The White House News

Tensions are brewing over President-elect Trump’s move to tap Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) to serve as secretary of State, with some of the president-elect’s allies voicing concerns about the pick. 

The choice has already set into motion the process of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) choosing a replacement for Rubio in the Senate, and some senators have already said they would vote to confirm Rubio. 

But while Trump’s choice of Rubio received praise from various Republicans and Democrats, those in the so-called MAGA wing of the GOP have expressed a mix of surprise and disappointment about the pick, with many hoping Trump would choose former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell. 

“I’ve been most surprised with the Rubio pick,” said one source close to the transition, who described the Florida senator as “not that MAGA.”

The delay in formally announcing Rubio raised questions about whether Trump was navigating how to move forward amid the internal disagreement, but Trump’s announcement came shortly after Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) was elected Senate majority leader. 

“To me what that looks more towards was making sure that Rubio was being able to be a part of the Senate majority leader elections,” said Alex Stroman, Trump’s 2017 inaugural spokesperson and a personal friend of Grenell’s. 

Stroman said Rubio is someone Republicans are happy about and the kind of person Trump wanted from the outset. 

“Anytime that you have nominations for a president’s Cabinet, there are discussions that play out both publicly and privately,” he said. 

The source who expressed surprise about Rubio suggested the pick may have been influenced by Susie Wiles, Trump’s incoming chief of staff who has worked for decades in Florida politics.

The New York Times first reported late Monday that Trump was expected to name Rubio as his secretary of State nominee, and Trump on Wednesday confirmed the choice in a statement.

“He will be a strong Advocate for our Nation, a true friend to our Allies, and a fearless Warrior who will never back down to our adversaries,” Trump said.

On Monday, following reports that Trump would pick Rubio, conservative activist and Trump ally Charlie Kirk warned his followers to not “jump to conclusions.”

“If Trump hasn’t confirmed it on Truth, don’t jump to conclusions and don’t believe everything you see,” Kirk wrote. 

And earlier this week, a source familiar with the matter told The Hill that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had expressed opposition to the prospect of Rubio being nominated for the position. 

The decision to make Rubio secretary of State is far from the most controversial choice Trump has made during his transition so far. Shortly after announcing his intention to nominate the senator, Trump also announced he had picked another Florida Republican, Rep. Matt Gaetz, to be attorney general, a move that drew stunned responses from many Republicans on Capitol Hill.

While many in MAGA world have expressed displeasure at the idea of Trump appointing Rubio, others seem to be on board with the scenario if it means Lara Trump, the president-elect’s daughter-in-law, will fill his Senate seat. 

On Tuesday, Maye Musk posted on the social platform X that Lara Trump should be Rubio’s replacement and called the upper chamber “an old man’s club.” Elon Musk reposted his mother’s post, writing that “Lara Trump is genuinely great.” 

Elon Musk’s approval of Lara Trump in the position is notable given his recent close proximity to President-elect Trump. Musk has been a constant presence around Mar-a-Lago and even appeared in Trump’s family photo following his election win. 

Several other Trump allies have weighed in to support the idea of Lara Trump being the pick, including Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), who argued in a post on X that appointing the president-elect’s daughter-in-law would help avoid a “messy primary” in 2026.

With the president-elect’s decision to nominate Rubio, the choice of his replacement in the Senate will fall to DeSantis. A source familiar with the matter told The Hill that DeSantis’s chief of staff was favored for the position and that the other candidates include Florida’s lieutenant governor and attorney general. The source said that the president-elect may push for his daughter-in-law, but later added “our governor has not gotten a call about appointing Lara.” 

Sources have been reluctant to openly discuss the dynamics surrounding the nomination and the subsequent domino effect on Florida politics and in MAGA world. 

Rubio has had something of a winding journey to become one of Trump’s closer allies. He and Trump were fierce rivals during the 2016 GOP primary, with the two exchanging insults about their manhood.

But the senator became an informal adviser to Trump during his first term, and Rubio was one of three finalists considered to be Trump’s running mate this year before Vice President-elect JD Vance got the nod.

To be sure, the Rubio pick has gotten a warm reception from members of both parties. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) said he would vote to confirm Rubio, and Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) praised the choice.

But Rubio has also faced criticism from some Trump allies for being too much of a foreign policy hawk, a term Trump has used disparagingly to talk about rivals like former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.). 

However, his tough approach to China and Iran largely aligns with Trump’s talk on the campaign trail, and Rubio has in recent weeks argued the Ukraine-Russia conflict will need to end through a negotiated agreement, something that also echoes what Trump has said on the topic.

Grenell, comparatively, has been one of Trump’s staunchest allies dating back to the start of his first term, and he had been something of an envoy for the president-elect while he was out of office.

Grenell previously served as ambassador to Germany and acting director of intelligence during Trump’s first term. He joined Trump during a recent meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and he was an active presence on the campaign trail.

