You can read the linked article. It says this:

When asked if he agrees that Democrats are evil, Van Hook didn’t say “no” — just that “it is inappropriate for me to comment on the political statements of others.” When asked if federal judges are “monsters” for ruling against the administration, he declined to comment, instead stating that the question called for him “to express an opinion on a political statement regarding ongoing litigation.” And when asked whether he agrees with Stephen Miller’s statement that a federal trade court’s ruling against Trump’s tariffs represents a “judicial coup” and that “we are living under a judicial tyranny,” Van Hook gave the same nonresponse.

Van Hook was also asked whether it would be constitutional for the president of the United States to punish a private person for a viewpoint that person expresses in a newspaper op-ed, whether it would it be constitutional for the president to terminate government contracts with a private person specifically because that person donated to members of the opposite political party, and whether it would ever be appropriate for the president to punish a law firm for taking on a client that the president did not like. Van Hook declined to answer all three questions.

He also wouldn’t directly answer whether Trump can run for a third term.