|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Trump Team Distances Itself from RFK Jr. Amid Speculation Over Public Health Role
Edited by: Fern Sidman
In the wake of Donald Trump’s election victory, his team has reportedly begun to distance itself from Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the former presidential candidate and vaccine skeptic who had once been touted for a potential role in public health under Trump’s administration. According to a report in The Telegraph of the UK, despite earlier assurances that Kennedy would be given control of agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Trump’s advisers are now expressing doubts about his suitability for such a position. The hesitancy, sources suggest, stems from Kennedy’s controversial stances on vaccines and fluoride, as well as concerns over his ability to clear the rigorous vetting processes required for a cabinet appointment.
However, ABC News and other outlets just reported that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. spent roughly eight hours at Mar-a-Lago on Wednesday for transition-related meetings, someone who spotted his movements at the club.
Kennedy was seen with a team that included former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Tucker Carlson, his daughter-in-law and former campaign manager Amaryllis Fox Kennedy, health entrepreneur Calley Means and investor Tom Barrack.
Kennedy was spotted again in West Palm Beach on Thursday morning, though his specific movements are unclear.
It is also unclear exactly what the plans are for RFK JR.
Kennedy, a well-known critic of vaccines and advocate for various unconventional public health views, has raised eyebrows within Trump’s camp, particularly in light of recent media attention surrounding his positions. The Telegraph of the UK reported that Trump’s advisers fear that appointing Kennedy to lead the country’s public health agencies could invite unwanted scrutiny and political backlash. One advisor expressed concern over the focus on Kennedy’s vaccine skepticism, noting that his stance could detract from Trump’s broader policy agenda. “That is not what we want people focused on today,” a source close to Trump told CNN, as cited by The Telegraph of the UK.
While Kennedy has insisted that he would not push to eliminate vaccines altogether, he has spoken about addressing perceived safety gaps, stating he wants to fix “huge deficits” in vaccine safety. His remarks, however, have drawn intense criticism from public health experts who argue that Kennedy’s positions could undermine confidence in life-saving immunization programs. Furthermore, Kennedy’s commitment to removing fluoride from drinking water has sparked additional backlash, with critics warning that such a move would dismantle one of the most impactful public health measures of the 20th century. The Telegraph of the UK highlighted that many experts view fluoride in water as a critical tool for preventing tooth decay, especially among vulnerable populations.
Kennedy’s potential nomination has also raised practical concerns regarding his ability to navigate the political and security clearances necessary for a cabinet role. Trump’s team is reportedly questioning whether Kennedy could pass a Senate confirmation, especially given his controversial public image. According to The Telegraph of the UK, some in Trump’s camp have openly questioned whether Kennedy’s past actions, including a bizarre incident involving a dead bear cub, would hinder his suitability for high office.
The incident in question occurred in 2014, when Kennedy admitted to finding a dead bear cub and leaving it in New York’s Central Park, with a bicycle placed at the scene to give the appearance of an accident. Kennedy later said he thought locals would find the sight “amusing,” yet the revelation only fueled further skepticism about his judgment. The Telegraph of the UK reported that a former Trump official, referring to the Central Park incident, remarked, “If you dump a bear in Central Park and think you’re above the law, you don’t want to have to go through that gauntlet of political correctness.” This comment reflects the broader apprehension within Trump’s team about Kennedy’s potential to weather the intense scrutiny associated with a high-profile federal appointment.
Despite the reported doubts, Kennedy previously stated that Trump had assured him of a role within HHS or the FDA, signaling that he would be a key figure in reforming U.S. public health policy. His supporters argue that Kennedy’s commitment to challenging established public health practices could bring fresh scrutiny to policies long taken for granted. However, The Telegraph of the UK noted that his positions on health and environmental issues, particularly his vocal skepticism about vaccine safety and fluoride, are likely to generate controversy that could distract from Trump’s policy priorities.
