
Michael Waltz to face 'Signalgate' grilling in hearing for top UN post
The Senate-confirmed position is higher profile. And it comes with a cushy New York apartment. But unlike eight years ago, when future presidential candidate Nikki Haley held the job, Trump has decided against making it a top role.
That could help Waltz, who's expected to get a grilling from Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, at his nomination hearing on July 15. The lower designation will allow Waltz to testify alongside two other Trump nominees.
Waltz's testimony will still be the focal point of the hearing. The former Trump aide was one of the president's more hawkish advisers. He is almost certain to face difficult questions about the president's approach to foes such as Russia and Iran -- not to mention Trump's criticisms of United Nations leadership and his withdrawal from the institution's human rights council.
"This will be a chance for senators to question the former national security advisor and nominee to be U.N. ambassador, which has historically been a significant foreign policy post," Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat who sits on the committee, told USA TODAY last week.
He said that likely topics will be Ukraine, the conflict in the Middle East and ongoing tension between the U.S. and its allies over Trump's stinging tariffs.
Still, the toughest questions Waltz could face are over the text messages in which senior officials discussed strikes on Houthi militants in Yemen before they'd happened. Waltz inadvertently invited a journalist to the chat in an encrypted text messaging app.
"He will be asked several times by several senators about his misuse of Signal," Coons said, referring to the commercially available encrypted messaging app.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vance and other Cabinet officials weighed in on strikes while in the unsecure chain.
Waltz took "full responsibility" for the blunder, after it came to light. Trump initially declined to fire him or anyone else over the incident. He fired scores of staff members later in a National Security Council shakeup.
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, an ally of Waltz' who served with him in the House, acknowledged that Democrats were likely to zero in on the Signal scandal.
"Yet what are they bringing up? An entirely successful military operation, that was precise, that no Americans or American infrastructure or interests were harmed in any kind of way? In the end, that's what he has to answer for," Mast said in an interview.
U. N. role remained vacant for months
Trump said on May 1 that he would nominate Waltz as his United Nations ambassador, hours after news outlets reported on his ouster.
Yet, he did not officially do so for more than a month, raising questions about whether Waltz still had Trump's backing for the job.
The president yanked his first pick, Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, in late March amid concerns about the GOP's narrow House majority.
Trump eventually signed the necessary paperwork for Waltz in mid-June after USA TODAY asked the White House why Trump had not formally put him forward.
Career diplomat Dorothy Shea has represented the United States at the United Nations for the past six months.
More: Trump shakes up national security team: Waltz tapped for UN post
Trump demotes ambassador role
United Nations ambassadors have often served in presidential Cabinets.
Trump's first United Nations ambassador, Nikki Haley, had an official seat at the table. But the Republican president downgraded the position after the former South Carolina governor left the job.
A White House official who was not authorized to go on the record confirmed to USA TODAY that the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. role would not be part of the Cabinet.
That means that Waltz will report to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who's been acting as Trump's national security adviser since the switch occurred on May 1.
Mast said the role is still a "tremendous stepping stool" for Waltz, a former Green Beret and Florida congressman who served on the House Foreign Affairs, Armed Services and Intelligence committees.
"It's also a Senate-confirmed position, which puts him under a different level of scrutiny," Mast said. "It's a very different role than what he was doing previously."
Waltz will need a simple majority of senators to vote in his favor in the chamber where the GOP holds the majority in order to be confirmed.
Sen. Bill Haggerty, a Tennessee Republican who served as U.S. ambassador to Japan, said he expected Waltz to have a successful hearing.
He'll have "a big challenge dealing with the United Nations," Haggerty said. He told USA TODAY: "Mike's a competent professional."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
22 minutes ago
- Reuters
Israel intercepts missile fired from Yemen
July 22 (Reuters) - Yemen's Houthi militant group said on Tuesday it had launched a ballistic missile at Israel's Ben Gurion Airport near Tel Aviv. The Israeli military said it had intercepted a missile launched from Yemen following the activation of air raid sirens in multiple regions across the country. The launch from Yemen follows an Israeli military attack on Houthi targets in Yemen's Hodeidah port on Monday in its latest assault on the Iran-backed militants, who have been striking ships bound for Israel and launching missiles against it.


