Fox News Sunday 11-17-2024
53:08 Share

Hey there, Ryan Reynolds here. It's a new year, and you know what that means. No, not the diet. Resolutions.

A way for us all to try and do a little bit better than we did last year. And my resolution, unlike big wireless, is to not be a raging a**hole and raise the price of wireless on you every chance I get. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. $45 upfront payment required, equivalent to $15 per month. New customers on first three-month plan only. Taxes and fees extra. Speeds lower above 40 gigabytes on unlimited. See mintmobile.com for details.

I'm Shannon Bream. President-elect Trump makes waves with some out-of-the-box cabinet picks as Republicans solidify control of Congress.

Everybody feels very confident, very encouraged about the days ahead. This Republican team is united. We are on one team. A new era of Republican leadership falls into place on Capitol Hill. As Trump announces key choices for his cabinet, from secretaries of state and defense to national intelligence director, HHS, and attorney general. We're going to reduce regulation, waste, fraud, and inefficiency. We're going to clean out the corrupt, broken, and failed.

We'll get reaction from Speaker Mike Johnson, who just won the GOP nomination for a full two-year term, as Democrats determine how they can best flex their power in a new Washington. We'll talk with Delaware Senator Chris Coons, plus our Sunday panel on the Trump agenda and what it means for foreign policy and the economy. You have to start my term.

From November 5th, because the market's gone through the roof, enthusiasm's doubled. All right now on Fox News Sunday. Hello from Fox News in Washington. Here's a quick look at your headlines. Russia launched massive drone and missile attacks on Ukraine overnight, targeting energy infrastructure. President Zelensky says Ukrainian forces shot down 140 air targets, but there was damage to power and water supplies.

President Biden met one-on-one with Chinese President Xi Jinping Saturday at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit in Peru, where China has just opened a massive seaport. President Xi says he's ready to work with the incoming Trump administration.

Meanwhile, President Trump attended a UFC fight in Madison Square Garden last night, getting a rousing welcome from the crowd and joined by many of his brand new cabinet picks. House Speaker Mike Johnson was there. We'll speak to him in just a moment. And later, Senator Chris Coons joins us as well. But first, we turn to team coverage with Kevin Cork covering the final weeks of the Biden administration at the White House and Bill Mellujian reporting on President-elect Trump in West Palm Beach. That's where we begin. Hello, Bill.

Hey, Shannon, good morning to you all. President-elect Trump and his transition team here in Palm Beach have been moving at rapid speed when it comes to filling out his future administration. They made more than a dozen picks this last week alone. Some of them have bipartisan support. Others, though, are raising some eyebrows.

President-elect Trump taking a victory lap at UFC fight night at Madison Square Garden after a busy week building his second administration. His choices this past week include Marco Rubio for Secretary of State, Mike Walz for National Security Advisor, John Ratcliffe for CIA Director, Doug Burgum for Secretary of the Interior, and Kristi Noem for Homeland Security Secretary. We have four years ahead of us that Donald Trump has tapped

as the golden age of America. And he is putting effective, hardworking people into these positions. But other choices have been more controversial, including Trump's selection for Health and Human Services Secretary. Today, I nominated him for, I guess, if you like health and if you like people that live a long time, it's the most important position.

RFK Jr. We need disruption across the entire federal government. He'll be great at HHS to do that. We're talking about the potential decimation of community health centers. Trump is nominating Matt Gaetz for attorney general. That led Democrat Senator Martin Heinrich to post, quote, people voted for cheaper eggs, not whatever the F this is. But Republican senators aren't sold yet either. He's got a really steep hill to climb to get.

Lots of votes, including mine. Trump is also tapping Army veteran and former Fox News colleague Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense and former Democratic presidential candidate, now Republican, Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence. The question that we have to all ask, are these the best individuals available today?

And Trump has said he wants recess appointments to potentially be on the table to push his picks through without Senate confirmation if necessary. Now, incoming GOP Senate Majority Leader John Thune tells Fox News that he's looking at every single option, including those controversial recess appointments. They will all be on the table to potentially give Trump the people he wants, whatever way it comes down to it.

Shannon, we'll send it back to you. All right. We will talk about that quite a bit in the show today. Bill Malujian reporting from West Palm Beach. Thank you, Bill. Now to senior national correspondent Kevin Cork at the White House.

Shannon, a little more than two months remaining in office for Mr. Biden, but that doesn't mean the lame duck period will be an inactive one for the Biden White House. Plenty on the agenda, as you know, just wrapping up a number of ambitious closing international global conferences from Peru to the Amazon rainforest to Brazil, where Mr. Biden addressed issues from climate change to global governance and the economy. In fact, at APEC in Peru, Mr. Biden presumably met for the last time

with Chinese President Xi Jinping, whose country just opened a major seaport there and was front and center of the leader's photo, while shockingly, Mr. Biden was consigned to the upper right-hand corner. Now, when he does return here to the White House, Mr. Biden's expected to be in the White House.

to roll up his sleeves and press ahead with his domestic agenda, which includes partnering with congressional lawmakers by allocating any remaining authorized resources for major climate initiatives here at home, as well as additional funding for support of the wars in Ukraine and Israel abroad.