In what could be seen as a tacit acknowledgment of the divisions over Trump’s choice, Grenell congratulated Rubio on X on Wednesday night. The Florida senator promptly responded.

“Thank you! Kind words from a great American who will be a vital part of protecting America and Americans in the years to come!” Rubio tweeted.

President-elect Trump is forging ahead with a dramatic shake-up of the military, with fears of a purge of “woke” generals fueled by his nomination this week of Fox News host Pete Hegseth to lead the Defense Department. 

Trump is considering a draft executive order to create a “warrior board” of retired senior military officials who would review three- and four-star officers for dismissal, allowing a fast-track to reshape the military command structure, according to The Wall Street Journal. 

That plan has sparked concerns across the national security and defense establishment, especially after Trump selected Hegseth, who has espoused far-right views about rolling back “woke” policies in the armed forces and rooting out military leaders who implemented the changes.

“Well, first of all, you got to fire, you know, you got to fire the chairman of the Joint Chiefs,” Hegseth said on the “Shawn Ryan Show” podcast last week. 

“Any general that was involved, general, admiral, whatever that was involved in any of the DEI woke shit, it’s got to go,” he added, using an abbreviation for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

“Either you’re in for warfighting that and that’s it. That’s the only litmus test we care about.”

While on the campaign trail, Trump often explicitly mentioned that he wants to go after “woke” generals in the military.

“We have a military that’s not woke. You may have a few people on the top that are woke and we’re going to get rid of them so damn fast, your head’s going to explode,” Trump said at an Oct. 7 town hall in North Carolina. 

Richard Kohn, a professor emeritus at the University of North Carolina and an expert on civil-military relations, said Trump was sending a signal to the officer corps “that you better toe the line politically and demonstrate your loyalty to this president.”

Kohn said a purge of top-ranked personnel could exacerbate recruitment and retention challenges and spur a “diminishing of the military’s quality.”

“There’s enough difficulty in pursuing a military career up to the highest ranks without implying to the officer corps that you better toe the line politically and demonstrate your loyalty to this president,” he said.  

His allies have also laid out a clear blueprint for thinning the top ranks, including in the Project 2025 policy document from the conservative Heritage Foundation that outlines a roadmap for a Republican administration. 

In the document’s chapter for the Defense Department, Christopher Miller, who served as Trump’s last Defense secretary, wrote that one priority for the next GOP-controlled White House should be to reduce the number of generals, criticizing what he called “rank creep,” or a bloated bureaucracy of flag officers. 

While there has been some criticism of the ratio of the number of generals to service members, critics fear that Trump is looking to simply use the argument to install loyalists. 

Gene Moran, a former Navy destroyer captain and expert adviser to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a perceived political takeover of the military could lead to a mass exodus. 

“There’s a belief that it’s merit-based,” he said of the military ranks. “It’s a place of great leveling where people from all walks of life can come in and succeed. If you destroy that, it will be decades to recreate that.” 

Moran, now an adjunct professor of public policy at Florida State University, said purging the generals could also upend the system because it takes years to promote a service member to the rank of a general. 

“Do we really want that kind of disruption internally when we’re dealing with all of these global geopolitical challenges?” Moran said. 

If Trump does go after generals, Joint Chiefs Chair CQ Brown could be the first on his list, considering his and Hegseth’s past remarks. 

Brown, who is Black, spoke out against racism in the military following the 2020 George Floyd protests and racial reckoning. 

Trump’s transition team is considering whether to fire Brown, along with other top generals, according to Reuters. Kohn, the civil-military expert, said it would be a mistake. 

“I think there would be enormous pushback on that and accusations of racism against Trump,” he said. “General Brown has a very distinguished career [and Trump] would be taking a very serious chance of harming the military.” 

Hegseth, a decorated veteran who led conservative veterans’ advocacy groups before his television career, is against transgender military service and women serving in combat roles.  

In one of his books, “War on Warriors,” Hegseth writes that he is against “woke diverse” recruits from serving and calls out generals as “politicians in camo.” 

Hegseth calls to take back control of the Pentagon from left-wing ideology. “It’s one thing when a corporation or university goes woke. It’s an entirely different thing for the United States military to go woke.”   

Democratic lawmakers have expressed serious concerns about Hegseth, both for his lack of experience and his political views. 

Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) said Hegseth is “not remotely qualified to be secretary of Defense.” 

“The SecDef makes life-and-death decisions daily that impact our 2 million troops around the globe,” he wrote on the social platform X. “This is not an entry-level job for a TV commentator.” 

Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, said she had concerns about several of Hegseth’s views, including his statements supporting the Jan. 6, 2021, rioters.

“While much is unknown about Mr. Hegseth, I share the bipartisan concern that he is ill-prepared to serve as Secretary of Defense,” she said in a statement.

