President Donald Trump is getting what he wants.

Specifically, who he wants to serve in his administration. 

The nomination of former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., for attorney general last November? 

That was a lifetime ago. Pushed out. Withdrawn. Unconfirmable. Whatever you want to call it.

The Senate has already confirmed at least one nominee whom political experts deemed as potentially unconfirmable a few weeks ago: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Hegseth skated through to confirmation with three GOP nays. But Vice President JD Vance broke a tie. It was only the second time in U.S. history that the Senate confirmed a Cabinet secretary on a tiebreaking vote by the vice president. 

And by the end of the week, the Senate will likely confirm two other controversial nominees who at one point seemed to be a stretch. The Senate votes Monday night to break a filibuster on the nomination of Tulsi Gabbard to serve as Director of National Intelligence. Her confirmation vote likely comes Wednesday. After that, the Senate likely crushes a filibuster on the nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to serve as Health and Human Services Secretary. The Senate could confirm Kennedy by late Thursday. 

It was unthinkable in November that Trump may be able to muscle through certain nominees. But this is a confirmation juggernaut. Yes, challenges await former Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, R-Ore., who’s up for Labor Secretary. Some Republicans believe Chavez-DeRemer is too pro-labor. And the Department of Education may not be around long enough for the Senate to ever confirm Education Secretary nominee Linda McMahon. But so far, Republicans are sticking together. 

Many Senate Republicans aren’t willing to buck the president. They believe the GOP owes its majority in the House and Senate to him. So they’re willing to defer to Mr. Trump. Moreover, some Republicans worry about the president hammering them on Truth Social or engineering a primary challenge against them. Or, perhaps just pressuring them.

Groups aligned with the president went after Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, late last year after her initial meeting with Hegseth. Ernst served in the military and is a sexual assault survivor. In an interview on Fox, Ernst suggested she wasn’t on board with Hegseth yet and wanted ‘a thorough vetting.’ But weeks later, Ernst came around and gave Hegseth the green light following a second meeting. 

Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., dodged reporters’ questions in the hallways for several days about his stance on Gabbard.

‘We’re not taking any questions!’ an aide hollered brusquely as the senator tried to evade the Capitol Hill press corps in the Dirksen Senate Office Building. 

The same thing happened the next day.

‘Sorry, we’re not taking questions today. Sorry guys, we’re not taking questions today. Thank you though. Appreciate it,’ said an aide as Young maneuvered through the halls.

Young didn’t tip his hand on Gabbard until the Intelligence Committee prepared to vote on the nomination and send it to the floor. Young released a letter from Gabbard where the nominee apparently allayed the senator’s concerns. 

‘There was certain language I wanted her to embrace,’ said Young.

In particular, he wanted Gabbard to state she wouldn’t push for a pardon for spy Edward Snowden. 

Gabbard once advocated that a pardon was in order for Snowden – even though he made off with perhaps the biggest heist of U.S. intelligence secrets of all time – and fled to Moscow. 

The committee then voted 9-8 to send Gabbard’s nomination to the floor with a positive recommendation toward confirmation. 

What made the difference to Young?

He spoke with President Trump. He spoke with Vance. He even spoke with Elon Musk. 

‘Was there any implication that there would be recriminations if you voted a different way?’ asked yours truly.

‘Never an intimation,’ said Young. ‘I think something the American people don’t understand is that this process sometimes takes a while.’

He argued that obtaining reassurances followed the process that ‘our Founding Fathers wanted people like myself to’ do.

The road to a prospective confirmation for RFK Jr. isn’t all that different. 

Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., is a a physician and chairs the Senate Health Committee. After Kennedy’s hearing with that panel, Cassidy signaled he wasn’t prepared to support the nominee yet and wanted to talk with him over the weekend. Cassidy was perplexed by RFK Jr.’s stance on vaccines. But Cassidy was in RFK Jr.’s camp when it came time for the Senate Finance Committee to vote on the nomination a few days later.

‘Mr. Kennedy and the administration committed that he and I would have an unprecedentedly close, collaborative working relationship if he is confirmed,’ said Cassidy. ‘We will meet or speak multiple times a month. This collaboration will allow us to work well together and therefore to be more effective.’