And speaking of congressional lawmakers, theirs is a fulsome to-do list as well, including expedited efforts to keep the government funded through the holidays, pick up any additional federal disaster aid, as well as pushing the farm bill over the finish line and getting the right money for the national defense authorization. And, of course, to confirm judges. That's especially important for Democrats who are concerned about the looming GOP control at both ends of Pennsylvania.

Avenue, which, of course, is all to say the president is eager to get back to work as memories of his legacy and his leadership. And, of course, the loss in November make way for the final verdict on his time in office. Shannon. All right. Kevin Cork reporting at the White House. Thank you, Kevin. Now to our interview with House Speaker Mike Johnson. Speaker, after a late night and an early morning. Welcome back to Fox News Sunday.

Great to be with you. OK, so let's start here. The House Ethics Committee has been investigating one of President Trump's nominees, former congressman now Matt Gaetz, up for attorney general. And they say that their Friday meeting was postponed, not canceled. But it doesn't look like that report that may have come from them is going to be released. Democrat Congressman Glenn Ivey sits on that ethics committee. Here's what he says about us ever seeing that report.

There's precedent for that. I can't really get into what's going on now, but the fact that someone has left the Congress does not mean that the report can't be released or additional information for that matter. So you know our intrepid Chad Pergram, congressional correspondent. He says that there are at least two times a report has been released after a member left Congress. Why be against the transparency? And listen, this report may clear him. I mean, for somebody who's going to be the top federal law enforcement officer in this country.

Yeah, so I don't know anything about the contents of the report because the way the rules work, of course, the Speaker of the House can't put a thumb on the scale or be involved in an ethics committee report. What I do know is that the comments about this being there's a precedent for releasing reports is not exactly accurate. Yeah, there are two breaches of the tradition in the past under very extraordinary circumstances. I don't think this meets that criteria.

Matt Gaetz is a colleague of mine. We've been serving together for more than eight years. He's one of the brightest minds in Washington or anywhere, for that matter. And he knows everything about how the Department of Justice has been weaponized and misused. And he will be a reformer. And I think that's why the establishment in Washington is so shaken up about this pick. But with regard to the report, there's a very important reason for the tradition and the rule that we use.

always have almost always followed. And that is that we don't issue investigations and ethics reports on people who are not members of Congress. I'm afraid that that would open a Pandora's box because the jurisdiction of the ethics committee is limited to those who are serving in the institution. That's its very purpose. And I think this would be a breach of protocol that could be dangerous for us going forward in the future.

So his nomination will obviously have to go through the Senate confirmation, excuse me, the Senate Judiciary Committee. And that's going to be a long process. Our next guest coming up, Senator Chris Coons, is part of that committee. He says the report should be released, but he's not the only one. It's not just Democrats. Here's Republican Senator John Cornyn.

I think there should not be any limitation on the Senate Judiciary Committee's investigation, including whatever the House Ethics Committee has generated. So you want to see it? Absolutely. He's open to issuing a subpoena to the House Ethics Committee. How do you see this playing out?

Well, look, I hope that the Ethics Committee will stick by our tradition and protocol for the reasons I just articulated. I think this would take us down a path where I don't know how we'd return if the House Ethics Committee and its resources, which are significant, substantial,

could be used to investigate people who are not in the House, then where would that end? I mean, people could weaponize that function of government as well. The reason that Matt Gaetz is such an exciting pick to so many people is because he will go in and reform the Department of Justice. It desperately needs it. Look, he and I sat on the Judiciary Committee together for a

almost seven years before I became Speaker of the House, and we heard the evidence. We saw the evidence of lawfare. We saw how the Department of Justice had been used for political purposes, how they targeted Catholics in some examples and parents at school boards and pro-life Americans. This is not...

what our system of justice was built to do, and Matt Gaetz will go in there and shake it up. And I think most of the American people understand that's an important function. Well, to be fair, he was a member when the investigation was underway. We'll see now how the battle may be between the Senate and the House sides play out as he proceeds in the confirmation process. In the meantime, President Trump has made it clear if his nominees get stuck.

He wants the Senate to move ahead and possibly the House cooperating with this idea of recess appointments. Forbes says this, that lawmakers in both the House and Senate would have to agree for the Senate to adjourn for more than 10 days as the Constitution requires both chambers to agree in order to adjourn for more than three days. So there would have to be House and Senate action. National Review says this about your role in that.

It says the very idea that the Speaker of the House would collude with the president to undermine the Senate's constitutional role and effectively make the legislative branch a passive plaything of the executive should outrage any member of Congress. Would you take steps to put things into recess so those appointments could happen?

Listen, I believe in the principle of a new president being able to choose his team. And that used to not be a controversial notion. We're in a time of very divided government and a very partisan atmosphere in Washington. I wish it were not. I wish the Senate would simply do its job of advice and consent and allow the president to put the persons in his cabinet locally.

of his choosing. But if this thing bogs down, it would be a great detriment to the country, to the American people. Remember, they just delivered a mandate to the president, an overwhelming popular vote victory and, of course, electoral college victory. And they have sent the message that America first policies should be the rule of the day. So the persons that the president is choosing will help with that agenda. They will take their

leadership in these agencies and they will reform them as the people expect and demand. So we'll evaluate all that at the appropriate time and we'll make the appropriate decision. There may be a function for that and we'll have to see how it plays out. Okay. You've had a specialty as a constitutional lawyer. I knew you for years in that role before you proceeded into what you're doing now.