New Statesman
25 minutes ago
- New Statesman
The economic cure to populism
Photo by Stefan Rousseau/Getty If there is one theme that has featured most heavily in these columns over the last four years, it has been the dangers of right-wing populism. The destructiveness of Brexit, the dishonesty of Boris Johnson, the recklessness of Liz Truss, and the authoritarianism of Donald Trump have all been familiar themes. It has to be said, however, that populism seems to be surviving my weekly onslaught. Reform UK leads in the opinion polls. The Conservative Party is led by someone who is half-tempted to turn her party into a fully-fledged populist party and who will likely soon be replaced by someone who will not hesitate in turning his party into a fully-fledged populist party. To the extent that President Trump is running into political difficulties, it is for being insufficiently committed to isolationism and conspiracy theories. The public is angry, dissatisfied with the status quo. There is a market for politicians who can articulate that anger, identity something to blame, and promise simple answers to complex problems. And it cannot be a coincidence that the rise of this type of politics has occurred during a period of economic stagnation. There is much more to populism than this; it is at least as much a cultural phenomenon as an economic one. But it is also surely the case that the attraction of populism in the UK would diminish if, by the time we got to the next general election, living standards were rising and expected to continue to rise. It is, therefore, an option for the Government to focus relentlessly on delivering economic growth as a means of achieving re-election (not to mention the more than incidental benefits to the country). Of course, many factors determine economic growth. Some of them can only be delivered in the long term; some – such as Trump's obsession with tariffs – are largely beyond the Government's control; some come at a very high political cost. Let us, for a moment, assume that the Government is willing to risk these high political costs to deliver higher economic growth. What could it do? Before making a few suggestions, what is not an option is an expanded borrow-to-invest strategy. Our current fiscal rules are already loose, in part to fund higher levels of capital spending. That is no bad thing, but remarkably little of that higher capital spending is going into the most economically beneficial areas, like transport or scientific research. The markets are already nervous about our fiscal sustainability and we have the third-highest debt interest costs of any developed country. If the interest rates on our government debt were at the same levels as Germany, we would be paying £50bn a year less than we do. Rather than borrowing more, a credible plan for fiscal credibility is necessary to get those costs down. Contrary to the fashionable view that austerity is bad for growth, it is the loss of control of the public finances that is the real danger. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe This does mean reducing the costs of government both in the short term (the disability benefit bill cannot be allowed to grow at the current rate) and in the long run. For a start, a plan should be announced to get us off the pensions triple lock. Even with spending control, taxes will have to go up. The challenge is that the least unpopular taxes are the most economically damaging. Focusing on the rich goes down well with most of the public but drives away the mobile wealthy. At least a partial retreat on non-doms is necessary, and the idea of a wealth tax should be dismissed. If we need more revenue (and we do), use the main taxes for a broad-based increase. The Government has made some progress on planning but even on this has recently retreated on environmental requirements. The real benefits of planning reform come from increasing the population of the highly productive parts of the country. This requires a substantial expansion of housebuilding in London (where next to no houses are being built) and the Ox-Cam corridor (where we should be massively ambitious), with spending on transport infrastructure focused there too. Ignore the complaints about the Treasury Green Book; we should invest where we get the best return. Economic growth should be prioritised ahead of reducing regional inequality. And while I am being provocatively right wing (at least for a New Statesman column), we should also drop the onerous tax we place on developers that reduces housebuilding, namely the requirement to build large numbers of affordable homes. Just build more homes. Planning is one area where regulations have become too onerous. Rachel Reeves was right to highlight in her Mansion House speech last week that excessive regulation is stifling growth. Her rhetoric needs to be matched by implementation – including in the context of employment rights. Returning to centrist dad mode, what about Brexit? Reduced access to our biggest trading market has proven to be a substantial drag anchor on our economy, predictably enough. The bolder and more ambitious the plans to restore a sensible relationship with the EU, the better. The economic gains will be worth upsetting a vociferous but shrinking minority. Taken together, it would be an agenda that maximises our chances of delivery economic growth and, in the long term, defeating populism. Is it an agenda that a government, especially this Government, could deliver politically? Probably not. It reminds me that, as I conclude the last of these regular New Statesman columns, that it is a lot easier to write about politics than to be a practising politician. [See also: Why is Boris Johnson so scared of Emmanuel Macron?] Related


The Herald Scotland
40 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Gov. DeSantis calls on Trump admin to release Epstein files
The calls for openness follow the news last week from The Wall Street Journal that Trump sent a lewd letter to Epstein on his 50th birthday in 2003. Trump has denied the report and sued the Journal over it. For years, President Donald Trump and top Republican officials have called for transparency about Epstein's alleged "client list" and said that Epstein didn't die by suicide in 2019. Many of the same people are upset that the Justice Department report indicated there was no such list and that he took his own life. "What I would say is just release it, let people see. But I do think there's a desire for justice because Jeffrey Epstein and (Ghislaine) Maxwell didn't just do this amongst themselves. I mean, there were obviously other people involved, and yet no one's been brought to justice," DeSantis told Fox News on July 20. Last year, DeSantis signed legislation that would authorize "the public release of grand jury documents," including those related to a 2006 Florida investigation into Epstein's abuse of underage girls. In July 2006, Epstein was indicted by a grand jury on a felony charge of soliciting prostitution. He was arrested and spent one night in the Palm Beach County jail. He was released the following day on $3,000 bond. He pleaded guilty in 2008 to solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of a minor for prostitution in Florida. He served a 13-month stint in county jail and was regularly allowed to leave as part of a generous work release program. He died in a New York federal detention center in 2019 before he could be tried on sex trafficking charges. Amid public clamor over the Justice Department's report, Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi on July 17 to produce grand jury testimony from Epstein's sex-trafficking case, assuming a court will allow it. Contributing: Kinsey Crowley and Holly Baltz, USA TODAY Network