Kash Patel’s Biggest Obstacle Could Be His Own Enemies List

Kash Patel, Donald Trump’s pick to take over the FBI, has put together an enemies list composed of members of the so-called “deep state.” But he may have already ruined his own plans to prosecute any of those people.

Paul Rosenzweig, the former deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush, thinks that Patel has doomed his revenge plot by openly discussing it, he wrote in The Bulwark Friday.

Rosenzweig explains that if accused criminals can prove that their prosecution is vindictive, they have grounds to rebut the charges. Usually, that’s very hard for defendants to prove, but Patel’s many interviews and the long enemies list in his book Government Gangsters provide that proof.

“If Kash Patel becomes director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as President Trump has suggested he should, he will be the poster child of vindictiveness—and his infamous public declarations of retribution may lead to the dismissal of any politically motivated prosecutions he initiates against his enemies list of ‘Deep State’ opponents,” Rosenzweig writes.

Even if Patel has actual credible evidence against any of the people on that list, he has preemptively hurt those efforts, according to Rosenzweig.

“A defendant can still succeed if he or she can present direct evidence showing that the prosecution was intended as retribution, notwithstanding the fact that actual crimes may have occurred,” the ex-Bush administration official writes.

Patel has already demonstrated a willingness to go after his own critics, threatening legal action against Olivia Troye, his former colleague from the first Trump administration, after she criticized him during an appearance on MSNBC. Democratic and Republican senators alike reportedly aren’t in favor of his nomination, preferring that current FBI Director Christopher Wray serve out the rest of his 10-year term. If Patel has actually messed up Trump’s chances to take revenge against enemies, the MAGA loyalist might soon lose the support of the president-elect too.

Elon Musk was behind a pro–Donald Trump Super PAC that falsely claimed the president-elect’s position on abortion aligned with the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s.

Politico reported Thursday that the world’s richest man was the only funder behind RBG PAC, giving the group $20.5 million to spend on ads claiming that Ginsburg was of “one mind” with Trump on the issue of abortion. The PAC’s website even displayed photos of Trump and the justice, saying that “great minds think alike.”

Ginsburg’s family vehemently opposed the ads. In October, her granddaughter Claudia Spera said in a statement that using the late justice’s name to “support Donald Trump’s re-election campaign, and specifically to suggest that she would approve of his position on abortion, is nothing short of appalling.”

Musk’s donation is a small fraction of the more than $250 million he spent on the 2024 presidential election for Trump’s candidacy but among the most secretive of the tech CEO’s political expenditures. He donated the $20.5 million on October 24, which was not disclosed until Thursday in a Federal Election Commission filing, conveniently a month after Election Day.

The RBG scheme isn’t Musk’s only deceptive political action during the campaign. The billionaire, through his larger America PAC, spent money on ads that touted Vice President Kamala Harris’s support for Israel, aimed at pro-Palestine Arab and Muslim voters in Michigan, while also funding ads attacking her as supporting anti-Israel policies, which were aimed at Jewish voters in Pennsylvania.

Musk brazenly gave away daily $1 million “lottery” prizes to voters in battleground states in the weeks leading up to the election and successfully avoided any legal consequences for it. But all of this is his known spending. He may have spent much more on right-wing dark money groups and in downballot races, which could remain hidden to the public. And thanks to America’s easily exploitable campaign finance laws, it’s all perfectly legal.

As Donald Trump drilled down in support of his defense secretary nominee, Pete Hegseth, his MAGA acolytes fell in line—but some are pushing a little too hard on the throttle to illustrate their deference to the president-elect’s choices.

During an interview Friday on Real America’s Voice’s Charlie Kirk Show, while blowing off the rape allegations plaguing Hegseth’s nomination process, Texas Representative Chip Roy practically admitted to his own sexual assault scandal.

“I think Pete Hegseth was an exceptional pick,” Roy said of the former Fox News anchor, who has been decried as “inordinately unqualified” for the top Pentagon position by former Army National Guard officials.

“He’s under fire from squishy senators who’ve been against everything we want to do,” Roy continued. “So I hope that Pete holds the line all the way through. And we should all defend him.