Here is the Wall Street Journal editorial board on the constitutionality of these recess appointments. They say it's unconstitutional, anti-constitutional. It would eliminate one of the basic checks on power that the founders built into the American system of government. If Mr. Trump gets away with it, the next Democrat to win the Oval Office would whoop through left-wing nominees and whoever holds the seat.

holds the presidency would gain unilateral power to name cranks and cronies to offices of immense authority. You talked about opening a Pandora's box by going against tradition earlier in the show. Isn't that what this would do? Would you worry about a Democrat president installing whomever he or she wanted without the restrictions of the Senate confirmation process?

Look, I've been a jealous guardian of the Constitution my entire life, and it was my career before it came to Congress. And I've demonstrated over and over that we will have fidelity to our oath, which is to uphold the Constitution. So we evaluate all these things very carefully. I'm sympathetic to all these arguments. As I said, we'll have to see how this develops. I am very hopeful, very hopeful that the Senate will do its job, and that is...

provide its advice and consent and move these nominees along. They have an obligation to do a vetting of every nominee, and they will. And we'll see how this plays out. But I think all the hyperbole and everything on the front end here is to distract the American people and to try to stall President Trump in delivering upon that mandate again that the people have given him.

I know he's excited to get to work. I spent all day yesterday with him at Mar-a-Lago, a long day of hard work. And then we went ultimately had a little fun at the UFC fight late last night. He is in a good place. He is ready to govern. And the people that he is choosing are ready to do the same. And I think that's going to be a good thing for the country. Okay, we know you've got a big agenda ahead. But first in this lame duck session, you've got to figure out funding the government. We run out of money at the federal level on December 20th, or at least in part.

So what is the plan? A short term measure, a long term effort? I know you have wanted to get all of the appropriations bills passed. Is it possible to do that? What do we do come that cliff?

Well, it's getting more and more difficult to get all of those bills done. Here's the reason why. The House has done its work. The Senate has not. Chuck Schumer is still the Democrat leader there in the Senate, and he has refused to put a single appropriations bill on the floor. That's not how the process is supposed to work, so it's broken down in that regard. So we're running out of clock. December 20th is the deadline.

We're still hopeful that we might be able to get that done. But if not, we'll have a temporary measure, I think, that would go into the first part of next year and allow us the necessary time to get this done. And I think that would be ultimately a good move because the country would benefit from it because then you'd have Republican control and we'd have a little more say in what those spending bills are.

But the new reform agenda begins in earnest as soon as President Donald J. Trump takes the office in January. And we have a full agenda to run. It's going to be a very aggressive first 100 days of the new Congress. And we've gotten all the all the members of Congress ready for that. The House has been preparing for this for almost a year. And now the Senate, under its new leadership of.

leader-elect Thune. He and I met this week. We talked about this aggressive agenda, and he told me he is ready to go and deliver on that America First, those America First policies. So it'll be a very busy time for Congress and a good time for the country. Well, we know you've got the majority again in the House. We'll wait to see how those last few seats settle out and watch as the agenda gears up for January. Mr. Speaker, thank you for your time. Always good to have you. Thank you so much. Good to be with you.

All right. We will get perspective from the other side of the aisle with Democrat Senator Chris Coons amid all this talk of recess appointments that could take the Senate out of the confirmation process. That includes RFK Jr. for Health and Human Services Secretary. That nomination, it's all coming up right after this.

Fox News Audio presents the Fox Nation Investigates podcast, The Baden Files. A person's final story can be told through their bodies in an autopsy. World-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Baden covers three incredible cases where he helped change the course of the investigation. Sometimes it takes more than one look.

to put the pieces together. Listen and follow starting January 7th at voxtruecrime.com or wherever you get your favorite podcasts. President-elect Trump rattling Washington this week with some of his cabinet nominations, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Health and Human Services Secretary. But

puts his controversial views right back into the spotlight. Well, joining me now, Johns Hopkins professor, Dr. Marty McCary, also the author of Blind Spots, When Medicine Gets It Wrong and What It Means for Our Health. Doctor, good to have you back on Fox News Sunday. Good to be with you. Okay, you've spent time with RFK Jr. You know his controversial views. You know what critics are beating him up about right now.

A piece by an M.D. over at The Washington Post says this. He's either unable to understand the scientific process that forms the basis of modern medicine, or he purposefully ignores the research when conclusions don't support his preconceived notions. Either explanation is disqualifying for someone overseeing the nation's health and science.

Well, I think if we listen to what he's talking about, he's very clear about what he wants to do. Number one, he wants to address corruption in health care and corruption in our government health agencies. A lot of people don't like that message and they're threatened by it. Number two, he wants to get back to evidence based research and he wants to fund research that's going to answer the big questions of our day. And number three, he wants to address the child chronic disease epidemic. A lot of people are concerned.

