularly with respect to Senator Rubio, that is something that wouldn't be alarming to people... has served on relevant committees... I would put that as maybe one of the most normal announcements of all."
— Mary McCord [11:57]

Memorable line:

“Janet Napolitano never killed a dog.”
— Benjamin Wittes [13:21], quipping on Noem’s controversial past

3. Concerns Over Unusual or Troubling Picks

[18:48] - [27:06]

Pete Hegseth (Secretary of Defense)

• Minimal relevant experience; known as a Fox News host with controversial stances and “affinity for war criminals.”
• Concerns about personal baggage and lack of seriousness for such a vital role.

Quote:

"A sycophantic Fox News host who likes war criminals is going to run the Department of Defense... This is the Secretary of Defense we're talking about, not municipal dog catcher."
— Alan Rosenstein [19:57]

John Ratcliffe (CIA Director)

• Has relevant prior experience, but record of partisan loyalty and attempts to bury whistleblower reports.

Tulsi Gabbard (Director of National Intelligence)

• Described as a "crank Trumpist" with fringe foreign policy views; major shift from conventional choices.
• Raises alarm about US intelligence credibility internationally and risk of intelligence misuse.

4. Control, Retaliation, and Institutional Damage

[27:06] - [31:56]

• McCord: Trump’s appointments at DOJ and Intelligence suggest an intent to place loyalists in agencies that have previously checked his power.
• Supreme Court's immunity decision may embolden excessive use of executive power.

Quote:

"...these two positions, I think were exactly what you just said. His way of saying, I am capturing these with the people I think are going to be the most loyal to me, the most willing to make sure that I don't have to worry about these two..."
— Mary McCord [28:50]

5. The Impact on DOJ and National Security Agencies

[39:25] - [46:10]

• Matt Gaetz (Attorney General): The panel is aghast, citing lack of seriousness, professionalism, and potential lasting harm.
• Agency morale: The risk of widespread departures and institutional humiliation is high.
• Cultural damage: Emphasis on how DOJ’s core values and esprit de corps could be destroyed.

Quote:

"I can imagine few more demoralizing things than to have a clown like Matt Gaetz... running the Department of Justice... It is a level of inconceivable that I don't think can be overstated."
— Alan Rosenstein [39:25]

6. International Repercussions and Intelligence Partnerships

[47:26] - [51:01]

• Allies, especially the Five Eyes partners, may lose trust in U.S. intelligence sharing if unpredictables or hardline loyalists lead key agencies.
• Unpredictability (Gabbard) poses greater risk than blind loyalty, given the potential for sudden, erratic actions.

Quote:

"When you put somebody mercurial and unpredictable in that position, that is a big problem... that's so bizarre, that's why they put her [Gabbard]..."
— Scott R. Anderson [51:01]

7. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Nomination (HHS) and Broader Competence Concerns

[55:41] - [59:22]

• Appointing known vaccine skeptic RFK Jr. to Health and Human Services seen as directly life-threatening and a stark rejection of science and expertise.
• The pattern is described as evidence of a lack of grand strategy—Trump simply choosing loyalists or ideological fellow travelers, regardless of competence.

Quote:

"Putting an anti vaxxer in charge of the Department of Health and Human Services is going to kill a great deal of people."
— Quinta Jurecik [57:04]

8. Circumventing Senate Confirmation: The Recess Appointment Scheme

[61:35] - [66:34]

• Alan Rosenstein lays out in detail the constitutional mechanics and unprecedented nature of a potential attempt to install the cabinet via recess appointments—by manipulating pro forma sessions and leveraging divisions between House and Senate.
• Broad consensus that this would amount to a genuine constitutional crisis, potentially leading to court battles and chaos in governance.

Quote:

"It would be extremely dangerous because it would allow the President to recess appoint his entire Cabinet, including people like Gaetz and Gabbard... At that point we have very much gotten to the part of the map where it just says ‘there be dragons’."
— Alan Rosenstein [66:13]

9. Likelihood of the Scheme and Senate Dynamics

[67:20] - [76:05]

• Scott: The threat of recess appointments could be used to pressure hesitant Senators to confirm nominees they might otherwise reject—to avoid undermining Senate power.
• Mary: Stresses the (shaky) hope that institutional self-respect in Congress could block such extreme moves, but acknowledges doubts.
• Quinta: Draws historical parallels to the UK’s 2019 prorogation of Parliament; warns that the willingness to challenge or eviscerate congressional checks signals designs to rule as an unaccountable executive.

Quote:

"...if Trump comes into office and says both I have the power... to essentially force a recess and force my appointees through without the Senate... and I have the power to ignore... the congressional power of the purse... Those two things together really read to me as an effort to govern as an executive that is completely unchecked by the legislature..."
— Quinta Jurecik [75:12]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "There is not a strategy. There is not a brilliant plan here. It is putting people in charge who are in some way aligned with his worldview and who are in a position to do a great deal of harm." — Quinta Jurecik [03:34]

• "This is not a joke."
  — Benjamin Wittes [21:45], on Hegseth's support for war criminals

• "It is a level of inconceivable that I don't think can be overstated... Just the humiliation, the demoralization, the coarsening and the long term damage that this does." — Alan Rosenstein [39:25]

• "At that point, we have very much gotten to the part of the map where it just says ‘there be dragons’." — Alan Rosenstein [66:13]

Timestamps for Major Segments

• [04:47] — Cabinet Appointment Trends: Three Buckets
• [11:19] — Evaluating the 'Normie' Picks (Rubio, Noem)
• [18:48] — Hegseth for Defense: Qualifications, Risks, Precedents
• [27:06] — Gabbard & Gaetz: Loyalty over Competence; Institutional Fallout
• [39:25] — DOJ Cultural Impact and Staff Reaction to Gaetz
• [47:26] — Gabbard and Global Intelligence Implications
• [55:41] — Vaccine Skeptic Leading HHS? Dangers of RFK Jr.
• [61:35] — The ‘Cockamamie’ Recess Appointment Scheme Explained
• [67:20] — Senate Dynamics and Democratic Checks

Takeaways

• The nominations signal a shift from conventional appointments to overt loyalty or ideological alignment, often at the expense of competence and credibility.
• There is real concern about the ability of institutions to withstand unqualified or deeply polarizing leadership, both domestically and internationally.
• The possibility of circumventing Senate confirmation amplifies anxieties about checks and balances and the potential for a constitutional crisis.
• The consensus among the panel is that these choices are less the result of a grand strategy than of impulsivity and the pursuit of personal loyalty, with massive potential for institutional harm.