Scott Pelley recapped the Cabinet picks of President-elect Donald Trump in the “60 Minutes” opening Sunday, enraging MAGA supporters despite the segment’s recitation of facts. (Watch the video below.)

The summary “is exactly why no one respects the legacy media anymore,” one person complained on X, formerly Twitter.

“Pure Democratic propaganda,” griped another.

Pelley, a correspondent, began by noting “some nominees appear to have no compelling qualifications other than loyalty to Trump.”

He pointed out defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth’s lack of government experience and recent gig as a Fox News morning host; the investigation into attorney general nominee Matt Gaetz’s alleged sex with a minor; and the vaccine skepticism of health and human services nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

“It’s up to the new Republican majority in the Senate to decide whether these nominees are equipped to represent the American people,” Pelley concluded.

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    48
    ·
    4 hours ago

    The same people attacking Trump’s picks had no issue with Obama letting Citibank pick all of his people for him.

    Yes, Trump’s picks are bad, but Democrats aren’t really in a position to be pointing fingers. Blue & Red MAGA have no self-awareness.

    • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      That’s like comparing a mean comment to a war crime. A very serious misunderstanding, or an attempt to mislead.

      • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Funny you bring up war crimes. Red & Blue MAGA don’t hold their own accountable for those either.

    • _lilith@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Other administrations being bad does not make this one better. Everyone is in a position to critique this administration because everyone has a stake.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Deep Cut whataboutism

      The same people attacking Trump’s picks had no issue with Obama letting Citibank pick all of his people for him.

      Really, you know that? Down to the last person? Pretty impressive.

      Also - can you remind me when Obama was last in office?

      Because it seems to me the time to complain about Obamas picks was when Obama was in office.

      How about folks who weren’t even voting age then? Do they also need to STFU about Trump confirming what everyone already knew by making garbage choices for his cabinet based primarily on their likelihood to support his fascist goals? How does the 8 year old Obama whataboutism come into play in that scenario?

      • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        3 hours ago

        “Whataboutism” is trying to excuse one person’s actions because of another person’s actions.

        I’m not excusing shit. They’re both crooks. I’m pointing out y’all don’t give a shit when a Dem does it.

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          I’m pointing out y’all don’t give a shit when a Dem does it.

          And I’m pointing out (among other things) that you don’t know that to be true.

          I’m not excusing shit.

          OK.