Recess Appointments

[flockofseagulls104]

Most of his reported appointments (Kristi Noem, Elise Stefanik, Marco Rubio, John Ratcliffe) will sail through the Senate. Others don’t require confirmation. His Department of Government Efficiency isn’t a real department, more like a policy think tank. Some like Pete Hegseth for SecDef could face pushback. No former generals so far - I suppose he soured on them since his first term.

The democrats have been extensively planning to vigorously oppose and delay his agenda. Gavin Newsome's zoom meeting is just one example, and he was blatant enough to do it in public. Lord knows what they have up their sleeve that they've planned in private. I'm sure they have investigated every possible nominee's high school activities. And lined up people willing to slander any one of them. President Trump has learned a lot in the past 4 years and at last our side (WE THE PEOPLE) are seeing some push back against the 6 ways from Sunday tactics of the swamp and possibly some courage to take the fight to them.

All it takes is a majority vote, so where's the problem? Could it be that there are some "RINOs" who might resist some of the nominations?

Of course there are. Did we not have a discussion about that not too long ago? Or have you forgotten or ignored it already?
One of the biggest rinos managed to get a man in his image elected as the Majority Leader. We can only hope he'll grow into the job and side with the people instead of the swamp.

[earendel]

Now I get it. The reason for recess appointments is so that we can get an alleged sex criminal as head of the justice department, a conspiracy theorist as director of national intelligence, a defender of war criminals as secretary of defense, and a vaccine skeptic as head of HHS.

[Weyoun]

Russian television actually calls Gabbard a "friend of Russia" - and there is no reason to think she is playing some long game. This is exactly who you want in charge of intelligence.

[flockofseagulls104]

Now I get it. The reason for recess appointments is so that we can get an alleged sex criminal a victim of lawfare as head of the justice department, a conspiracy theorist a person who was a democrat Presidential Candidate until the swamp put her on the terrorist list as director of national intelligence, a defender of war criminals an anti woke - decorated warrior as secretary of defense, and a vaccine skeptic an ex democrat Presidential Candidate who has devoted his life to health issues as head of HHS.

Fixed it for you from a different perspective.
Seems like the upcoming administration is not only inclusive, is strong woman friendly and is bi-partisan. Unlike the BS you get from the legacy media conglomerate. Why is it you still give them any credibility?

oh, and PS: I thought that the war criminals had jumped ship and joined the democrats.

[Weyoun]

If these are such a great choices, they should be able to withstand the scrutiny of the standard confirmation process. That way they can vocalize their ideas about how to make America great again, and address concerns about them.

If Gabbard is a Russian agent, then Russia would be very much in favor her getting appointed and having access to all that intelligence without her being vetted as would be the protocol otherwise.

Given that dunderfuck Tommy Tuberville held up appointments over the unrelated matter of abortion, it’s completely fair to expect that actual heads of cabinet departments undergo the full scrutiny that should be expected for their positions.

[flockofseagulls104]

If these are such a great choices, they should be able to withstand the scrutiny of the standard confirmation process. That way they can vocalize their ideas about how to make America great again, and address concerns about them.

If Gabbard is a Russian agent, then Russia would be very much in favor her getting appointed and having access to all that intelligence without her being vetted as would be the protocol otherwise.

Given that dunderfuck Tommy Tuberville held up appointments over the unrelated matter of abortion, it’s completely fair to expect that actual heads of cabinet departments undergo the full scrutiny that should be expected for their positions.

So we can spend weeks hearing them yelling about made-up stuff that didn't happen in high school or round up women willing to falsely accuse some sort of sexual abuse? If they could limit the questions to policy issues, that's one thing. But they NEVER do that. They only do character assassination. Biden was the pioneer.
Enough is enough.

How many times are you going to use the russia card? None of them have been true. When will you learn? (rhetorical question)

[Weyoun]

If these are such a great choices, they should be able to withstand the scrutiny of the standard confirmation process. That way they can vocalize their ideas about how to make America great again, and address concerns about them.

