The Washington Post reported earlier this week that the Pentagon general counsel has selected Michael Ellis, a White House official and former chief counsel to Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), to serve as the top lawyer at the National Security Agency, and Susan Hennessey writes at Lawfare that "there is a lot that stinks" about the choice.In a breakdown of the complex situation, Hennessey explains that the NSA general counsel is a career position that doesn't require Senate confirmation, although the selection process is supposed to remain free from political interference and is supposedly based purely on the candidate's qualifications. But, in this case, there is speculation that the White House pushed for Ellis' appointment, especially because Ellis' resume appears lacking compared to other top candidates for the job including the agency's acting General Counsel Teisha Anthony, Hennessey argues.Further, Hennessey notes, Ellis "isn't simply a neutral official who happened to occupy a political role," but was rather "an overtly political actor involved in some of the famously disturbing episodes of the Trump administration." In short, Hennessey thinks the selection demands more scrutiny and may be an example of the Trump administration attempting to "'burrow,' or improperly convert a political appointee into a career position" that would theoretically last beyond President Trump's upcoming White House exit.Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who testified during Trump's impeachment trial that Ellis was the individual who first proposed moving a memo of the president's phone call with Ukrainian President Alexander Vindman to a highly classified server, agrees with his new colleague, Hennessey. Read more at Lawfare. > I've worked w/ Ellis. He is a partisan political operative. In my opinion he is unqualified, lacks judgment & is dangerously unethical. He is the subject of a DoD investigation of congressional interest for violations of law & regs. This is Trump admin burrowing into intel. https://t.co/j2PqNhFneo> > -- Alexander S. Vindman (@AVindman) November 14, 2020More stories from theweek.com 7 scathingly funny cartoons about Trump's refusal to concede Trump is reportedly 'very aware' he lost the election but is putting up a fight as 'theater' Texas senator suggests it's too soon to declare Biden the winner because Puerto Rico is still counting votes

Peruvians protesting the abrupt ouster of president Martin Vizcarra clashed on the streets of Lima on Thursday night with riot police, who fired tear gas to disperse the crowds. The clashes, and other more peaceful protests in the capital and other cities, are piling pressure on a fragmented Congress and the new government of Manuel Merino. Mr Vizcarra, a politically unaffiliated centrist who is popular with voters, was ousted on Monday in an impeachment trial over allegations he received bribes, an accusation he denies.

Representative Elissa Slotkin (D., Mich.), a moderate whose district voted for President Trump in 2016 and 2020, said she would not support giving Nancy Pelosi (D., Calfi.) another term as House Speaker, in an interview with Politico released on Friday.Trump carried Slotkin's 8th district in 2020 by just 1 percentage point, while the incumbent congresswoman won reelection by less than 4 points. Slotkin earned national fame as part of a group of moderate Democrats who pushed to open an impeachment inquiry against the president in September 2019.In the wide-ranging interview, Slotkin made clear that she thinks Democrats needed a change in leadership after the party almost lost its House majority in the general elections."I will not be voting for Nancy Pelosi" for speaker of the House, Slotkin told Politico. "I have no idea if people are gonna run against her, or who might run against her. And I will of course have this conversation directly with her. But I believe we need new leadership."Slotkin added, "I would love to see more Midwesterners, because if you look across the leadership….I respect these people, but it’s New York and California."Democrats have seen infighting between moderate and progressive members after the elections. Moderates have slammed progressives' adoption of the label of socialism, as well as the slogan "defund the police." Slotkin pointed out that Democrats' basic divide could be seen in more geographic terms, with liberals from "New York and California" on the one hand, and the rest of the country on the other."The brand of the national Democratic Party is mushy," Slotkin said. "People don’t know what we stand for, what we’re about."