January, 07 2021, 11:00pm EDT

Washington Post: Biden in Danger of Having No Confirmed Cabinet Secretaries on First Day of Presidency
WASHINGTON
In case you missed it, yesterday evening The Washington Post released a deep-dive into the explicit dangers of the possibility that the Biden administration may not have a single confirmed Cabinet official on the first day of its tenure. This would be the first time that a president enters the office without at least part of his national security team in place since the Cold War.
Americans across the country overwhelmingly voted in support of President-elect Biden and his agenda to put American workers and families ahead of special interests. The historically diverse team of men and women comprising Biden's Cabinet appointees must be ready to hit the ground running on day one to begin the daunting task of cleaning up after Trump's messes, getting the pandemic under control, and rebuilding the economy so that it works for everyone, not just the wealthy and well-connected.
Wednesday's sobering, Trump-motivated attack on the U.S. Capitol is just the latest crisis highlighting the need for a trial-tested, qualified, and quickly-confirmed Cabinet in the interest of national security, public health, and the democratic principles that have been stripped and shaken over the past four years.
Washington Post: Biden in danger of having no confirmed Cabinet secretaries on first day of presidency
By Paul Kane, Karoun Demirjian and Anne Gearan
Jan. 7, 2021 at 8:18 p.m. EST
President-elect Joe Biden's incoming administration is in danger of not having a single Cabinet official confirmed on Inauguration Day, upsetting a tradition going back to the Cold War of ensuring the president enters office with at least part of his national security team in place.
Delays in Congress, caused primarily by runoff elections in Georgia for Senate seats that Democrats flipped this week and the arcane procedures needed to get the new chamber up and running, have sparked deep concern among Biden's top advisers. They are now mapping out contingency plans to install acting secretaries in most, if not all, Cabinet posts, in case Biden's nominees are unable to secure Senate backing by Jan. 20, according to those familiar with discussions.
"The American people rightfully expect the Senate to confirm his crisis-tested, qualified, history-making cabinet nominees as quickly as possible," Ned Price, the national security spokesman for the Biden transition team, said in a statement. "With so much at stake, we can't afford to waste any time when it comes to leading the response to the deadly coronavirus crisis, putting Americans back to work, and protecting our national security."
For decades, Senate Republicans and Democrats have shelved their political differences to ensure a seamless transition between administrations, especially in the departments responsible for safeguarding the country against foreign and domestic threats. At a time when the United States is reeling from a massive cyberespionage campaign of presumed Russian origin, Iran's resumed uranium enrichment, the deadly pandemic and volatile domestic unrest, the need for continuous leadership is considered especially paramount.
To date, the Senate Republican committee chairs -- who will remain in control until Jan. 20 -- have scheduled only one confirmation hearing for a Biden nominee: that of Lloyd J. Austin III, the president-elect's choice for defense secretary. That lags well behind the pace of previous transfers of power between administrations, and many Republicans increasingly believe it will be impossible to expedite things.
The scenario would set up an unprecedented moment in which every Cabinet post would have an acting secretary, with either the top career official in a given federal agency taking the helm or some temporary official appointed by Biden.
The Senate Armed Services Committee said Thursday that it would hold a confirmation hearing for Austin, a retired Army general, on Jan. 19. The panel also announced that it would hold a hearing next week -- while the House and Senate are out of Washington -- to prepare a waiver allowing Austin to serve as the civilian leader of the Defense Department, despite having been retired from active military service for less than the required seven years.
That schedule could allow the Senate to squeeze in Austin's confirmation just in time for Biden's inauguration. But the House must also approve Austin's waiver for him to take office -- and as of yet, that chamber has issued no similar plans for its consideration. The House Armed Services Committee, which has requested to meet with Austin, has not scheduled its hearing either.
Should lawmakers fail to remedy the impasse, Biden will become only the second newly inaugurated president in the past 45 years to not have his choice for secretary of defense in place on the first day, according to Senate records. George H.W. Bush, in 1989, is the only other president not to immediately get his Pentagon chief confirmed, as his initial nominee, John Tower, fell into a bitter confirmation fight that ended in defeat.
The problem is not limited to the Pentagon. In years past, the Senate has scrambled to furnish incoming presidents with some combination of their picks to lead the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the intelligence community -- all of whom this year are in danger of being stuck in limbo when Biden takes office.
In the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, secretary of state nominee Antony Blinken's confirmation stalled amid a partisan dispute over whether the candidate has furnished the panel with satisfactory answers to prehearing questionnaires. Blinken submitted his paperwork to the panel on Dec. 31, according to aides familiar with the process, and has yet to meet with the vast majority of the panel's members -- a situation that has given rise to partisan finger-pointing about who is to blame, and insinuations from Democrats that the GOP chairman, Sen. James E. Risch of Idaho, is intentionally drawing out the process.