If Gabbard is a Russian agent, then Russia would be very much in favor her getting appointed and having access to all that intelligence without her being vetted as would be the protocol otherwise.

Given that dunderfuck Tommy Tuberville held up appointments over the unrelated matter of abortion, it’s completely fair to expect that actual heads of cabinet departments undergo the full scrutiny that should be expected for their positions.

So we can spend weeks hearing them yelling about made-up stuff that didn't happen in high school or round up women willing to falsely accuse some sort of sexual abuse? If they could limit the questions to policy issues, that's one thing. But they NEVER do that. They only do character assassination. Biden was the pioneer.
Enough is enough.

How many times are you going to use the russia card? None of them have been true. When will you learn? (rhetorical question)

As a non-simpleton, and as a taxpayer, I think it's very important for folks to be asked under scrutiny about their positions.

It was often invoked that Trump would be the better higher versus Harris if this was a job interview. Well, these are job interviews.

Given the stakes involved, I would think even Donald Trump would want to make sure every is square - unless of course he's hiding something, or just doesn't care.

I favor the latter. Given the statutory rape allegations out there against Gaetz, it's embarrassing he would be considered for Attorney General.

[flockofseagulls104]

If these are such a great choices, they should be able to withstand the scrutiny of the standard confirmation process. That way they can vocalize their ideas about how to make America great again, and address concerns about them.

If Gabbard is a Russian agent, then Russia would be very much in favor her getting appointed and having access to all that intelligence without her being vetted as would be the protocol otherwise.

Given that dunderfuck Tommy Tuberville held up appointments over the unrelated matter of abortion, it’s completely fair to expect that actual heads of cabinet departments undergo the full scrutiny that should be expected for their positions.

So we can spend weeks hearing them yelling about made-up stuff that didn't happen in high school or round up women willing to falsely accuse some sort of sexual abuse? If they could limit the questions to policy issues, that's one thing. But they NEVER do that. They only do character assassination. Biden was the pioneer.
Enough is enough.

How many times are you going to use the russia card? None of them have been true. When will you learn? (rhetorical question)

As a non-simpleton, and as a taxpayer, I think it's very important for folks to be asked under scrutiny about their positions.

It was often invoked that Trump would be the better higher versus Harris if this was a job interview. Well, these are job interviews.

Given the stakes involved, I would think even Donald Trump would want to make sure every is square - unless of course he's hiding something, or just doesn't care.

I favor the latter. Given the statutory rape allegations out there against Gaetz, it's embarrassing he would be considered for Attorney General.

Talk to me about that when you do some scrutinization on the people you vote for to represent you, and will be 'judging' these nominations. I'd love to see them going through their own confirmation hearings and what could be thrown at them.

[Weyoun]

So we can spend weeks hearing them yelling about made-up stuff that didn't happen in high school or round up women willing to falsely accuse some sort of sexual abuse? If they could limit the questions to policy issues, that's one thing. But they NEVER do that. They only do character assassination. Biden was the pioneer.
Enough is enough.

How many times are you going to use the russia card? None of them have been true. When will you learn? (rhetorical question)

As a non-simpleton, and as a taxpayer, I think it's very important for folks to be asked under scrutiny about their positions.

It was often invoked that Trump would be the better higher versus Harris if this was a job interview. Well, these are job interviews.

Given the stakes involved, I would think even Donald Trump would want to make sure every is square - unless of course he's hiding something, or just doesn't care.

I favor the latter. Given the statutory rape allegations out there against Gaetz, it's embarrassing he would be considered for Attorney General.

Talk to me about that when you do some scrutinization on the people you vote for to represent you, and will be 'judging' these nominations. I'd love to see them going through their own confirmation hearings and what could be thrown at them.

Isn’t that usually the case? Do you have an example of an attorney general who was appointed by recess appointment and never scrutinized?