The food supply is poisoned and kids are growing up in a toxic milieu. And we're drugging kids at scale as the American Academy of Pediatrics is pushing those Zempik and six-year-olds. He is talking about health and chronic diseases. It shouldn't be a political message. And I think you're seeing a lot of people unite around that message. Parents, it was effective on the campaign. And I think they're delivering on that now. And I have seen those within the medical community, your peers as well, saying...

We do agree with him on a lot of that stuff. Those are conversations we need to have. But they're very worried about his authority over agencies that are very important when it comes to things like vaccines and public health.

I would say people should not dissect what he said 30 years ago and listen to what he's saying now. He's saying very clearly he's not anti-vax. He's not going to remove or take away anyone's vaccines. And what is scary and dangerous to health is not RFK Jr., it's what people just witnessed. It's the food pyramid lie that's been out there for 60 years.

It's the medical establishment that lied to us about opioids for 20 years, saying it was not addictive. It was the vaccine mandates, ignoring natural immunity, cloth mask on toddlers. That's what's driving a lot of the distrust of the medical establishment. It's not RFK Jr. There are also those who object within the Republican Party because of his issues on abortion, his positions there. Former Vice President Pence, now with American Freedom, put this on X.

He says he would be the most pro-abortion Republican appointed secretary of HHS in modern history. He says, I'm respectfully urging Senate Republicans to reject this nomination. So there's the abortion issue, too, for conservatives that they have some concerns about with him. Yeah, I don't speak for him. I don't know his views on abortion, but I do know his views on addressing a lot of these chronic diseases and the issues of the food supply industry.

If you look at the path that we are on as a country, it's not a good path. We're watching so many of these crises go up. Early onset Alzheimer's has tripled.

cancer in young people under age 50 has gone up by 79%. We're looking at half of our nation's children are sick. We're looking at 40% of our nation's children now with a mental health diagnosis. One in five kids is on a medication. So what he is really focused on is this concept that we can't keep drugging our nation's children going down this path.

That's what's dangerous. Really quickly, if he were to be confirmed to this position, how much authority would he have to make real progress on all those things you mentioned in maybe four years? I think he wants to bring in a lot of scientists from highly respected institutions and let them do good work. And I think that's the focus. He is really the quintessential environmental health attorney of our era.

And that may be the quintessential issue of our era if we look at our status in terms of health. The central issue in health care is the health of the population. It's not health insurance and how we finance the broken health care system. It's how we fix it. And so for the first time ever, we're now seeing a focus on addressing the health of our nation's children and the chronic disease epidemic. And that's exciting a lot of people. Well, for a lot of people, it's a shock to the system. So we'll see how this plays out. Doctor, always good to see you. Good to see you, Shannon. Thank you so much.

Okay, joining me now, Delaware Democratic Senator Chris Coons, who would be somebody voting on all of these different confirmations. Senator, good to see you. Good to see you, Shannon. Thanks for a chance to be on again. Okay, so let's talk about RFK Jr. Because as I mentioned, there are people within the medical establishment community who have some problems with him but do like the things he's highlighting. In a New York Times guest essay, Dr. Rachel Bedard says this, I believe there's a health care agenda that finds common ground...

between people like myself, medical researchers and clinicians, and Mr. Kennedy. There's opportunity to leverage Mr. Kennedy's skepticism and relative political independence for good to turn his most valid criticisms of the American health care system into constructive reforms. Are you open to sitting down and having this kind of conversation with him about where he really stands on all these issues?

Of course. And you introduced me, Shannon, as someone who will get a chance to vote on all of these nominations. I certainly hope that's the case and that we won't see nominees jammed through in recess appointments where there's no confirmation hearing, no confirmation vote. And they take over incredibly powerful positions for up to two years. Of course, I'd be willing to meet with President-elect Trump's nominees, of

I did the previous time he was president. I voted on many of them and I look forward to meeting with RFK Jr. I have to say, though, that his long record of being an anti-vaccine campaigner gives me real pause and concern. That'd be the first thing I'd ask him about, because the fact that American children are vaccinated against things like measles, mumps and rubella keeps us safe.

and saves millions of lives a year. So getting to the bottom of his real views on a wide range of issues, from vaccines to dietary supplements to the research work of CDC, NIH, and FDA, and whether he's pro-choice or pro-life, all of that would be important for us to get some clarity on.

OK, so just a few days ago, he said he's not anti vaccine and he doesn't accept that label that's been given to him. He says he is for being more transparent. He's not going to block any vaccines for people or for kids or whatever. But he says he wants people to have more of the scientific information and studies that have gone on behind the vaccines. Is that a kind of conversation? You know, does that position, would that be comforting or acceptable to you to hear him say it and articulate it in that way?

Yes. Look, Shannon, the whole point of a confirmation process is to have meetings with those who've been nominated to run incredibly significant and powerful agencies and get clarity on their views, their experience and their character. That's why, frankly, there's been both.

Great consternation in the Senate about Matt Gaetz being nominated to be the next attorney general because of real concerns about his character. And there's generally been real positivity about Senator Marco Rubio being nominated to be the next secretary of state. Senator Rubio has served in a leading role on the Intelligence Committee, on the Foreign Relations Committee for 14 years.