Cassidy’s support dislodged RFK Jr.’s nomination from committee and sent it to the floor. That’s why, like Gabbard, he’s on cruise control for a confirmation vote later this week.

What made the difference in salvaging these nominations which once teetered on the edge?

Multiple Senate Republicans point to their former colleague, Vance.

Vance has worked quietly in the shadows, leaning on his relationship with senators, to convince skeptical Republicans into a comfort zone with controversial nominees. The Trump Administration saw how quickly the nomination of Matt Gaetz evaporated last fall. There was worry that robust GOP pushback could jeopardize an entire slate of nominees. 

So has Vance deployed soft power with senators? Or has he dispelled concerns through brute force? Judge for yourself. 

Consider what the vice president said about the role of senators during an interview on Fox last month:  

‘You don’t have to agree with everything Bobby Kennedy has ever said. You don’t have to agree with everything that Tulsi Gabbard has ever said,’ said Vance of Republican senators. ‘You are meant to ask, ‘Do they have the qualifications and the character to do this job?’ The person who decides whether they should be nominated in the first place, he was the guy elected by the American people. That’s President Trump.’

The Senate has confirmed 13 of Trump’s nominees so far. Eleven obtained bipartisan support. Secretary of State Marco Rubio marshaled the votes of all 47 senators who caucus with the Democrats. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum secured 27 Democratic yeas. Attorney General Pam Bondi scored one Democratic yes. That was Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn.

But Budget Director Russ Vought and Hegseth failed to win over any Democrats. That’s probably the same case with the upcoming confirmation votes for Gabbard and Kennedy. Not only do Democrats object to these nominees, but their base is compelling major pushback after the administration shuttered USAID and DOGE is mining for cuts – without congressional assistance.

Some Democrats, like Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., believe that presidents deserve to have a cabinet of people they choose – unless they are egregious nominees or unqualified. But now Democrats are flexing their muscles. That’s why the Senate was in all night leading up to the confirmation vote of Vought. Democrats will likely require the Senate to burn all available time on Gabbard and Kennedy.

But Trump is getting what he wants when it comes to confirmations. Most Senate Republicans are unwilling to push back. And Democrats can make the Senate run the clock and speak out against nominees. But, proper or not, there is now a confirmation juggernaut for the president in the Senate. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., unveiled on Monday the Democrats’ counter-offensive plan against the broad government audit being conducted by President Donald Trump’s temporary agency, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 

‘Senate Democrats have a responsibility to fight back on behalf of American families as Republicans look the other way in obedience to Donald Trump. And we are,’ he wrote to members of the Senate Democratic Caucus in a letter. 

Notably, with Democrats out of control in each legislative chamber, as well as the White House, they have very few levers of authority over items of which they disapprove. 

The Democratic leader explained that the plan to fight DOGE, headed by Trump-aligned billionaire and special government employee Elon Musk, is four-pronged. Schumer said that Democrats will take on the audit through Oversight, Litigation, Legislation and Communication & Mobilization. 

According to Schumer, Democrats have begun conducting oversight by sending ‘hundreds’ of inquiries. 

He and Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Ranking Member Gary Peters, D-Mich., sent a letter to federal employees announcing a new portal for whistleblowers ‘to report corruption, abuses of power, and threats to public safety.’

As for litigation, Schumer noted that court challenges ‘are already bearing fruit.’ He cited federal court injunctions against a since-rescinded Office of Management and Budget temporary funding freeze, judges’ actions to prevent buyouts and administrative leave for federal employees as ordered by the administration, and a judge’s ruling to prevent DOGE’s team from accessing certain government systems. 

‘Our committees and my office are in regular communication with litigants across the country, including plaintiffs, and are actively exploring opportunities for the Democratic Caucus to file amici curiae that support their lawsuits,’ Schumer wrote. 

He further pointed to opportunities to take on Trump and Musk through legislation, with the specific example of the upcoming government spending deadline next month. The Democratic leader noted that there will be 60 votes needed in the Senate to pass a deal — meaning Republicans will need some Democratic support. 

With this in mind, Democrats will use this leverage to get certain priorities into a spending deal as both parties look to avoid a partial government shutdown.

‘It is incumbent on responsible Republicans to get serious and work in a bipartisan fashion to avoid a Trump shutdown,’ Schumer said. 