“Look, we’ve all had some indiscretions in our past and things like that,” Roy added, seemingly referring to Hegseth’s situation. “Every human has. But good grief, Pete Hegseth—you know, he has the support of so many people. And he represents somebody who would take on the defense establishment.”

Hegseth, a 44-year-old former infantry officer, has been under fire since Trump tapped him to lead the Pentagon, primarily over a shocking 2017 police report that revealed the Army veteran was accused of raping an attendee at a Republican women’s conference in Monterey, California. Hegseth has also admitted to several other scandals, including five affairs that he had during his first marriage. Some of Hegseth’s former Fox colleagues have accused him of being “handsy” and groping them. Nearly a dozen of his former co-workers have spoken to various media outlets to warn that his drinking habits are “concerning,” and some noted that they had smelled alcohol on Hegseth as recently as last month.

Republicans at the forefront of the Senate confirmation process have bristled at Hegseth’s nomination, with some taking particular note of the 44-year-old’s drinking problem. In an interview with CNN earlier this week, Republican Senator Kevin Cramer specified that Hegseth needed to stay away from the bottle and offer a promise of sobriety before taking the reins of the country’s military intelligence.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Donald Trump’s pick to run the Department of Health and Human Services, is already taking applications for people to work for him—and they include some bizarre questions. 

Puck News reported Friday that the anti-vaccine activist has a form on his “Make America Healthy Again” website where applicants can respond to a series of questions by selecting some odd pre-written responses.

Job hunters have to fill out a 90-minute questionnaire that recommends one be “well rested, have recently eaten, and will not be disturbed” before beginning. The questions themselves seem to concern personality traits, with applicants having to choose responses such as “Modesty doesn’t become me,” “I get upset when people don’t notice how I look when I go out in public,” and “I can usually talk my way out of anything.”

Kennedy has some unusual views, including believing that the Covid-19 pandemic was planned, AIDS isn’t caused by HIV,  and that WiFi causes cancer, so it’s not a big surprise that he would have an unusual application process. However, at this point, Kennedy has not even begun his Senate confirmation hearings, let alone been sworn into Trump’s Cabinet, so these applications don’t meet federal hiring standards and laws.

If Kennedy is confirmed, it will be interesting to see if his application process faces legal challenges, especially since many federal agencies are unionized. Trump has pledged to purge the civil service of his opponents and is putting Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy in charge of “government efficiency,” which effectively means massive cuts to government programs and the firing of civil servants in large numbers. 

Kennedy’s strange hiring standards may not initially hold up, but if Trump and his new friends get their way on overhauling the civil service, these kinds of unusual applications could become the norm in the federal bureaucracy, to the detriment of the government actually functioning well. 

Ex–Fox 5 New York host and Trumpian acolyte Greg Kelly uncharacteristically dropped the hammer on one of the president-elect’s Cabinet picks, warning that his former network colleague—defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth—has “serious baggage” that makes him “blackmailable.”

“I was once accused of sexual assault, falsely,” Kelly said on Newsmax, his current home network, Wednesday. “I would never in a billion years pay that person a dime. That doesn’t sound like a fighter. That sounds like somebody who’s blackmailable. And I’m not comfortable with that individual being the secretary of defense.”

Kelly, the son of New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, was accused of raping and impregnating a woman in 2011 before the charges were dropped a year later by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.

Hegseth, meanwhile, has been under fire since Donald Trump tapped him to lead the Pentagon, primarily over a shocking 2017 police report that revealed the Army veteran was accused of raping an attendee at a Republican women’s conference in Monterey, California. Hegseth has also admitted to several other scandals, including five affairs that he had during his first marriage. Some of Hegseth’s former Fox colleagues have accused him of being “handsy” and groping them. Nearly a dozen of his former co-workers have spoken to various media outlets to warn that his drinking habits are “concerning,” and some noted that they had smelled alcohol on Hegseth as recently as last month.

Republicans at the forefront of the Senate confirmation process have also taken note of Hegseth’s drinking problem. In an interview with CNN earlier this week, Republican Senator Kevin Cramer specified that Hegseth needed to stay away from the bottle and offer a promise of sobriety before taking the reins of the country’s military intelligence.