On the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, there has been similarly little action on Alejandro Mayorkas, the nominee for secretary of homeland security. The process has been complicated to a transfer of power on the GOP side between outgoing Chairman Ron Johnson (Wis.) and ranking Republican Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio).
Despite the confusion, Senate Democrats have argued that the Republican leaders of those panels could make a gesture of good faith by scheduling committee hearings with the nominees. Now that the results of Georgia are known, it is possible that the incoming Democratic chairs could try to take matters into their own hands and call meetings to discuss the pending nominations, with or without the consent of the outgoing GOP chairs.
But until the panels are officially formed and blessed by the full Senate -- which cannot happen until Georgia certifies that Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff won their elections and they are formally seated in Washington -- no committee can report out any nomination to the floor for confirmation.
The Biden transition team has taken pains to ensure that if there are delays, they aren't coming from its end. A senior Biden transition official said that all outstanding financial disclosures for key nominees will be transmitted to the relevant Senate committees by the end of the week.
Yet even in committees that have not hit political or organizational snags, the task of delivering Biden a full national security team has been selectively hampered by the transition team's decision-making process.
Democratic and Republican aides on the Senate Intelligence Committee have expressed total confidence that they will find a way to confirm Avril D. Haines as director of national Intelligence by Inauguration Day. But Biden has yet to name a director for the Central Intelligence Agency, also traditionally considered a priority post.
On President Trump's Inauguration Day in 2017, the Senate convened and confirmed Jim Mattis and John F. Kelly as secretaries of defense and homeland security, and took an initial procedural vote on Mike Pompeo's nomination to be CIA director, easily confirming him three days later. Even that slight delay on Pompeo outraged Republicans who said it endangered national security, led by the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
"Why the hell don't we just go ahead and give the president his national security team when we need it more than any time in recent history?" McCain said Jan. 20 in a speech.
On Jan. 20, 2009, Democrats had cried foul when Republicans declined to confirm Hillary Clinton as secretary of state until the second day of President Barack Obama's administration, despite confirming six other Cabinet nominees on Day One.
The 50-50 split in today's Senate adds an extra layer of complication, as the Republican committee chairs will remain in control of the chamber's panels until Jan. 20, when Vice President-elect Kamala D. Harris is formally sworn in and can break the tie to make Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) the majority leader. The last time a 50-50 Senate hampered the confirmation of a new Cabinet -- for George W. Bush in 2001 -- the two Senate leaders, Republican Trent Lott and Democrat Thomas A. Daschle, hammered out a power-sharing agreement, allowing for early confirmation hearings and a smooth transition.
Aides in both parties acknowledged that the partisan discord of 2021 makes similar comity unlikely. But after Wednesday's riot at the U.S. Capitol, there is increased pressure on Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to ensure as smooth a transition as possible -- and that includes giving Biden his national security team.
Watchdog group Accountable.US recently launched the Accountable Senate War Room to fight back against those lawmakers who seek to overturn the will of the people by standing in the way of the smooth transition of power and the swift approval of nominees to ensure that the government can function and deliver results for the American people.
Accountable.US is a nonpartisan watchdog that exposes corruption in public life and holds government officials and corporate special interests accountable by bringing their influence and misconduct to light. In doing so, we make way for policies that advance the interests of all Americans, not just the rich and powerful.
LATEST NEWS
Dems Demand Answers as Trump Photo Disappears From DOJ Online Epstein Files
"What else is being covered up?"
Dec 20, 2025
Congressional Democrats on Saturday pressed US Attorney General Pam Bondi for answers regarding the apparent removal of a photo showing President Donald Trump surrounded by young female models from Friday's Department of Justice release of files related to the late convicted child sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein.
Amid the heavily redacted documents in Friday's DOJ release was a photo of a desk with an open drawer containing multiple photos of Trump, including one of him with Epstein and convicted child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and another of him with the models.
However, the photo—labeled EFTA00000468 in the DOJ's Epstein Library—was no longer on the site as of Saturday morning.
"This photo, file 468, from the Epstein files that includes Donald Trump, has apparently now been removed from the DOJ release," Democrats on the House Oversight Committee noted in a Bluesky post. "AG Bondi, is this true? What else is being covered up? We need transparency for the American public."
This photo, file 468, from the Epstein files that includes Donald Trump has apparently now been removed from the DOJ release.AG Bondi, is this true? What else is being covered up? We need transparency for the American public.