[flockofseagulls104]

As a non-simpleton, and as a taxpayer, I think it's very important for folks to be asked under scrutiny about their positions.

It was often invoked that Trump would be the better higher versus Harris if this was a job interview. Well, these are job interviews.

Given the stakes involved, I would think even Donald Trump would want to make sure every is square - unless of course he's hiding something, or just doesn't care.

I favor the latter. Given the statutory rape allegations out there against Gaetz, it's embarrassing he would be considered for Attorney General.

Talk to me about that when you do some scrutinization on the people you vote for to represent you, and will be 'judging' these nominations. I'd love to see them going through their own confirmation hearings and what could be thrown at them.

Isn’t that usually the case? Do you have an example of an attorney general who was appointed by recess appointment and never scrutinized?

AGs aren't elected. You don't know what you're talking about. Or you didn't bother to comprehend what you were responding to. You're a poophead. Don't talk about what you don't know about or understand. Drunk again?

Just a hint. I'd like to see Schumer go through a democrat-style confirmation hearing. Or better yet, Biden.

[Weyoun]

Talk to me about that when you do some scrutinization on the people you vote for to represent you, and will be 'judging' these nominations. I'd love to see them going through their own confirmation hearings and what could be thrown at them.

Isn’t that usually the case? Do you have an example of an attorney general who was appointed by recess appointment and never scrutinized?

AGs aren't elected. You don't know what you're talking about. Or you didn't bother to comprehend what you were responding to. You're a poophead. Don't talk about what you don't know about or understand. Drunk again?

Just a hint. I'd like to see Schumer go through a democrat-style confirmation hearing. Or better yet, Biden.

What are you even talking about? The Attorney General is not directly elected, but that person is confirmed by a vote of the Senate. And the other name you mentioned were actually elected.

It’s getting to the point where I feel sorry for you, since I’m not sure if you have the capacity to care for yourself

[kroxquo]

So we can spend weeks hearing them yelling about made-up stuff that didn't happen in high school or round up women willing to falsely accuse some sort of sexual abuse? If they could limit the questions to policy issues, that's one thing. But they NEVER do that. They only do character assassination. Biden was the pioneer.
Enough is enough.

How many times are you going to use the russia card? None of them have been true. When will you learn? (rhetorical question)

As a non-simpleton, and as a taxpayer, I think it's very important for folks to be asked under scrutiny about their positions.

It was often invoked that Trump would be the better higher versus Harris if this was a job interview. Well, these are job interviews.

Given the stakes involved, I would think even Donald Trump would want to make sure every is square - unless of course he's hiding something, or just doesn't care.

I favor the latter. Given the statutory rape allegations out there against Gaetz, it's embarrassing he would be considered for Attorney General.

Talk to me about that when you do some scrutinization on the people you vote for to represent you, and will be 'judging' these nominations. I'd love to see them going through their own confirmation hearings and what could be thrown at them.

The people I voted for did go through scrutiny - it's called elections. I vetted every single person I voted for from President right down to the local school board by looking at their record, statements, and any other information I could find. And believe it or not, I did not vote a straight ticket. I did vote for two Republicans and a Libertarian in state elections. That's where the scrutiny comes in. Now in the case of of cabinet picks, no one is voting for them. That is why the framers included the "advise and consent" part of the Constitution - so that the voters had selected could have a say (at least indirectly) in the selection of unelected positions.

[earendel]

Now I get it. The reason for recess appointments is so that we can get an alleged sex criminal a victim of lawfare as head of the justice department, a conspiracy theorist a person who was a democrat Presidential Candidate until the swamp put her on the terrorist list as director of national intelligence, a defender of war criminals an anti woke - decorated warrior as secretary of defense, and a vaccine skeptic an ex democrat Presidential Candidate who has devoted his life to health issues as head of HHS.