Even Hegseth’s own mother couldn’t defend the white nationalist-connected conservative, accusing her son in a scathing 2018 email following his separation from his second wife of “using women for his own power.” (Penelope Hegseth has since publicly changed her tune—on Wednesday morning, she appeared on Fox News to beg people to support her son for defense secretary.)

But beyond the unsavory misconduct, Kelly’s gripe with Hegseth is that he’s an unqualified candidate who simply hasn’t demonstrated enough loyalty to Trump to warrant such a title.

“Pete Hegseth is no Matt Gaetz,” Kelly said, referring to the legally embattled ex-congressman who was practically forced to drop his attorney general nomination last month over sex trafficking allegations. “He hasn’t done nearly enough for MAGA to warrant the Department of Defense job. And he’s got serious baggage. Serious baggage. It happens sometimes. Not every pick is perfect.”

Trump, meanwhile, has drilled down on his endorsement of the former Fox host.

“Pete Hegseth is doing very well. His support is strong and deep, much more so than the Fake News would have you believe,” Trump wrote on Truth Social Friday morning. “He was a great student—Princeton/Harvard educated—with a Military state of mind. He will be a fantastic, high energy, Secretary of Defense Defense, one who leads with charisma and skill. Pete is a WINNER, and there is nothing that can be done to change that!!!”

Fox News’s “Patriot of the Year” loves the United States so much that he wants to completely reshape it—starting with the country’s elections.

Speaking to a crowd he referred to as “friends” during the network’s sixth annual Fox Nation Patriot Awards Thursday night, President-elect Donald Trump signaled his full intentions to enact sweeping changes to the process by which the nation chooses its leaders.

“We’re going to do things that have been really needed for a long time. No, we are going to look at elections,” Trump said.

“We want to have paper ballots, one-day voting, voter ID, and proof of citizenship, a little thing like proof of citizen—” Trump continued before trailing off on a rant about voting laws in California, which, like many other states around the country, doesn’t require voters to show photo ID at the booth. Instead, the Golden State asks its denizens to register to vote with either their Social Security number, their driver license number, or their California ID number.

Trump’s late-night ode to election fraud (despite having been relatively mum on the issue since winning his race in November) is a neon-emblazoned sign that his administration has no intention of dropping his 2020 voter fraud conspiracy—even if actual voter fraud is, statistically, a relative nonissue in U.S. elections.

A statewide audit out of Georgia, the epicenter of Trump’s baseless theory, revealed in September that just 20 noncitizens out of 8.2 million residents existed on the state’s voter roll. Out of those 20, only nine participated in elections years ago, before ID was required as a part of the voter verification process. The other 11 individuals were registered but never actually voted, according to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.

Critics argue that restrictions on the front end of the electoral process—such as one-day voting and requiring day-of voter ID—would minimize voter turnout and limit the democracy’s ability to represent its constituents. This would especially be true in high-density areas like the nation’s biggest cities, where those stipulations would significantly drain resources (i.e., the number of volunteers required) and require more time to process, potentially leading to delays.

Trump’s continued focus on the nativist nonissue belies the fact that it is, of course, already illegal and impossible for noncitizens to vote in U.S. elections, including in Georgia, where the individuals who fell through the cracks in the system accounted for just 0.00024390243902439 percent of the state’s voting population.

Meanwhile, Trump has said nothing about campaign finance reform, an electoral issue that has, over the last few decades, increasingly placed politicians in the pockets of major corporations and billionaire donors. Project 2025—which Trump briefly disavowed before his allies practically admitted postelection that it was the blueprint all along—has actually promoted the opposite, advocating that the incoming Trump administration loosen campaign finance laws, raise limits on campaign contributions, and oppose Federal Election Commission reforms that could help the agency enforce the laws regarding the country’s elections.

The Heritage Foundation, the far-right think tank behind Project 2025, has also urged Trump—a man who used his own campaign funds to foot his legal fees—to appoint FEC commissioners who won’t enforce the law.

