The tough questions facing Trump’s nominees

Some of Donald Trump’s key allies will face grilling by senators this week, as part of a tense process that will see them approved or rejected for the roles the president-elect nominated them for.

The hearings, which begin Tuesday, are the first opportunity for senators to publicly question some of Trump’s most controversial choices.

They must then be confirmed in their functions by vote. And although the upper house of Congress is now controlled by Trump’s Republican Party, just three defections could be enough to deny a candidate a seat.

These are some of the tough questions nominees are likely preparing to face.

One of the first confirmation hearings will be one of the most closely watched.

Trump’s nominee for defense secretary is expected to face questions Tuesday about his lack of management experience, his alleged excessive alcohol consumption, as well as his previous opposition to women serving in combat roles in the military.

Hegseth could also be asked about an allegation that he sexually assaulted a woman in a California hotel room in 2017.

He denies the claim and maintains that the encounter was consensual.

The allegation was investigated, but Hegseth, a Fox News host and military veteran, was never arrested or charged.

Hegseth and the anonymous accuser reached a confidential financial settlement in 2023. His lawyer later told the Associated Press that the payment was intended to avoid a baseless lawsuit.

Trump has endorsed his pick, who is among the nominees who have been busy courting senators in recent days to try to shore up needed votes.

The center of attention Wednesday will be the woman who could be tasked with carrying out one of Trump’s key campaign promises, considered by his team to be the largest mass deportation of illegal immigrants in U.S. history.

As the president-elect’s choice for secretary of Homeland Security, Noem could be questioned about the logistics of implementing this commitment. A mass deportation program on the scale proposed would likely face logistical or legal difficulties, experts say.

Noem could also face questions about other potential immigration policies, such as Trump’s promise to end birthright citizenship.

She has been a loyal and vocal supporter of the president-elect’s promises, which is consistent with other nominees and appointees for Trump’s second term in the White House.

The man chosen to lead Trump’s foreign policy agenda was once on the other side of a confirmation hearing for a Trump nominee for secretary of state.

During the 2017 session, he annoyed Rex Tillerson, urging him to describe Russian President Vladimir Putin as a war criminal, something Tillerson refused to do.

If that session signaled a divergence of opinions between Rubio and Trump – who were then rivals – the two seem much more aligned eight years later.

Rubio is now in the saddle for one of the Trump administration’s most coveted jobs and is expected to encounter relatively little resistance on his path to confirmation.

But on Wednesday senators could test their loyalty with a series of questions about future American support for Ukraine in its war against Russia. Trump has portrayed this as a drain on American resources, a view that could clash with Rubio’s tough views on foreign policy.

Another candidate facing a possible test of loyalty to Trump in his Senate committee hearing (which has not yet been scheduled) is one of the officials who would be tasked with implementing Trump’s sweeping tariffs.

Trump has threatened to impose import taxes on a range of goods coming into the United States – including those from some of its biggest trading partners – in what he says is an effort to protect American jobs.

Lutnick, the billionaire CEO of the financial firm Cantor Fitzgerald, has accepted this proposal, even though this position is at odds with others in his industry and with some prominent economists.

He is likely to face direct questions about the impact of the sweeping new tariffs on the American economy and consumers.

Republicans and Democrats alike could ask Trump’s pick for director of national intelligence about her past comments about American adversaries such as Russia and Syria.

Gabbard, another military veteran, has routinely opposed interventionist U.S. foreign policy. In 2017, while still a Democratic congressman, he met with then-Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and cast doubt on U.S. intelligence assessments that blamed him for using deadly chemical weapons.

And after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine five years later, it blamed NATO and echoed a Kremlin claim that there were U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine.

Gabbard has spoken of the need to talk to countries like Russia.

Democrats are reportedly delaying their hearing until background checks are completed.

One of Trump’s most unconventional picks, like Gabbard, he has been on a political journey that actually began in the Democratic Party.

Kennedy has since become a Trump supporter and has been rewarded with this nomination.

He has no medical qualifications, which could present a complicated opening line of questioning from both sides of the political divide.

And his past statements about established science could also come under scrutiny. He has repeatedly made widely refuted claims about the harms of vaccines, but has denied being against vaccines in general.

On other issues, such as controlling food additives, Kennedy enjoys broader support.

Some critics of Trump’s choice to lead the FBI have expressed doubts that Patel is qualified to lead America’s premier law enforcement agency. Others have shared concerns that he may work to exact revenge on Trump’s opponents.

“We’re going to go after the media people who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig the presidential election,” he previously said, citing Trump’s baseless claim about the 2020 election.

Although former law enforcement officials have questioned his ability to lead the agency, Trump’s team and some Republicans have praised Patel’s experience as a lawyer and in a number of national security roles.

Patel has a stated goal of dramatically reshaping the way the FBI works, including eliminating some of its top officials.

American correspondent Anthony Zurcher makes sense of American politics in his twice-weekly newsletter US Election Unspun. UK readers can register here. Those outside the UK can register here.