Fixed it for you from a different perspective.
Seems like the upcoming administration is not only inclusive, is strong woman friendly and is bi-partisan. Unlike the BS you get from the legacy media conglomerate. Why is it you still give them any credibility?

oh, and PS: I thought that the war criminals had jumped ship and joined the democrats.

It's not worth the effort, but...
Gaetz was investigated by the House Ethics Committee, and resigned before their report could be released. Now Speaker Johnson is stating that the report won't be released. I wonder why?

I don't mind that Gabbard was a former Democrat. But her statements about Russia and Ukraine make her at least a "useful idiot".

Hegseth, on his FOX program, lobbied for Trump to pardon at least two members of the military who were accused of war crimes. And he, too, has to deal with a sexual assault charge.

Kennedy is a well-known vaccine skeptic, not to mention he also buys into some conspiracy theories - for instance, that 5G wireless networks are used to control people's behavior, COVID was engineered to spare Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people, and antidepressants cause mass shootings.

These are the people Trump has appointed. He's not building a cabinet, he's filling a junk drawer. (Not original with me.)

[flockofseagulls104]

After thinking about it, I think Gaetz should go through a complete and thorough confirmation hearing. I would prefer just one circus where the democrats can shoot their wad, rather than a series of them.

None of you or the media know what the results of the congressional investigation is. You are just assuming he is guilty. It is an amazing coincidence that every conservative that is a threat to the swamp seems to have a group of women willing and brought forward to accuse them of some sort of abuse. Usually with no evidence. Just with 'you have to believe the woman'. Do they have a rolodex of them? At least with Bill Clinton there was physical evidence.

What we want him to do and the reason he was nominated is to find and root out the corruption in the DOJ. What better way to start than to stand up to and fight back against what will certainly be another democrat show trial of a nominee. Perhaps he can completely embarass and take out a democrat senator or two. Maybe even a Rino.

[earendel]

After thinking about it, I think Gaetz should go through a complete and thorough confirmation hearing. I would prefer just one circus where the democrats can shoot their wad, rather than a series of them.

None of you or the media know what the results of the congressional investigation is. You are just assuming he is guilty. It is an amazing coincidence that every conservative that is a threat to the swamp seems to have a group of women willing and brought forward to accuse them of some sort of abuse. Usually with no evidence. Just with 'you have to believe the woman'. Do they have a rolodex of them? At least with Bill Clinton there was physical evidence.

What we want him to do and the reason he was nominated is to find and root out the corruption in the DOJ. What better way to start than to stand up to and fight back against what will certainly be another democrat show trial of a nominee. Perhaps he can completely embarass and take out a democrat senator or two. Maybe even a Rino.

In Gaetz's case, his "good friend" ratted on him. Moreover, Speaker Johnson's reluctance to let the Senate have the results of the House's investigation doesn't pass the smell test (no, he's not standing on tradition - there are multiple instances in the past where an investigation was relayed to others). As for Hegseth, now it appears that he paid the woman money in exchange for a nondisclosure agreement.

[flockofseagulls104]

After thinking about it, I think Gaetz should go through a complete and thorough confirmation hearing. I would prefer just one circus where the democrats can shoot their wad, rather than a series of them.

None of you or the media know what the results of the congressional investigation is. You are just assuming he is guilty. It is an amazing coincidence that every conservative that is a threat to the swamp seems to have a group of women willing and brought forward to accuse them of some sort of abuse. Usually with no evidence. Just with 'you have to believe the woman'. Do they have a rolodex of them? At least with Bill Clinton there was physical evidence.

What we want him to do and the reason he was nominated is to find and root out the corruption in the DOJ. What better way to start than to stand up to and fight back against what will certainly be another democrat show trial of a nominee. Perhaps he can completely embarass and take out a democrat senator or two. Maybe even a Rino.

In Gaetz's case, his "good friend" ratted on him. Moreover, Speaker Johnson's reluctance to let the Senate have the results of the House's investigation doesn't pass the smell test (no, he's not standing on tradition - there are multiple instances in the past where an investigation was relayed to others). As for Hegseth, now it appears that he paid the woman money in exchange for a nondisclosure agreement.