He's a conservative Republican. He and I differ on some key policies. But he's someone I've worked with, legislated with, traveled with.

Matt Gaetz, on the other hand, is someone who just resigned in order to avoid the public release of a bipartisan report of the House Ethics Committee that might very well have cast very damning allegations against his character and conduct in the Congress. Yeah, we don't know what it says. As I said earlier, Mike Claremont, I mean, the DOJ decided not to charge him in February of last year.

But to that House ethics issue, you have obviously called for it to be released. You're not the only one. There are Republicans, including John Cornyn on the Senate Judiciary Committee with you as well, saying that he'd be open to a subpoena. Do you think there would be bipartisan support from the committee to do what you needed to do to get your hands on that report?

Yes. And to be clear about what Speaker Johnson said before, the Ethics Committee loses its jurisdiction to discipline a member when they're no longer a member. On several occasions in the past, the House Ethics Committee has released a report when someone as Matt Gaetz just did resigned.

at the last moment in order to avoid the release of a report. Some might say, why is it relevant now? It's relevant because the Senate has a constitutional role. It's called our advice and consent role to make sure that a president-elect mostly gets their choice, their nominees, but doesn't get to put people in who are unqualified or who lack the requisite character and capabilities to lead an incredibly important agency like the Department of Justice.

Well, I'll be interested to see if the subpoena does come from your committee as we get into this in January. But absent this, you've got the conversation about recess appointments that may cut the Senate out of this process altogether, potentially. Do you think that there are that all Republicans, all 53 of them, once you flip into the new year, if that McCormick seat holds, as we expect in the midst of this recount? Do you think?

all of them would vote to adjourn the Senate. Do you think there are some Republican colleagues of yours who would say, we're not going to adjourn the Senate and go along with this recess and run?

Likely, yes, Shannon, because they understand our constitutional role. We're a check and balance. We're there to be a guardrail. You cited earlier a Wall Street Journal editorial that said, frankly, if you take the confirmation process out and you only put in the cabinet as a result of recess appointments, then there's a real risk that future administrations, future presidents will jam in increasingly marginal characters who are there because, again,

of their popularity or their celebrity or what they've said, but who lack the requisite skill and experience, policy views and character to lead what are huge and significant federal agencies. I agree with that view. OK, there's something else being worked on. It's called the Department of Government Efficiency. It's not going to be an official government entity, but run by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. What they want to do is highlight where they say there is tons of government fraud, overregulation, too many federal employees.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board says this thing could be Trump's best idea. They say the attempt to tame and shrink Leviathan is worth the toil and it's essential to liberating Americans from the tyranny of the expanding administrative state.

You know, there are these government waste reports that come out from members every year pointing out all kinds of crazy things that the American taxpayer has no idea that they're funding. What do you make of this effort? I mean, if these come to Congress as suggestions you would have to then act on or have the opportunity to act on, is it a worthwhile exercise?

Look, when President Clinton came into office, one of the things he asked his vice president, Al Gore, to do was to lead a commission to look at government efficiency and operation. They work closely with folks in the bureaucracy who knew better than anyone where there were things that they were doing that were unnecessary or duplicative. And they actually saved billions and billions of dollars.

Shannon, we also already have an agency. It's called the GAO, the General Accounting Office, that does reports. As you mentioned, they release them every Congress that highlight areas of inefficiency in waste and operations.

The numbers that Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk have thrown out, that they might be able to cut $2 trillion out of government spending, there's no way to achieve that kind of savings without cutting into critical functions like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans' health care. But they could save tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars. Depending on how it's structured and what they do, this could be a constructive undertaking that ought to be embraced.

But frankly, it somewhat amuses me that they've chosen two billionaires with no prior government experience to run this entity, whatever it will be, and that one of them is a major government contractor. I think it's important that we proceed with transparency and guardrails. Look, the success that Elon Musk has had in business means he may well have some insights into operational efficiency.

But it amuses me, frankly, that it takes two of these folks to put together an organization on government efficiency. And I look forward to having a conversation about what that path forward can and should look like so that we achieve some progress for the American people. I mean, these are successful guys who say they're doing it for zero dollars. So that's a cost cutting measure, I guess. Senator, thank you for your time. Always good to see you.

Thank you, Shannon. OK, so we mentioned this. Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, they're trying to go for unprecedented cuts to federal bureaucracy. Our panel is going to dig this into this. This newly minted Department of Government Efficiency or Doge, how it could shake up Washington. They're next.

The time he takes the oath of office, hopefully a lot of those nominees will be through their confirmation hearings and will be ready to act on them on the Senate floor. And then it's a question of how much do the Democrats resist or object or try to block those nominations from going forward. And we're going to grind them out. That's incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune foreshadowing these coming confirmation battles over President Trump's nominees, possible recess appointments.