Trump will have wide latitude to thin the ranks of generals. The Senate must approve high-ranking military promotions but has limited power over firings, with Congress in most cases only receiving notification of the retirement of a general or flag officer. 

The potential for a purging of generals has also drawn scrutiny from Trump’s former Pentagon press secretary, Alyssa Farah Griffin, who has become critical of her former boss. 

Griffin told CNN this week that firing generals was not only a “distraction” but “exactly the kind of thing folks like many of us who have spoken out didn’t want to see.” 

“We do not have enough people who are raising their hand to serve. To further politicize the military by showing some form of retribution to our general officers, officers who have served distinguishably for decades, I think, could hurt that even more,” she said.  

Leon Panetta, who served as a Defense secretary under the Obama administration, told CNN that the focus has long been “to keep the military separated from politics.” 

“The military swears an oath to the Constitution, not to a political party, not to the president, but to the Constitution. And we ought to keep that separation in place,” he said. 

Panetta said there were “plenty of laws” to punish generals for unprofessional or illegal conduct. But he added that “we don’t need to burden the Defense Department or the military with some kind of vigilante hit team in the White House.”

Educators and university leaders are on the edge of their seats as President-elect Trump makes his return to office with an aggressive posture toward K-12 and higher education.

Trump has threatened multiple times to take away funding from schools if they do not align with his views on subjects such as diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and transgender rights.

That threat has left institutions holding their breath as they try to prepare with how to deal the hostility they could face for the next four years.  

Trump has threatened to “tax endowments, impose budget reconciliation, and fine institutions ‘up to the entire amount of their endowment’ if they are perceived as having promoted ‘wokeism,’ [which] risks eroding academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the democratic purposes of higher education,” said Lynn Pasquerella, president of the American Association of Colleges and Universities. 

The federal government gives billions of dollars to colleges and universities every year, from grants to research funding to direct financial aid.  

K-12 institutions receive a majority of their funding from state and local governments, while 7.6 percent came from the federal government in the 2019-2020 school year.  

Congress controls the power of the purse, and next year’s GOP-majority House and Senate could be amenable to Trump’s goals.

“The first Trump administration failed in its repeated attempts to cut student aid and academic research, largely because they were disorganized and poorly educated in the workings of the federal government, but also because of resistance from Congress,” said John Aubrey Douglass, senior research fellow and research professor at the Center for Studies in Higher Education at the University of California, Berkeley. 

“Trump and his allies are exploring various ways to withhold federal funding for individual colleges and universities that would be punitive. That could come from a much expanded concept of presidential authority and bills passed by Congress, like the Stop Woke Act already passed by the House,” Douglass added.  

At a campaign rally this cycle, Trump went after multiple elite universities he accused of stifling free speech on campus, saying he would “take away their endowments, and they will pay us billions and billions of dollars for the terror they have unleashed into our once-great country.”

The president-elect has also said he would tax the endowments of schools that spend money on racial equity, and a “portion of the seized funds will then be used as restitution for victims of these illegal and unjust policies, policies that hurt our country so badly.” 

He said K-12 schools that teach “critical race theory, gender ideology or other inappropriate racial, sexual or political content on our children” would also see a cut in federal funding.  

With a GOP trifecta in Washington, “there will be a much more accommodating Congress, at least until the midterms,” Douglass said. “Democrats can muster filibusters in the Senate, but fights over the budget and bills and procedures meant to accommodate Trump, along with the assumption of unprecedented executive authority, provide a much more threatening political environment for America’s colleges and universities.”

And there are some ways to get around Congress when restricting federal money. 

Trump’s Department of Education is likely to change the definition of Title IX as it stands under President Biden and remove language regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. If the department creates rules against allowing transgender students in certain locker rooms or sports teams and schools refuse to comply, one of the punishments for violating the rule could be a restriction in federal funds. 

“I think you’ll see an effort to define sex in Title IX as binary and biological,” said Bob Eitel, co-founder and president at the Defense of Freedom Institute, adding there could be efforts by the Trump administration “to investigate those school districts and colleges and universities that” go against the mandate.

And there are specific threats to research funding under the second Trump White House, too.

“Although it is speculative, the ‘unitary executive theory’ offers a path for withholding or impounding federal funds for research in areas thought by the Trump administrators to be antithetical to their political agenda, like climate change. That would likely be a nationwide restriction that, along with threats to drastically reduce funding for infrastructure costs of doing federal research, would create a huge hole in the financial model for research universities.” Douglass said. 

The fluid situation leaves schools in a position of trying to figure out how to prepare without fully knowing what comes next. 

“Institutional leaders are holding their breath but are also doubling down on seeking protections for DACA students, international students, and those most impacted by the removal of DEI offices and programs designed to ensure that campuses are places of welcome and belonging for all students — from first-generation students, LGBTQ students and students of color to veterans and students with disabilities,” said Pasquerella.