[image or embed]
— Oversight Dems (@oversightdemocrats.house.gov) December 20, 2025 at 9:30 AM
Numerous critics have accused the Trump administration of a cover-up due to the DOJ's failure to meet a Friday deadline to release all Epstein-related documents and heavy redactions—including documents of 100 pages or more that are completely blacked out—to many of the files.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche responded to the criticism by claiming that "the only redactions being applied to the documents are those required by law—full stop."
"Consistent with the statute and applicable laws, we are not redacting the names of individuals or politicians unless they are a victim," he added.
Earlier this year, officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation reportedly redacted Trump's name from its file on Epstein, who was the president's longtime former friend and who died in 2019 in a New York City jail cell under mysterious circumstances officially called suicide while facing federal child sex trafficking and conspiracy charges.
Trump has not been accused of any crimes in connection with Epstein.
House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) said during a Friday CNN interview that the DOJ only released about 10% of the full Epstein files.
The DOJ is breaking the law by not releasing the full Epstein files. This is not transparency. This is just more coverup by Donald Trump and Pam Bondi. They need to release all the files, NOW.
[image or embed]
— Congressman Robert Garcia (@robertgarcia.house.gov) December 19, 2025 at 5:06 PM
"The DOJ has had months and hundreds of agents to put these files together, and yet entire documents are redacted—from the first word to the last," Garcia said on X. "What are they hiding? The American public deserves transparency. Release all the files now!"
In a joint statement Friday, Garcia and House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said, "We are now examining all legal options in the face of this violation of federal law."
"The survivors of this nightmare deserve justice, the co-conspirators must be held accountable, and the American people deserve complete transparency from DOJ," they added.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)—who along with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) introduced the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was signed into law by Trump last month and required the release of all Epstein materials by December 19—said in a video published after Friday's document dump that he and Massie "are exploring all options" to hold administration officials accountable.
"It can be the impeachment of people at Justice, inherent contempt, or referring for prosecution those who are obstructing justice," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israeli Forces Massacre 6 Palestinians Celebrating Wedding at Gaza School Shelter
"This isn't a truce, it's a bloodbath," said a relative of some of the victims, who included women, an infant, and a teenage girl.
Dec 20, 2025
Funerals were held Saturday in northern Gaza for six people, including children, massacred the previous day by Israeli tank fire during a wedding celebration at a school sheltering displaced people, as the number of Palestinians killed during the tenuous 10-week ceasefire rose to over 400.
On Friday, an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) tank blasted the second floor of the Gaza Martyrs School, which was housing Palestinians displaced by the two-year war on Gaza in the al-Tuffah neighborhood of Gaza City.
Al Jazeera and other news outlets reported that the attack occurred while people were celebrating a wedding.
Al-Shifa Hospital director Mohammed Abou Salmiya said those slain included a 4-month-old infant, a 14-year-old girl, and two women. At least five others were injured in the attack.
"It was a safe area and a safe school and suddenly... they began firing shells without warning, targeting women, children and civilians," Abdullah Al-Nader—who lost relatives including 4-month-old Ahmed Al-Nader in the attack—told Agence France-Presse.
Witnesses said IDF troops subsequently blocked first responders including ambulances and civil defense personnel from reaching the site for over two hours.
"We gathered the remains of children, elderly, infants, women, and young people," Nafiz al-Nader, another relative of the infant and others killed in Friday's attack, told reporters. "Unfortunately, we called the ambulance and the civil defense, but they couldn't get by the Israeli army."
The IDF said that “during operational activity in the area of the Yellow Line in the northern Gaza Strip, a number of suspicious individuals were identified in command structures," and that "troops fired at the suspicious individuals to eliminate the threat."
The Yellow Line is a demarcation boundary between areas of Gaza under active Israeli occupation—more than half of the strip's territory, including most agricultural and strategic lands—and those under the control of Hamas.
"The claim of casualties in the area is familiar; the incident is under investigation," the IDF said, adding that it "regrets any harm to uninvolved parties and acts as much as possible to minimize harm to them."
Since the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, more than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces, including approximately 9,500 people who are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath rubble. Classified IDF documents suggest that more than 80% of the Palestinians killed by Israeli forces were civilians.
Around 2 million Palestinians have also been displaced—on average, six times—starved, or sickened in the strip.
Gaza officials say at least 401 Palestinians have been killed since a US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas took effect on October 10. Gaza's Government Media Office says Israel has violated the ceasefire at least 738 times.
"This isn't a truce, it's a bloodbath," Nafiz al-Nader told Agence France-Presse outside al-Shifa Hospital on Saturday.