So let's talk about it with our Sunday group. Former Washington State Senate candidate Tiffany Smiley, Kevin Roberts, the Heritage President, Fox News senior political analyst Juan Williams, and Steph Kite, co-author of Axios Hill Leader's Newsletter. Welcome, everyone. It's been an interesting week in Washington, I think it's fair to say. Exciting. You've got a number of these senators now.

choosing their words very carefully, I think is the right thing to say. But Steph, they have to now know there are these threats of if you don't support all of these nominees on the Republican side, you may get primaried in a MAGA primary. And they've got to calculate that. I mean, even look at Senator Bill Cassidy, for example, as someone who has at times been willing to kind of vote against his party line, but has come out pretty favorably for people like RFK Jr., his

appointment and others. So people are definitely walking a narrow line here as these announcements have come out. Some Republicans have expressed concerns about some of these, especially Matt Gaetz has been one that, you know, I was on the Hill when that announcement came out and was talking to Senate Republicans who seem to indicate pretty clearly they think it's going to be a tough road for Matt Gaetz to get through. Of course, they're not making any decisions right now, but it's clear that these controversial

controversial picks are going to have pretty rough processes, even if they get across the finish line in the end. There's going to be some real questions asked. And there are still a handful of Republicans, you know, six or seven that I can name who are not going to be able to be discounted on to vote for anyone. That's true. OK, so National Review says this. Republican senators don't want to resist or oppose Trump, but they're

But even they might discover some hint of institutional pride if the president demands that the Senate shutter its operations for a while so that he can circumvent the constitutionally required confirmation process and put in place cabinet officials that most senators oppose. So, Kevin, how does this play out in reality?

Well, I think we'll see some recess appointments, and I think that's appropriate. You know, as a historian, I would say if you don't learn lessons from the past, then you're going to repeat the same mistakes. And what the American people have said, not just conservatives, Shannon, is that they want a Trump administration and a cabinet filled with men and women who place the ordinary American...

ahead of establishment Washington. From our heritage friend and fellow Tom Homan as the border czar, to RFK as the HHS secretary, to Marco Rubio as the secretary of state, there is a message being sent that while you can have your institutional prerogatives, the American people want their country back. It's morning in America again, and the Senate needs to understand that.

So, Juan, you and I were together on election night, and we have this Fox News voter analysis. We talked to more than 110,000 people and tracked them over a period of time to see what is motivating their vote.

More than, I think it was 82% said they either wanted substantial change or like a complete upheaval. I mean, they want that. There seems to be some appetite for these controversial picks. Absolutely. The thing about it to me is there are conservatives who I would say are credentialed and qualified to do major jobs in this town, like run the Defense Department. But when I look at the nominees of president,

President-elect Trump, I think he's like casting the apprentice. I think it looks like a parody. I meet people, you know, Steph was saying she was on the Hill talking to Republican senators. She didn't say Democrats and Republicans have questions. It looks like the priority here is not about serving those people who are

you know, Trump faithful who want Washington disrupted. It looks like it's about are you a Trump loyalist? Will you really do what I tell you and not interfere with the White House prerogative in setting the agenda for Washington and going after enemies within and vendettas? You know, to Kevin's point about recess appointments, the Senate that we know now is going to be 53-47, Shannon.

And with that, you would think, well, gee, if these were qualified people, you wouldn't have any trouble getting them confirmed. The advice and consent function would be fine. It's a Republican Senate. But I think the fact that they are not qualified people is why you're hearing talk of recess appointments and why there's pressure being put on Republicans to abdicate their responsibility to screen these folks. No, it's because the Senate moves too slow.

And it's time that they move faster to do the will of the American people. And the American people made it loud and clear with Donald Trump winning the popular vote. It's a mandate for our country. They did. But there is the Senate role, I mean, to walk them through. And so part of that may be the House Ethics Committee and whether that information on now former Congressman Matt Gaetz gets released. Politico says lawmakers are basically left with two options here. They can release their long running report into his alleged misconduct.

and risk incurring President-elect Donald Trump's wrath, or keep it under wraps and face accusations of burying potentially scandalous information about a nominee for attorney general, the most powerful law enforcement official in the country. You know, Tiffany, do we get to see that? Do senators who are going to vote get to see that? Yes, they will. But look, there's plenty of wiggle room. There's 53 senators, you know, with the House majority in the Senate, in the House majority.

There's an opportunity here for President Trump to get his nominations through. And this is exactly what the American people want. They made it loud and clear. Fifty six percent want change. I just want to make a point real quick as well, because Obama had 32 recess appointments.

So, you know, when it comes to Matt Gaetz, you know, it's a mandate for change. It's a breakthrough of status quo. He was on the Judiciary Committee. So he believes in the rule of law. Donald Trump has been clear that he is there to root out corruption in the DOJ. And that's exactly what the American people are looking forward to in the next four years. But if this was a Democrat and the kind of sexual...

Potential sexual crimes we're discussing. I think I think conservatives would be up. Well, I mean, DOJ didn't charge him last year and we don't know if the House Ethics Committee cleared him. We I mean, we just don't know. So I think senators will continue to fight to try to get that information. Meantime, I do want to talk about Doge. This is something that President Trump has said about his buddy Elon Musk and just how tight they've become. You know, he likes this place. I can't get him out of here. He just likes this place.

And you know what? I like having him here. One of the things he's going to be tasked with doing, he and Vivek Ramaswamy, is this Department of Government Efficiency, which tweeted out on or X'd out, whatever, November 14th. We need super high IQ, small government revolutionaries willing to work 80 plus hours per week on unglamorous cost cutting. Elon himself followed that up with a tweet saying, indeed, this will be tedious work. Make lots of enemies and compensation is zero. What a great deal.