Russian state media thinks Tucker Carlson might be acting as a back channel between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

During a Thursday broadcast of the state-controlled channel Solovyov Live, host Vladimir Solovyov spoke to his guest, U.S. expert Malek Dudakov, and referred to Carlson’s recent Moscow interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, which was posted that same day on X.

“What is important here is that the man who came to talk to Lavrov spent the last six months shoulder-to-shoulder with Trump. Obviously, he didn’t just come to conduct an interview. He has something to say. Apparently, he has a message that he is bringing,” Solovyov said.

Dudakov agreed, saying, “Yes, we currently see quite a few similar emissaries.”

“It seems Viktor Orbán is again planning to meet with Trump, and after that, he may come to Russia once again. There are people who are willing to pass messages back and forth, indirectly,” Dudakov continued.

Carlson’s interview was very sycophantic toward Trump and Putin, lending some credibility to Dudakov’s theory. Six months ago, Carlson interviewed Putin himself, and was so deferential to the Russian leader that Putin even mocked him afterward. Still, Carlson is liked enough by the Russian government that his show has aired on Russian TV channels, although his producer claims that was without permission.

Russian strategy has focused on using fear of nuclear war against the U.S. over its support of Ukraine, and Carlson’s interview with Lavrov was very much in line with that goal, according to The Daily Beast.

“We’re on the brink of global war. Why isn’t anyone talking about it?” Carlson said during the episode’s introduction. The rest of the interview was framed around how the U.S. could avert doomsday by ceasing to back Ukraine.

Trump promised during his presidential campaign to end the war in Ukraine quickly, a possibility that Putin has seemingly dismissed. But if Carlson, as well as pro-Putin leaders such as Orbán, are carrying messages from Russia to the president-elect, negotiations related to the war could be in the pipeline. They will likely favor Putin and Russia over Ukraine, though.

New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is on the rise.

The progressive breakout began notifying her colleagues Thursday that she intends to run for ranking member on the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, the key investigative arm of the legislature and one of the most influential positions in the House.

At least three lawmakers who had discussions with Ocasio-Cortez confirmed the bid, reported NBC News. The 35-year-old currently serves as the vice ranking member on the committee.

Her race, which pits her against a senior member of the committee—Virginia Representative Gerry Connolly—will serve as a measure of Democratic priorities in the wake of a brutal November election, as the caucus weighs whether to continue to reward and back its longtime leaders or lean into its up-and-coming changemakers.

Fellow progressives are already endorsing her for the job. In an interview with NBC News, Representative Ro Khanna described Ocasio-Cortez as “very collaborative” and someone who “helps lift up all members.”

“She has been so passionate about the work of this committee for two years as vice chair, and we need progressives moving into leadership in our Congress and country to enact a working-class agenda,” Khanna told the network. “I’m all in for her.”

The top spot became an open race after Maryland Representative Jamie Raskin challenged New York Representative Jerry Nadler to become the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. In a letter to his colleagues announcing his candidacy, Raskin warned that the next four years under Donald Trump would be “the fight of our lives,” pointing to the incoming Republican trifecta as well as a “complicit Supreme Court waiting in the wings” and a “dominant media propaganda system parroting all the lies.

“This is where we will wage our front-line defense of the freedoms and rights of the people, the integrity of the Department of Justice and the FBI, and the security of our most precious birthright possessions: the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the rule of law, and democracy itself,” Raskin wrote, referring to the House Judiciary Committee.

On Wednesday, Nadler bowed out of the race, caving to internal party pressures that demanded a younger face for the coveted position. His exit came with a full endorsement of Raskin, 61, who will effectively waltz into the position in a race with no other challengers.

Pete Hegseth’s lawyer is resorting to threats to help his client’s nomination to secretary of defense.

Tim Parlatore told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins Thursday night that the sexual misconduct allegations against the former Fox & Friends Weekend host were “extortion,” in his opinion.

“Quite frankly, with the violation of the [confidential settlement] agreement, if he is not confirmed as the secretary of defense, we may still bring a civil extortion claim against her,” Parlatore said.

