About a month after Election Day 2024, there was evidence suggesting the incoming Trump administration’s hiring practices were not at all normal. The New York Times, for example, reportedly spoke to several people involved in the hiring process for high-ranking positions who were asked whether they believed the 2020 election was stolen.

“The sense they got was that there was only one right answer,” the article added.

It stands to reason that in any administration, potential political appointees, especially those being considered for positions of authority, are going to face questions about the degree to which they’re on board with the White House’s priorities. But there’s little about Donald Trump and his team’s hiring practices that appear normal.

The Wall Street Journal reported, citing interviews with “roughly a dozen candidates for government jobs, lobbyists in Washington and administration officials,” that the Republican operation is imposing “loyalty tests.” In some cases, such tests even ask applicants about their views on NATO and tariffs for jobs that have nothing to do with international affairs or economic policymaking, the Journal reported. Others have been pressed on whether they ever worked for a politician who disliked Trump.

All of this, evidently, stems from one the president’s lingering regrets. From the Journal’s article (which has not been independently verified by MSNBC or NBC News): “Trump has repeatedly told donors that his hiring was the biggest mistake of his first presidency — even though he personally made many of the hiring decisions himself.”

The Journal’s report added that Presidential Personnel Office Director Sergio Gor, a former aide to Republican lawmakers such as Rand Paul and Michele Bachmann, has taken such a key role in this process, that members of Congress have begun lobbying him directly.

And while a White House spokesperson said there’s nothing inappropriate about the process, it’s worth noting not only how job applicants are being scrutinized, but also which applicants are receiving the scrutiny. The Washington Post reported on the tests being applied to candidates for top national security positions.

The questions asked of several current and former officials up for top intelligence agency and law enforcement posts revolved around two events that have become President Donald Trump’s litmus test to distinguish friend from foe: the result of the 2020 election and the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol, according to the people, who, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.

For example, the Post’s report, which also has not been independently verified by MSNBC or NBC News, highlighted a pair of applicants for positions within the intelligence community, who were asked to give “yes” or “no” responses to questions such as: Was Jan. 6 “an inside job?” And was the 2020 presidential election “stolen?”

The wording of the Jan. 6 question was of particular interest. One might expect job applicants to be asked whether they agreed with Trump’s pardons, but the idea that the attack on the Capitol was “an inside job” has long been seen as a conspiracy theory relegated to the crackpot fringe.

And yet, if the Post’s reporting is accurate, those seeking influential intelligence community positions aren’t just confronting the question, they’re also expected to answer it the “right” way. (We’ll never know, of course, how many applicants lie for the sake of employment.)

The same article went on to note that at least two individuals in FBI field offices, who were being interviewed for senior positions who the “real patriots” were on Jan. 6. (A White House spokesperson told the Post the hiring process is “entirely appropriate.”)

All of this is every bit as unsettling as it seems. As MSNBC’s Chris Hayes summarized, “Purging dissent in the security services and giving loyalists power is something we instantly recognize in other contexts.”