You have a smell test? I guess your left nostril doesn't work quite as well as your right nostril. No surprise with you getting your information from places like Vanity Fair and their 'unnamed sources'.
Good Friend? Like Michael Cohen? I say let Gaetz go through the process.

You are proving my point for me. Amazing that this 2017 thing has surfaced out of the swamp against the pick they fear the most. Same old same old. The swamp has used it so many times nobody believes it. Geez, it must be hard for Clarence Thomas, Donald Trump, Brett Kavanaugh et al to have kept it in their pants so long when they are all sex maniacs.

[Weyoun]

I don’t think it is wild that a sexual assault allegation from 2017 surfaced to the public now. The guy was just nominated for defense secretary.

[flockofseagulls104]

I don’t think it is wild that a sexual assault allegation from 2017 surfaced to the public now. The guy was just nominated for defense secretary.

Patterns of behavior.

[earendel]

Two women have come forward and said that Matt Gaetz paid them for sex. Now this may surprise you, but that doesn't bother me, as long as the women were of age and had the ability to consent (not drugged or blind drunk). I do happen to think that that was immoral, but not disqualifying to be Attorney General. It's the drug use and underage sex that's the problem.

[flockofseagulls104]

Two women have come forward and said that Matt Gaetz paid them for sex. Now this may surprise you, but that doesn't bother me, as long as the women were of age and had the ability to consent (not drugged or blind drunk). I do happen to think that that was immoral, but not disqualifying to be Attorney General. It's the drug use and underage sex that's the problem.

Apparently so. I don't know what the truth is, and neither do you. And sexual charges against conservative nominees seems to be a pattern. And in this country, people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

I also know that the DOJ, no particualr fan of Matt Gaetz, did a year long investigation of these charges and decided not to charge him with anything.

Given the extensive track history of the main stream, legacy media, the media conglomerate that has lied to us about so many things, taking the position of the left in most, if not all, of these situations, why do you automatically give them credibility?

[Weyoun]

Two women have come forward and said that Matt Gaetz paid them for sex. Now this may surprise you, but that doesn't bother me, as long as the women were of age and had the ability to consent (not drugged or blind drunk). I do happen to think that that was immoral, but not disqualifying to be Attorney General. It's the drug use and underage sex that's the problem.

Apparently so. I don't know what the truth is, and neither do you. And sexual charges against conservative nominees seems to be a pattern. And in this country, people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

I also know that the DOJ, no particualr fan of Matt Gaetz, did a year long investigation of these charges and decided not to charge him with anything.

Given the extensive track history of the main stream, legacy media, the media conglomerate that has lied to us about so many things, taking the position of the left in most, if not all, of these situations, why do you automatically give them credibility?

The underage stuff has been floating around for sometime. There’s a lot of reason I think it’s true. While no one likes the little turd, the fact that it led to all this stuff and he was just a lonely representative is quite interesting.

You can take the insane position that anything said by the media must be a lie, but I think the situation is serious enough that those who have allegations against the representative should have their day and the quarter of public opinion. Surely Trump can find some other non-creep to be attorney’s general.

The hilarious thing is that this will backfire. He will never make the nomination hearing stage, so the other forces are good can focus on knocking out his other insane pics.

[flockofseagulls104]

Two women have come forward and said that Matt Gaetz paid them for sex. Now this may surprise you, but that doesn't bother me, as long as the women were of age and had the ability to consent (not drugged or blind drunk). I do happen to think that that was immoral, but not disqualifying to be Attorney General. It's the drug use and underage sex that's the problem.

Apparently so. I don't know what the truth is, and neither do you. And sexual charges against conservative nominees seems to be a pattern. And in this country, people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

I also know that the DOJ, no particualr fan of Matt Gaetz, did a year long investigation of these charges and decided not to charge him with anything.