Yeah. I mean, it's not the first time we've had a commission that looks at government efficiency, right? It's not the first time that the government has looked to try to save American tax dollars, all of that. It will be interesting to see how someone like Elon Musk kind of takes on this role, as well as Vivek Ramaswamy. And the big question here is whether they try to

find ways to implement their suggestions on their own without Congress, right? That's the big question right now. Congress is in charge of appropriating funds. Usually it comes down to Congress to decide where money should be cut or more funding provided. And, you know, we've been hearing that the Trump folks are looking at the opportunity

and ways to kind of cut spending on their own. So that's the biggest thing that we're watching here, because they can make suggestions all they want. But if there's not a way to really implement them, then it's hard to see how much change they can really provide. Well, and Kevin, a lot of legal experts out there are saying if they try to do some sort of end run around Congress on these cuts, these ideas, I mean, that's going to wind up in court like day one.

Sure. And that's fair. But I don't see this or them as attempting to do an end run, Shannon. I see them as setting a 30,000 foot view of something that every or almost every American acknowledges, which is at the very least on its best day. The federal government is inefficient and we need to improve it on behalf of the everyday American. But there's an there's another facet of this that I think we need to think about. And that is by enlisting Americans as volunteers.

Not only will they get better ideas, but perhaps they will improve the level of trust that Americans have in their federal government. And I would like to think that that's something that even Juan and I and liberals, conservatives, centrists would think is a good thing. Well, I could agree with that, but I just wonder, Elon Musk is the richest man in the world, I think.

And he made his money basically on government spending and government regulations. Is he looking out for himself or is he looking out for the American taxpayer here? Because he doesn't have... Well, it's the picture of the American dream. And when you think about excellence and ingenuity in this country, that's exactly what this is. I mean, I know him and Donald Trump have talked. I know they have great ideas. They've done incredible things in the private sector. That's what the American people want. I mean, he built a rocket and sent it to the moon yesterday.

I want that guy working in an agency in our government. I just want him to be accountable. Well, and what they're going to do is not spend government money allegedly doing this and publish everything online so folks at home, we can see what we're paying for, which I think most of us would like to know. Okay, panel, don't go far. This week, a New York judge is due to make a decision whether or not President Trump will be sentenced on criminal charges. That's next.

Knock, knock. Number one, it should never have been brought. And if Judge Mershon wants to have any dignity, any any dignity from the American people in the robe, in the office of all attorneys and judges and the DOJ, he should stop this nonsense right away. All right. Trump attorney Alina Haba arguing the president elects New York criminal case should be tossed. We are awaiting the judge's decision due by Tuesday. And we are back with our panel. One, I'm guessing you don't agree with her.

Well, to me, I am not sure about the law, but I am sure about this, that what I've heard from my conservative colleagues this morning is President former elect President President elect Trump won the popular vote. I think it's very hard right now for the Justice Department or any judge to.

to say this president-elect must go to jail. It just seems like, wow. Maybe something short of jail. I mean, there could be. If he decides the case survives, then there's a sentencing issue. Yeah, so he's an elderly man, right? And typically that would be factored in, as well as the fact that he was convicted and penalties paid. So you're right. There are other ways that he could be penalized. Okay.

Kevin, what do you think he does? I mean, Judge Rashawn has moved and moved and moved this thing. It feels like we're due for a decision. Well, our Fox friend and legal scholar Jonathan Turley said it right. He calls it a circus. And maybe the circus master will finally realize the gig is up.

That's what I'm hoping for. That's what would be right and just. Even people who didn't vote for President Trump, to Juan's excellent point, think that the time for this to come to a close has passed. Every decision he's made, every decision that judge has made, has favored the prosecution, which is really a political persecution that no one in this country should stand for.

I did sit through that trial and can tell you, yeah, I don't think there was anything he decided in favor of the Trump legal team that they were arguing for. But there was a jury. Oh, yeah. The jury made the decision. But, you know, the judge can shape things in evidence and those things along the way. And he was not a Trump fan, I think is fair to say.

Over at MSNBC, a legal analyst there writes on their blog, a jury found him guilty. Dismissing the case outright would disrespect the jury's verdict and generally would not make sense. Trump could argue it would interfere with his duties to have a sentencing hanging over him. But that's his problem. He was convicted as a private citizen. Tiffany, what about that argument? You know, it's extraordinary circumstances for sure. But I think the Supreme Court was clear when they ruled that President Trump has immunity from criminalization.

criminal liabilities while in office. For official duties. Yes, official duties, yes. But, you know, to be clear, anytime this is brought up, the American people tune it out.

They're tired of it. They want to talk about securing our border. They want to talk about the economy. And that's exactly what they voted for, you know, in voting for President Trump. And so we've got the federal cases, one of them here in D.C., one down in Florida. And Jack Smith, special counsel, has asked the courts to put both of those on hold. He says he'll have a report by December 2nd. Looks like he's going to step down.