Israel says Hamas broke the truce at least 32 times, with three IDF soldiers killed during the ceasefire.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, are fugitives from the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where they are wanted for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, including murder and forced starvation.
Israel is also facing a genocide case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice, also in The Hague. A United Nations commission, world leaders, Israeli and international human rights groups, jurists, and scholars from around the world have called Israel's war on Gaza a genocide.
Friday's massacre came as Steve Witkoff, President Donald Trump's Mideast envoy, other senior US officials, and representatives of Egypt, Qatar, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates met in Miami to discuss the second phase of Trump's peace plan, which includes the deployment of an international stabilization force, disarming Hamas, the withdrawal of IDF troops from the strip, and the establishment of a new government there.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's 9 New Prescription Drug Deals 'No Substitute' for Systemic Reform
"Patients are overwhelmingly calling on Congress to do more to lower prescription drug prices by holding Big Pharma accountable and addressing the root causes of high drug prices," said one campaigner.
Dec 19, 2025
"Starting next year, American drug prices will come down fast and furious and will soon be the lowest in the developed world," President Donald Trump claimed Friday as the White House announced agreements with nine pharmaceutical manufacturers.
The administration struck most favored nation (MFN) pricing deals with Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi. The president—who has launched the related TrumpRx.gov—previously reached agreements with AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer.
"The White House said it has made MFN deals with 14 of the 17 biggest drug manufacturers in the world," CBS News noted Friday. "The three drugmakers that were not part of the announcement are AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, and Regeneron, but the president said that deals involving the remaining three could be announced at another time."
However, as Trump and congressional Republicans move to kick millions of Americans off of Medicaid and potentially leave millions more uninsured because they can't afford skyrocketing premiums for Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans, some critics suggested that the new drug deals with Big Pharma are far from enough.
"When 47% of Americans are concerned they won't be able to afford a healthcare cost next year, steps to reduce drug prices for patients are welcomed, especially by patients who rely on one of the overpriced essential medicines named in today's announcement," said Merith Basey, CEO of Patients for Affordable Drugs Now, in a statement.
"But voluntary agreements with drug companies—especially when key details remain undisclosed—are no substitute for durable, system-wide reforms," Basey stressed. "Patients are overwhelmingly calling on Congress to do more to lower prescription drug prices by holding Big Pharma accountable and addressing the root causes of high drug prices, because drugs don't work if people can't afford them."
As the New York Times reported Friday:
Drugs that will be made available in this way include Amgen's Repatha, for lowering cholesterol, at $239 a month; GSK's asthma inhaler, Advair Diskus, at $89 a month; and Merck's diabetes medication Januvia, at $100 a month.
Many of these drugs are nearing the end of their patent protection, meaning that the arrival of low-cost generic competition would soon have prompted manufacturers to lower their prices.
In other cases, the direct-buy offerings are very expensive and out of reach for most Americans.
For example, Gilead will offer Epclusa, a three-month regimen of pills that cures hepatitis C, for $2,492 a month on the site. Most patients pay far less using insurance or with help from patient assistance programs. Gilead says on its website that "typically a person taking Epclusa pays between $0 and $5 per month" with commercial insurance or Medicare.
While medication prices are a concern for Americans who face rising costs for everything from groceries to utility bills, the outcome of the ongoing battle on Capitol Hill over ACA tax credits—which are set to expire at the end of the year—is expected to determine how many people can even afford to buy health insurance for next year.
The ACA subsidies fight—which Republicans in the US House of Representatives ignored in the bill they passed this week before leaving Capitol Hill early—has renewed calls for transitioning the United States from its current for-profit healthcare system to Medicare for All.
"At the heart of our healthcare crisis is one simple truth: Corporations have too much power over our lives," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), former chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said on social media Friday. "Medicare for All is how we take our power back and build a system that puts people over profits."
Jayapal reintroduced the Medicare for All Act in April with Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) and Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). The senator said Friday that some of his top priorities in 2026 will be campaign finance reform, income and wealth inequality, the rapid deployment of artificial intelligence, and Medicare for All.
Earlier this month, another backer of that bill, US Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), said: "We must stop tinkering around the edges of a broken healthcare system. Yes, let's extend the ACA tax credits to prevent a huge spike in healthcare costs for millions. Then, let's finally create a system that puts your health over corporate profits. We need Medicare for All."
It's not just progressives in Congress demanding that kind of transformation. According to Data for Progress polling results released late last month, 65% of likely US voters—including 78% of Democrats, 71% of Independents, and 49% of Republicans—either strongly or somewhat support "creating a national health insurance program, sometimes called 'Medicare for All.'"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