Parlatore said that the agreement between Hegseth and his accuser was not a nondisclosure agreement but a confidential settlement between the two parties, and claimed that the accuser and one of her friends had violated it. The lawyer added that Hegseth’s accuser was free to speak publicly but faced the risk of a defamation lawsuit.

This flies in the face of what Republican senators have been saying in recent days to defend Hegseth. Senators Lindsey Graham and Rick Scott each attacked the credibility of Hegseth’s accuser for remaining anonymous and not coming forward. Now it appears that she will be hit with a defamation lawsuit and branded as an extortionist if she starts speaking publicly.

Kevin Roberts, president of the powerful Heritage Foundation and architect of the Project 2025 manifesto, is throwing his organization’s heft (and cash) behind Donald Trump’s nominee. However, the president-elect is reportedly souring on Hegseth, and last month, his team began compiling a list of alternative candidates for secretary of defense. With Hegseth’s nomination reportedly hanging on by a thread, Trump might have to deal with the same embarrassment he faced with Matt Gaetz.

The crypto industry is about to have another friend inside the White House.

In a post on Truth Social, Donald Trump announced the appointment of Paypal COO David Sacks to a new position with an influential-sounding title: “White House A.I. & Crypto Czar.”

“In this important role, David will guide policy for the Administration in Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency, two areas critical to the future of American competitiveness,” Trump wrote late Thursday. “David will focus on making America the clear global leader in both areas. He will safeguard Free Speech online, and steer us away from Big Tech bias and censorship. He will work on a legal framework so the Crypto industry has the clarity it has been asking for, and can thrive in the U.S. David will also lead the Presidential Council of Advisors for Science and Technology.”

Trump continued to pile on the praise for his prominent Silicon Valley backer in a follow-up post, promising that the tech executive has the “knowledge, business experience, intelligence, and pragmatism to MAKE AMERICA GREAT in these two critical technologies.”

The new role—and his appointment of a longtime tech billionaire to initiate it—underscores Trump’s growing intent to leverage D.C. to the better benefit of Silicon Valley. A member of the “Paypal Mafia,” Sacks will be the latest associate of Peter Thiel to enter the echelons of the executive branch, following fellow Paypal co-founder Elon Musk and Vice President–elect JD Vance, who has had a long work history with the anti-tax billionaire. Trump has also tapped Thiel’s colleagues to run critical agencies: Jared Isaacman, who financed Musk’s SpaceX initiative, was nominated to run NASA earlier this week.

Sacks is a part of a contingent of tech bros, including Musk and Thiel, who have leveraged their immense wealth, power, and influence to unite conservatives and former leftists behind a cynical and conspiratorial reactionary vision against liberalism. As The New Republic’s Jacob Silverman noted in 2022, Sacks has spent years “quietly becoming the leading practitioner of a new right-wing sensibility that has emerged in the political realignments provoked by Trumpism and the pandemic.

“On foreign policy, it offers a blend of isolationism, Trumpist nationalism, suspicion of the deep state, and the anti-empire realism of John Mearsheimer,” Silverman wrote. “Domestically, the vision is more muddled, a series of angry poses, a politics of pique, much of it playing out on Twitter, Callin, YouTube, Rumble, Substack, and other online media, especially among people who may have once counted themselves on the left but now can’t countenance the sight of homeless encampments.”

But despite his political affinity for Trump’s politics, Sacks hasn’t always been on the president-elect’s side. In the immediate wake of January 6, the longtime Republican said on his podcast, All-In, that Trump was “clearly” responsible for the insurrection because “he is the one who put forth this theory that the election was stolen and was constantly repeating it for the last two months” and had “disqualified himself from being a candidate at a national level.”

“If you want to see this mob as a gun, I think he loaded the gun,” Sacks said at the time. “He pointed it in a certain direction, but did he tell them to storm the Capitol? No, not specifically. I think therefore it’d be a very hard case to prosecute, but I think, you know, prosecuting him in a court of law is sort of unnecessary and redundant. I mean, I think that in the eyes of the public, politically, he is—I think most see that he’s culpable.”