He’s now named Kari Lake to head VOA.
Re last post, it’s not up to him; it is up to a senate-confirmed board whose members have staggered terms. Here’s the VOA story:
How long it will take Trump to get a majority on the board, I do not know. I hope that when Trump exceeds his authority by firing board members, they push back.
Also, there has to be an even split among the board’s voting members between Democrats and Republicans. But I suppose Trump could appoint a registered Democrat who is actually a Trumper 
P.S. On a positive note, this so-called appointment may indicate complete incompetence on the part of the Trump transition people.
From your link two things seem to be in her favor:
“Trump also wrote Wednesday that he would soon announce his pick to head the U.S. Agency for Global Media, known as USAGM, which oversees VOA along with other U.S.-funded broadcasters. That position is presidentially nominated and requires Senate approval. Trump said his pick for CEO would appoint and work closely with Lake.”
and
“VOA’s current director, Mike Abramowitz, sent an email to staff Thursday morning saying that he read the announcement about Lake Wednesday night and had not been given additional information beyond the social media post. “I welcome a smooth transition of power for both USAGM and VOA. I intend to cooperate with the new administration and follow the process” for the appointment of the director of VOA, he wrote.”
This may be an early test of whether the rule of law still applies. Can Trump push through an appointment that seems legally impossible?
Surrendering to the lure of podcasts, I heard Anne Applebaum saying that Rubio, supposedly ex officio on the board, might break a 3-3 tie on the board to get Lake in the job. This is such an insider issue – Joe sixpack never heard of the VOA – that there would be little median voter outrage if Trump got Lake the job through such a borderline illegality. Would anyone even have standing – or enough concern about the VOA – to sue? But if Trump can put one person into a job that is legally nonpartisan, he’ll move on to many others.
Maybe Mitch McConnell will, after caving to Trump so many times, surprise me, and organize a not so loyal GOP senate opposition.
RFK Jr.'s lawyer and top ally asked FDA to revoke approval of polio vaccine
And:
Mitch McConnell, Who Had Polio, Reacts to RFK Jr. Ally’s Anti-Vaccine Push
I was thinking that if McConnell would stop any nominees, it would be on the foreign policy side. I predict he will cave, but one can dream.
I read recently that Trump and his crones are literally threatening congress critters with being primaried if they don’t start kissing the ring on nominations.
True…Elon Musk directly said he will fund primaries and see that opponents of Trump in Republican party are defeated in mid-terms.
And it seems to be working seeing how Hegseth nomination is progressing now.
Scary to see the world’s richest man have such influence.
Elon Musk plans are scary…
Maybe you genuinely believe that Trump’s people can’t find a way to make Trump’s wishes (in this case, about getting Kash Patel in as FBI Director) come true. I don’t share your belief, needless to say. I’m confident that they will find a way.
Too bad we can’t bet. (Of course the real loser is the rule of law.)
The comment you’re responding to didn’t have anything to do with Kash Patel. I was responding to your claim that
Which Republicans cannot do because they don’t have 60 votes in the Senate and Thune has made it clear that changing the filibuster is not on the table.
Whether Patel gets through or not I have no idea.
He’s said it’s not on the table. They also said Roe v. Wade was settled law. They said they’d replace Obamacare with something better. They said they’d end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours. They said you shouldn’t appoint a Supreme Court justice within a year of an election. They said they’d lower the cost of groceries.
What they say is meaningless. What they will actually do is what matters, and if it’s a question of “Trump loses or we eliminate the filibuster”, well, I don’t think they’re just going to sit around and let Trump lose. They’ll find some excuse to give him what he wants.
And that’s why the filibuster was eliminated in 2017 when Trump told McConnell and the Senate to get rid of it, right?
As they say in advertising for financial services, “past performance is not an indicator of future results.”
@Smapti : you’ve used that particular argument many times since the election: “they didn’t do it before, so why should we believe they’ll do it now?” You may be right, but you might consider the idea that things will not be the same now.
McConnell won’t be Majority Leader this time around. Thune will need to be more of a toady for Trump or the MAGA Senators may depose him.
Because…?
Republicans have the exact same Senate margin they did in 2017. Two of the three who voted to keep the ACA are still there, and so is McConnell, who is arguably the creator of the modern filibuster. The new Majority Leader is his protege, and if there are Republicans in the Senate who are arguing in favor of eliminating the sole source of their power to control policy while in the minority then I’m not aware of them. On top of that, they have an even smaller House majority than they did before the election. It’s simply not possible for any kind of radically antidemocratic “Trump can do whatever he wants” bill to pass, and the people declaring “This time is DIFFERENT!” are basing that on nothing more than vibes.
You mean the same ones who just elected him INSTEAD of Trump’s chosen candidate, in a secret ballot where they can’t be pressured over who they voted for?
…was before the cult of MAGA really took off. Everyone still thought Trump was a clown, and that he’d have to listen to “the adults in the room.” The eight years since then have changed that calculation.
And in what tangible way does that change the fact that the filibuster isn’t going anywhere and Republicans cannot pass significant partisan agendas on their own aside from what can be addressed through budget reconciliation, which will itself require the entire caucus to be in lockstep when it clearly isn’t?
Republicans in the House can only afford to lose two votes on any given piece of legislation, and this is a body that took weeks just to pick a Speaker.
Of course it did.
Follow back up and you’ll see that the chain of comments ending with those copied above, originated in @PhillyGuy’s post describing an argument made by conservative David French (mistakenly ID’d as David Frum):
French is defending Wray’s choice to resign on the grounds that it constitutes a way to block Kash Patel’s ascension to the FBI Directorship. (Specifically, by making it necessary for Patel to achieve Senate confirmation, instead of getting there via hiring Patel at a lower level that doesn’t require Senate confirmation, then firing the people above Patel). The French article is NYT and I don’t have access to a gift link, so if this quotation of PhillyGuy’s post doesn’t reproduce the link I refer you back to the post.
But, yes: I replied to PG (about the rule French relies on being unlikely to stop Trump from getting Patel in), and you replied to that reply with your usual claim that the filibuster rules will stop Trump dead in his tracks!!!1! 
And I was replying specifically to your claim that “the all-GOP Congress will pass a special law”. Nothing else. I have no interest in arguing about Kash Patel or Christopher Wray or David whoever, because I have no insight into how that process will go. You’re trying to rebut a claim I never made.
And yes, that is my usual claim, because it is correct. I haven’t heard a response to it that doesn’t fall back on “Trump can do whatever he wants and Congress will fall in line and the Supreme Court will take his side no matter what even though they’ve ruled against him plenty of times before, because now things are different in some way that can’t be described or evidenced”.
Yes, they did momentarily defy Trump by electing Thune. Thune of course almost immediately indicated he would withhold judgement on the Gaetz nomination and since then has been busy bending his knee and kissing the ring.
Now we see all the opposition to Hegseth evaporating into thin air much like the supposed spines these folks were showing just last week. Today it appears only Ernst and Murkowski are likely to vote against. Collins of course is concerned which indicates she is unlikely to vote against.
I expect much the same for all the others including RFK Jr. Even if he calls for the polio vaccine to be pulled from the market for "studies’. That will be the day to invest in iron lung futures.
Thune can see what is happening to Cornyn and how his power is being stripped from him. He realizes he would likely be next if he upset The Don.