As a key member of the right-wing media — soon to be the Regime Media — the Media Research Center had a prime duty to promote Donald Turmp’s cabinet picks and attack any critic of them, no matter the legitimacy of that criticism. Weirdly, though, it didn’t exactly rush to the defense of Matt Gaetz, the original nominee for attorney general. The first substantive mention of Gaetz same in a Nov. 16 column by Jeffrey Lord, but all he did is recite Gaetz’s resume:
Gaetz is a graduate of William and Mary Law School, belonged to a prestigious Florida law firm, and, as a member of the Florida legislature, served as chairman of the Florida House Criminal Justice Subcommittee. As a member of the U.S. House, Gaetz has been a member of the House Judiciary Committee.
He went on to insist that Gaetz, along with the others in the first crop of nominees, “are not only qualified for the jobs to which Trump has nominated them, they would bring the experience of their individual backgrounds to the task of running the departments they have been nominated to head.”
Bill D’Agostino whined in a Nov. 18 post that Gaetz and other picks were being criticized:
It’s difficult to quantify anguish, but it would appear the three cabinet picks who have most deeply upset the beltway journalists are Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-FL) for Attorney General, Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence, and Fox News host Pete Hegseth to lead the Department of Defense. A case could also be made for RFK, Jr. being tapped as Trump’s HHS secretary, but he didn’t seem to elicit the quite same degree of sheer unadulterated horror.
The reaction to Gaetz was particularly priceless. On CNN’s The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, White House correspondent Paula Reid solemnly remarked: “We’ve seen people today, our fellow reporters, crying, hugging in the hallways.” She later added, “No one is endorsing this.”
(If anyone actually has a video of CNN reporters weeping in each other’s arms about Matt Gaetz, please contact @banned_bill on X.)
During that same panel discussion, CNN commentator Elie Honig exclaimed: “This is a crazy pick! This is a dangerous pick! I wish there was a gentler way to say it, but there’s no use mincing words.”
Other objections to Gaetz’s nomination on CNN and MSNBC ranged from, “insane,” to “simply gobsmacking,” to “literally the worst pick in the world.”
D’Agostino didn’t refute any of that criticism.
Tim Graham complained that Gaetz’s creepy personal life was brought up:
CNN host Abby Phillip broke out the scolding on Wednesday night’s NewsNight when Bruce LeVell – the former executive director of Trump’s 2016 National Diversity Coalition used the apparently offensive word “dear” to Democrat [sic] strategist Julie Roginsky, in a “condescending tone.”
However, it was all right to accuse Matt Gaetz of “statutory rape.” Phillip didn’t mind that one bit.
As they discussed all the allegations of sexual impropriety against Gaetz, Roginsky said: “They have a responsibility to do the right thing here, which is to say to the president, Mr. President, you get to choose your cabinet, but we have advice and consent powers, and we do not consent to Matt Gaetz. Find somebody else of similar ideology who doesn’t have problems with potentially sleeping with underage girls, doing drugs and going to sex parties.”
Levell protested that after Gaetz was investigated, “The bottom line is the DOJ said there’s nothing there.” Roginsky protested that no, “they said they didn’t have enough to indict. That shouldn’t be the standard.” Put aside that this is typically the standard for Democrats like Bill Clinton.
Graham didn’t explain why his standard on sexual behavior suddenly changed when a Republican was being accused. Mark Finkelstein whined further about Gaetz’s sleaziness being exposed, even as he withdrew from consideration for the job:
Before Matt Gaetz withdrew from his Attorney General nomination today, Morning Joe was furiously kibitzing over how he could be unraveled over allegations of having sex with a minor and attending drug-fueled parties.
If they couldn’t obtain the House Ethics Committee report, the Senate would conduct its own investigation, bringing live witnesses to testify as to Gaetz’s activities–something that, Joe Scarborough argued, would be worse for the nominee.
That’s when MSNBC Republican Elise Jordan blew the lid off it, by claiming Gaetz was an “addict” twice over. It’s not simply an issue of morality.
“Your morality leads you to become compromised. And this is about not wanting a sex addict, not wanting a drug addict, having control of the nation’s top secrets at the end of the day.”
Jordan didn’t explain precisely what she meant by “compromised.” But presumably, she was suggesting that such a person would be vulnerable to blackmail. But would new information be compromising if the Democrats have already unloaded a ton of alleged dirt about him?
We don’t recall Finkelstein objecting when his MRC co-workers unloaded a ton of “alleged dirt” about Hunter Biden.
But it was only after Gaetz’s withdrawal was the MRC allowed to speak the truth about him. A Nov. 22 post by Alex Christy noted that Gaetz “withdrew from the process amid a series of sex scandals,” then quickly moved on to defending his replacement, Pam Bondi.