But there is more potentially to come. NBC News reporting this. The looming question in the weeks ahead is whether Smith's final report detailing his charging decisions will be made public before Inauguration Day. Special Counsel's Office is required under Justice Department regulations to provide a confidential report to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who can choose to make it public. Do you think, Steph, at this point, the DOJ is like, all right, we're closing this chapter? Or is that one last dig at here's what we're alleging the president did?

I mean, you can see it going either way. But, you know, I do think that the Justice Department has been very aware of the political dynamics. And it is hard to imagine that Trump winning as resoundingly as he did as he's entering office, that the Department of Justice would decide to release something like that right at the end. I find that hard to believe, but you never know. And there also is the question of the American people also want to know what what has been going on there. What are the findings? What is happening?

behind the decision making at the same time. So that could also be an argument for releasing a report like that and explaining to the American people this is what the investigation has looked like, this is what has come out of it, whether that would be helpful to the political conversation is another question. I think there's one other factor, which is there may be other people who could be charged and other people who have gone to jail because of January 6th. So the question is, will it have impact on these other cases?

We'll have to wait and see. But I also want to note this week that FEMA administrator Deanne Criswell is going to be on Capitol Hill after the wake of this story where a FEMA worker or canvasser, there were notes that she had that said to avoid Trump homes. And she is saying that came from above her and she is being scapegoated. And it was about making sure they avoided confrontations. Apparently that had been their experience with some homes. Here she is talking to our Trace Gallagher on Fox News at night.

Did this also happen in other places? This was Florida, but did it happen in North Carolina? Did it happen in other places? Georgia as well. Just ask the crew leads and the specialists. They will discuss their avoidance and their de-escalation methods in the field. And I think Ms. Criswell would be happy to know what's going on, truly.

I mean, one, when this happened, Deanne Criswell talked about this employee. You know, it was reprehensible. We've taken care of this. This person's no longer with us. But this woman is saying she got these orders from someone else and that it is more widespread than we know. I mean, how much for grilling do you think the administrator will get this week on the Hill?

Well, it should be looked into. It's wrong. You can't do that. I mean, if you discriminated against anybody, against poor people, people living off the grid or whatever, those people deserve help in the midst of crisis.

Now, I will say that what we heard from Republican governors and Republican mayors and county officials was that FEMA was out there and doing their job. So it's inconsistent with that. But I don't know the truth of what this woman said. And if the idea that anybody would be left by government unattended at a moment of need is wrong.

Steph, I mean, this is one of those, now that we're kind of into a lame duck period, it's one of the hearings that might actually get attention. Yeah, and I do think it's important for hard questions to be asked about this situation. And I think it's very unfortunate. You know, this was, it could have been an isolated incident. It could have been a broader issue, but it comes in this context.

context of already massive distrust in FEMA. It already comes as people feel like they can't turn to the government to take care of them, to protect them in their hour of need when they're faced with disaster. And I have family near Asheville, went and visited and volunteered a little bit after the storm there and heard from people who really did not feel like they were being served the way they should.

Well, I would also love for that woman who's now been dismissed to testify on the Hill because she sounds like she genuinely wants to help the administrator understand what has been going on. Maybe she'll be part of the hearing, too. I'm not a member of the committee, so I don't have any control over that. OK, panel, thank you very much. We'll see you next Sunday. Coming up, a sneak preview, an in-depth look at the lives of Catholic saints, flaws and all by a world renowned Hollywood heavyweights coming to Fox Nation.

In the name of the one true God. Sign up for Fox Nation for $1.99 a month. Red lapses across the nation.

We've got a fascinating new series debuting on Fox Nation today. The first episode of Martin Scorsese Presents the Saints is available on FoxNation.com. The series takes a deep dive into religious figures as people who struggle just like we do. Scorsese sat down for an interview on the set of the Saints to talk a bit about the episode on Joan of Arc. 14-year-old girl hears voices, the voices of saints, the word of God.

until it addresses men's clothes, organize an army, lead French soldiers into battle to put the Armagnac king on the throne, which she does. She becomes a political liability. She's captured. She's tried. She's condemned. She's burned at the stake. And at that point, a dove soars from out of the fire. So I think that's very compelling.

Martin Scorsese presents The Saints is available exclusively on Fox Nation starting today. And a quick note, my podcast, Live in the Bream, drops today. This week, I sat down with Alabama Senator Katie Britt to talk about the changes and challenges coming to the Senate when it flips to GOP control in January and about her book, God Calls Us to Do Hard Things. Live in the Bream, anywhere you like to get your podcasts.

That's it for us today. Thank you for joining us. I'm Shannon Bream. Have a wonderful week. We'll see you next Fox News Sunday.

Fox News Audio presents the Fox Nation Investigates podcast. The Menendez brothers, monsters or misunderstood? We have evolved to understanding that this kind of stuff can happen. Judge Jeanine Pirro and a panel of experts break down the Menendez brothers' new fight for freedom, and their defense attorney explains why he's optimistic he can clear their names. Are these convicted killers monsters or just misunderstood? Listen and follow starting January 7th at foxtruecrime.com or wherever you get your favorite podcasts.

Listen to Fox News Sunday ad-free on Amazon Music with your Prime membership or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.