Given the extensive track history of the main stream, legacy media, the media conglomerate that has lied to us about so many things, taking the position of the left in most, if not all, of these situations, why do you automatically give them credibility?

The underage stuff has been floating around for sometime. There’s a lot of reason I think it’s true. While no one likes the little turd, the fact that it led to all this stuff and he was just a lonely representative is quite interesting.

You can take the insane position that anything said by the media must be a lie, but I think the situation is serious enough that those who have allegations against the representative should have their day and the quarter of public opinion. Surely Trump can find some other non-creep to be attorney’s general.

The hilarious thing is that this will backfire. He will never make the nomination hearing stage, so the other forces are good can focus on knocking out his other insane pics.

Not surprising you are a fan of trying someone through the media instead of a courtroom. Your side controls the media, so why not? That is an insane position and what they do in banana republics, and what they tried to do to trump. You want to live in a country like that? Go to Venezuela. Go to Brazil and keep Lula in power. I may be stupid, but you are crazy.

Consider this. Marco Rubio will be SOS. That opens up a Senate seat that De Santis will appoint. How would you like Senator Gaetz?

[Weyoun]

Apparently so. I don't know what the truth is, and neither do you. And sexual charges against conservative nominees seems to be a pattern. And in this country, people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

I also know that the DOJ, no particualr fan of Matt Gaetz, did a year long investigation of these charges and decided not to charge him with anything.

Given the extensive track history of the main stream, legacy media, the media conglomerate that has lied to us about so many things, taking the position of the left in most, if not all, of these situations, why do you automatically give them credibility?

The underage stuff has been floating around for sometime. There’s a lot of reason I think it’s true. While no one likes the little turd, the fact that it led to all this stuff and he was just a lonely representative is quite interesting.

You can take the insane position that anything said by the media must be a lie, but I think the situation is serious enough that those who have allegations against the representative should have their day and the quarter of public opinion. Surely Trump can find some other non-creep to be attorney’s general.

The hilarious thing is that this will backfire. He will never make the nomination hearing stage, so the other forces are good can focus on knocking out his other insane pics.

Not surprising you are a fan of trying someone through the media instead of a courtroom. Your side controls the media, so why not? That is an insane position and what they do in banana republics, and what they tried to do to trump. You want to live in a country like that? Go to Venezuela. Go to Brazil and keep Lula in power. I may be stupid, but you are crazy.

Consider this. Marco Rubio will be SOS. That opens up a Senate seat that De Santis will appoint. How would you like Senator Gaetz?

As a Senator he's not as capable of harm, and can't kill investigations into his own creepy, illegal behavior.

[earendel]

Consider this. Marco Rubio will be SOS. That opens up a Senate seat that De Santis will appoint. How would you like Senator Gaetz?

That position has been reserved for Lara Trump.

[earendel]

Two women have come forward and said that Matt Gaetz paid them for sex. Now this may surprise you, but that doesn't bother me, as long as the women were of age and had the ability to consent (not drugged or blind drunk). I do happen to think that that was immoral, but not disqualifying to be Attorney General. It's the drug use and underage sex that's the problem.

Apparently so. I don't know what the truth is, and neither do you. And sexual charges against conservative nominees seems to be a pattern. And in this country, people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

I also know that the DOJ, no particualr fan of Matt Gaetz, did a year long investigation of these charges and decided not to charge him with anything.

Given the extensive track history of the main stream, legacy media, the media conglomerate that has lied to us about so many things, taking the position of the left in most, if not all, of these situations, why do you automatically give them credibility?

You automatically assume that whatever the mainstream media reports is a lie. So it's not surprising that you refuse to accept what they report - I imagine that if they reported the sky was blue you'd find posts on X that would refute that claim. As to your specific question, Gaetz's timely resignation before the ethics report could be released, coupled with Speaker Johnson's about face on releasing the report to the Senate has to raise some red flags.