The situation illustrates the delicate balancing act for Trump’s transition team, which must fill thousands of federal positions while carefully managing public perception. With Kennedy’s unconventional views on health and a past checkered by unusual incidents, his appointment could prove too politically contentious for the new administration. At the same time, the attention around Kennedy highlights the challenges the Trump team faces in navigating the sometimes conflicting priorities of its supporters and the broader public.
The Telegraph of the UK reported that if Kennedy is indeed handed control of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), he has ambitious plans to enact sweeping reforms. In an interview on Wednesday, he openly stated his intention to clear out what he sees as deeply flawed departments within these agencies. “In some categories, their entire departments, like the nutrition department in the FDA, they have to go,” Kennedy told MSNBC. He argued that certain divisions have failed in their duty to protect public health, particularly that of children, and cited the nutritional standards for products such as Froot Loops as evidence of this failure.
Kennedy specifically criticized the FDA’s approach to food regulation, questioning why products in the U.S. contain numerous additives while similar products in other countries have far simpler ingredients. “Why do we have Froot Loops in this country that have 18 or 19 ingredients, and you go to Canada, and it’s got two or three?” he asked, underscoring his belief that U.S. agencies have compromised public health by allowing unnecessary additives and chemicals in children’s foods. According to the report in The Telegraph of the UK, Kennedy’s skepticism of federal regulatory practices reflects a deep mistrust of what he describes as “corruption” within public health institutions, a theme he has consistently highlighted throughout his career.
Kennedy’s public health ambitions extend beyond mere reorganization. Although he has acknowledged that dismantling entire agencies would require congressional approval, he has emphasized his intent to “root out corruption” within these bodies, The Telegraph of the UK noted. His criticisms, especially those targeting the FDA, have found a receptive audience among some voters who share his distrust of federal oversight in health and nutrition. However, Kennedy’s plans have also raised concerns among public health experts, who argue that his approach could undermine decades of regulatory standards designed to protect the public.
Kennedy’s potential appointment to a public health role has already sparked a divided response within Trump’s team, as they weigh the political implications of placing a known vaccine skeptic in such a high-profile position. His outspoken criticism of vaccines has been a focal point of his career, drawing both supporters and detractors. In recent interviews, Kennedy has tried to downplay concerns about his stance on vaccines, stating that he would not “take vaccines away from anybody” but would work to address what he perceives as gaps in vaccine safety protocols. This stance, however, remains controversial, with some advisers to Trump fearing that Kennedy’s views could overshadow the administration’s broader policy goals.
The potential role for Kennedy in public health has stirred speculation about how his divisive past might impact his ability to carry out federal duties. As The Telegraph of the UK detailed, his personal history includes a bizarre 2014 incident involving a dead whale, where Kennedy allegedly sawed off the animal’s head and strapped it to the roof of his car. Such actions have contributed to a public image that is often described as eccentric or unorthodox, leading some to question his suitability for a federal leadership role.
For Trump’s administration, the prospect of appointing Kennedy poses a strategic dilemma. On one hand, Kennedy’s criticism of government agencies aligns with Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp” by reducing perceived corruption in federal institutions. On the other hand, The Telegraph of the UK noted that Kennedy’s controversial views and actions may draw undue media scrutiny, detracting from the administration’s broader goals. A source close to Trump’s team suggested that they are wary of diverting public attention toward Kennedy’s contentious history, which could complicate efforts to focus on other priorities.
As Trump’s team continues to assess cabinet candidates, Kennedy’s potential role remains uncertain. His ambitious plans for reformation and his vocal opposition to certain public health practices highlight his determination to leave a lasting impact on U.S. health policy. Yet, his polarizing reputation and unusual past raise fundamental questions about whether he can effectively lead the agencies he aims to transform.
The Telegraph of the UK emphasized that Trump’s final decision on Kennedy’s appointment will likely consider both the potential benefits and risks. Appointing Kennedy could signal a bold commitment to challenging the status quo in public health, appealing to voters who distrust federal agencies. However, it could also bring a wave of controversy that risks overshadowing the administration’s policy goals. Whatever the outcome, Kennedy’s position in the public health debate exemplifies the ongoing tensions between government oversight, personal freedoms, and the complex dynamics of American health policy.