Lastly, the minority leader said Democrats in the Senate are working to keep the caucus informed and united to amplify their concerns to the public. 

‘And the public is responding,’ he wrote. ‘Grassroots energy is surging. From town halls to protests, Americans are pushing back. The stakes couldn’t be higher, and Senate Democrats are standing with the people to fight back, expose the truth, and stop the Trump agenda.’

More than 100 congressional lawmakers have lined up behind the goal of cutting government waste, as Republicans and Democrats wage an aggressive ideological battle over the merits of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The Congressional DOGE Caucus was founded shortly after President Donald Trump tapped Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead an advisory panel on where the federal bureaucracy could be trimmed.

That effort is now being led by Musk alone, and it’s attracted fierce criticism from Democratic lawmakers who call him an unelected bureaucrat with too much control over the federal government despite no prior experience inside of it.

But in the House, enthusiasm for the mission is still strong. Fox News Digital was told more than 100 members are part of the DOGE Caucus – which is more than one in five House lawmakers.

The group’s members are currently working on legislative items aimed at reducing government spending and forwarding specific items on Trump’s agenda, Fox News Digital was told.

The caucus, led by Reps. Aaron Bean, R-Fla., Pete Sessions, R-Texas, and House GOP Conference Vice Chair Blake Moore, R-Utah, has had two meetings so far. 

During the second session, lawmakers were asked which of eight different working groups they wanted to be a part of, after which those groups would focus on finding areas to trim government waste in their designated areas.

Documents obtained by Fox News Digital after the second meeting showed the working groups are: ‘Retirement,’ ‘safety net and family support,’ ’emergency supplementals,’ ‘natural resources and permitting,’ ‘homeland and legal,’ ‘defense and [veterans affairs],’ ‘workforce and infrastructure,’ and ‘finance and government operations.’

Fox News Digital was told those member selections have been made, and the groups are ‘in full swing.’

The caucus has seen significant interest from outside the Washington, D.C., Beltway as well, according to numbers shared with Fox News Digital. 

More than 40,000 people have reached out to the DOGE Caucus’ email tip line, and Fox News Digital was told that some ideas ‘for how to cut waste, fraud, and abuse’ were shared with Musk’s DOGE team.

A source in the room during the group’s previous meeting told Fox News Digital that Bean also challenged lawmakers to introduce at least one bill each aimed at cutting government waste.

Democratic lawmakers are fueling concerns of a partial government shutdown, warning they may withhold support for any plan in protest of President Donald Trump’s shakeup of the federal government. 

Left-wing leaders who have warned of the catastrophic consequences of government shutdowns in the past are now publicly signaling it could be a possibility – and they are already positioning to blame Republicans.

‘What leverage do we have? Republicans have repeatedly lectured America, they control the House, the Senate and the presidency. It’s their government,’ House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., told reporters when asked about what concessions he would seek in exchange for Democratic help to avert a partial shutdown. ‘We are in the governing season, and so we’re ready to work together on any issue. But I’m also confused about the leverage that we allegedly have in the face of such an overwhelming mandate that was given to Republicans by the American people, according to them.’

Meanwhile, Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J., suggested a partial shutdown could even aid in stopping the work of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, which Democrats have repeatedly raised alarms over. ‘This is on them. This is about whether or not they can get the votes. They are the majority. And if they cannot govern, then that’s for the American people to see,’ Kim told NBC News’ ‘Meet The Press,’ referring to Republicans.

‘I’ve worked through multiple government shutdowns. I will be the last person to want to get to that stage. But we are at a point where we are basically on the cusp of a constitutional crisis, seeing this administration taking steps that are so clearly illegal. And until we see a change in that behavior, we should not allow and condone that, nor should we assist in that.’

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., signaled one point of opposition was Trump and his allies’ support of allowing Trump to direct less federal spending than what was authorized by Congress, which Democrats argue runs afoul of the Constitution’s separation of powers.

‘We will meet with folks, and we will try to find common ground where it is possible. But what we will not do is engage in an effort that gives Donald Trump money to direct our federal government that he has no plan to utilize or implement,’ Aguilar said at a press conference last week. ‘If we’re going to pass law, we need to know that the law is followed. And it doesn’t appear that House Republicans are in a position to push back against Donald Trump to protect vital funding that supports our communities.’

Progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., told CNN that Democrats should seek a ‘very high’ price in exchange for their votes.

In past fiscal standoffs, Democrats had used the specter of a government shutdown to force Republicans back to the negotiating table.

Jeffries said during the previous round of government funding talks in late December, ‘If the government shuts down, holiday travel will be impacted…Border security and border patrol agents will not be paid. TSA agents will not be paid. Small businesses will be hurt in every single community in this country.’

‘This reckless Republican-driven shutdown can be avoided if House Republicans will simply do what is right for the American people and stick with the bipartisan agreement that they themselves negotiated,’ Jeffries said at the time.

Government funding has long been a thorny issue within the House Republican conference. 

GOP leaders have relied on Democratic support to pass every federal funding bill that has been signed into law since taking the House majority in January 2023.

Despite now having the Senate majority as well, Republican leaders’ razor-thin margins mean House GOP lawmakers would need to vote nearly in lock-step to pass any one bill without Democrats.

The House has about 15 days left in session before the government funding deadline on March 14.

Democratic lawmakers have also previously painted shutdowns as ‘catastrophic’ for the economy and federal workforce.

Aguilar said during a January 2024 press conference, ‘House Democrats are in lock step that we need to avoid a government shutdown, which would be a disaster for our economy and a disaster for hardworking American families.’

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced it would be cutting billions in overhead costs associated with federally funded research grants that go to various institutions, as part of a wider move by the Trump administration to slash wasteful spending.

The agency’s announcement unveiling the directive indicated that in fiscal year 2023, the NIH spent around $35 billion across roughly 50,000 grants that go to research institutions, such as universities and hospitals. Of that $35 billion, according to the announcement, $9 billion was allocated for ‘indirect costs’ that cover expenses related to depreciation on buildings, equipment, capital improvements, interest on debt associated with certain buildings, and operations and maintenance expenses.

When a grant is awarded, an additional percentage, on top of the allocated research funding, goes to the facility housing their work to cover these ‘indirect costs.’ According to the announcement, that percentage has historically been around 27 to 28% for each grant; however, the new directive is now imposing a 15% threshold, unless otherwise negotiated. 

‘Most private foundations that fund research provide substantially lower indirect costs than the federal government, and universities readily accept grants from these foundations. For example, a recent study found that the most common rate of indirect rate reimbursement by foundations was 0%, meaning many foundations do not fund indirect costs whatsoever,’ NIH’s announcement, released Friday evening, stated. ‘In addition, many of the nation’s largest funders of research—such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—have a maximum indirect rate of 15%. And in the case of the Gates Foundation, the maximum indirect costs rate is 10% for institutions of higher education.’

Some universities responded to the new, indirect cost cap with confusion and backlash.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison put out a statement arguing the new indirect cost cap will ‘significantly disrupt vital research activity and daily life-saving discoveries.’ It added that the move will also ‘have an inevitable impact on student opportunities to engage in research activities.’ 

At the University of Michigan, which currently has a negotiated indirect cost rate with the federal government of 56%, the school put out a statement emphasizing the ‘great deal of uncertainty’ over how the policy will be implemented. The school said it has begun investigating the implications of this new rule on its current grants.  

‘It seems like it is of a piece with the sort of slash-and-burn philosophy of the current administration,’ Dr. Francis P. Wilson, a Yale associate professor of medicine and public health, told the Yale Daily News. ‘It feels indiscriminate and abrupt, executed with little regard for the potential downstream consequences.’

The Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, applauded the move in a post on social media. ‘Amazing job by the NIH team,’ the group said in a post on social media. ‘Saved > $4B annually in excessive grant administrative costs.’

‘Can you believe that universities with tens of billions in endowments were siphoning off 60% of research award money for ‘overhead’?’ Musk also posted on social media. ‘What a ripoff!’

‘Contrary to the hysteria, redirecting billions of allocated NIH spending away from administrative bloat means there will be more money and resources available for legitimate scientific research, not less,’ added White House spokesperson Kush Desai in a statement to Fox News Digital.

The NIH declined to comment for this story.