Jump to content

Tracking Trump Administration and Cabinet picks

PenelopeWitherspoon

By PenelopeWitherspoon
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

956 Worldwide
956 Worldwide

Incidentally, “recess appointments” are what Matt Gaetz calls his dates. 

Ghost of LL
Ghost of LL

I genuinely don't understand why you post here. Literally everyone here thinks you're of significantly below-average intelligence.  Even the people who agree with your positions on a topic sigh a

Ted Lange
Ted Lange

Posted Images

956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 34703

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Ana stanning for Tulsi is pretty on brand. 

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2019/08/04/tulsi-gabbards-reports-on-chemical-attacks-in-syria-a-self-contradictory-error-filled-mess/
 

Quote

However, I remain skeptical about two particular CW attacks, one at Khan Sheikhun on April 4, 2017, and the other at Douma on April 7, 2018. Both attacks occurred in towns under the control of al-Qaeda-linked opposition forces. Both attacks resulted in multiple civilian casualties, and both were immediately blamed on the Assad government. However, there is evidence to suggest that the attacks may have been staged by opposition forces for the purpose of drawing the United States and the West deeper into the war.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
wildcat09

wildcat09 29347

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Don't worry, I am ready to be disappointed. Some of the worst warmongers nominated will easily clear confirmation. Would be nice to have at least one opposing voice at the table. 

Someone who supported Assad dropping barrel bombs and chlorine gas on his own citizens isn’t a warmonger because…?

  • Hook 'Em 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites
heso

heso 2786

Posted
Posted

The biggest Trump maga guy I know just said to me that there’s no reason to not do the background checks. If there’s a process, the process should be followed. But I got him before he’s had Fox News spin put on it and why it’s actually super important that they don’t have background checks. I’m sure his opinion will be changed by next week. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27194

Posted
Posted

Is it possible that dotard is nominating some of these woefully unqualified morons knowing they can't get confirmed. Yet they still did their part to help get him elected and probably expect, you know a little something for the effort? Maybe he realizes Gaetz or Tulsi or RFKjr can't get confirmed and he can say, "Hey, guys, I tried."

It's almost like asking somebody to a ballgame that you know beforehand can't go. You get credit for the invite and get to take somebody else? (Of course this probably isn't the case because turnip isn't that savvy.)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23463

Posted
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Someone who supported Assad dropping barrel bombs and chlorine gas on his own citizens isn’t a warmonger because…?

I haven't gone down the Syria rabbit hole, but where did she support anyone dropping bombs or gas on anyone else? Here is the excerpt from the link provided above. It was a criticism directed at, wait for it, the fucking Trump administration for apparently carrying out missile strikes without an investigation being completed. Go tear apart her statement all you want, but she is fundamentally criticizing the Trump administration's response. What a strange worldview y'all weave when you are bitching about Tulsi shitting on the prior Trump administration as proof that she is a warmonger in the context of Trump appointing her to a role in his second administration. You guys just get totally twisted and untethered to reality with some of this stuff. "Tulsi is a warmonger and should not be DNI in the second Trump administration because she challenged his military interventionism during the first Trump administration." Real galaxy brained shit. 

 

There is evidence that both the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad as well as the armed opposition groups aligned against him have used chemical weapons (CW) during the Syrian war.

However, I remain skeptical about two particular CW attacks, one at Khan Sheikhun on April 4, 2017, and the other at Douma on April 7, 2018. Both attacks occurred in towns under the control of al-Qaeda-linked opposition forces. Both attacks resulted in multiple civilian casualties, and both were immediately blamed on the Assad government. However, there is evidence to suggest that the attacks may have been staged by opposition forces for the purpose of drawing the United States and the West deeper into the war.

Unfortunately, in both instances President Trump launched retaliatory missile strikes against the Syrian government before any investigation had even begun, much less been completed. Rather than wait for evidence, Trump relied on social media posts and unverified sources originating from within rebel held territory, many of which had ties to al Qaeda.

The OPCW also relied on those sources.

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76874

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, C-Man said:

Is it possible that dotard is nominating some of these woefully unqualified morons knowing they can't get confirmed. Yet they still did their part to help get him elected and probably expect, you know a little something for the effort? Maybe he realizes Gaetz or Tulsi or RFKjr can't get confirmed and he can say, "Hey, guys, I tried."

It's almost like asking somebody to a ballgame that you know beforehand can't go. You get credit for the invite and get to take somebody else? (Of course this probably isn't the case because turnip isn't that savvy.)

 

putin wants the chaos 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoladu

yoladu 4090

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Is it possible that dotard is nominating some of these woefully unqualified morons knowing they can't get confirmed. Yet they still did their part to help get him elected and probably expect, you know a little something for the effort? Maybe he realizes Gaetz or Tulsi or RFKjr can't get confirmed and he can say, "Hey, guys, I tried."

It's almost like asking somebody to a ballgame that you know beforehand can't go. You get credit for the invite and get to take somebody else? (Of course this probably isn't the case because turnip isn't that savvy.)

i think a good part of it is a loyalty test for Senators to see who passes or not.

If Mega Maga Senator for the South votes to confirm presidential appointee Daffy Duck for Secretary of Labor, Trump knows this guy will debase and embarrass himself for basically anything Trump wants going forward.

Donald is trying to smoke out those not completely on Team Trump.

Edited by yoladu
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29656

Posted
Posted
Just now, yoladu said:

i think a good part of it is a loyalty test for Senators to see who passes or not.

If Mega Maga Senator for the South votes to confirm presidential appointee Daffy Duck for Secretary of Labor, Trump knows this guy will debase and embarrass himself for basically anything Trump wants going forward.

Yep. This is a smash-and-grab era of American politics and a loyalty test. Absurdity will be no impediment.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thatguy

Thatguy 8682

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Is it possible that dotard is nominating some of these woefully unqualified morons knowing they can't get confirmed. Yet they still did their part to help get him elected and probably expect, you know a little something for the effort? Maybe he realizes Gaetz or Tulsi or RFKjr can't get confirmed and he can say, "Hey, guys, I tried."

It's almost like asking somebody to a ballgame that you know beforehand can't go. You get credit for the invite and get to take somebody else? (Of course this probably isn't the case because turnip isn't that savvy.)

 

52 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

putin wants the chaos 

 

36 minutes ago, yoladu said:

i think a good part of it is a loyalty test for Senators to see who passes or not.

If Mega Maga Senator for the South votes to confirm presidential appointee Daffy Duck for Secretary of Labor, Trump knows this guy will debase and embarrass himself for basically anything Trump wants going forward.

Donald is trying to smoke out those not completely on Team Trump.

Lol no! Trump is stupid. All those nominees, regardless of how dumb we think they are, are smarter than Trump. He probably thinks they can do the job. 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23463

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Weird take

Maybe. State, DoD, and NSA positions all seem to be filled with folks that are going to be more than happy to advocate expanding military interventionism. I mean Rubio? For Chrissake. He is the most slam dunk confirmation, the NSA guy right behind him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubliminalHorn

SubliminalHorn 6786

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Longhorn94 said:

Maybe I picked the wrong day to go to the Holocaust museum but he is following Hitler's playbook - rush to get everyone confirmed because crisis, bypass normal safeguards see crisis, establish a private police force to handle deportation because crisis. 

We are going to need to pull together and stop this. Holy fucking shit.

 

 

The time for that was last week. But nope. Misinformation, an economy that had bad vibes, and the fact she was a woman of color killed our chance to stop it. It’s happening now. Now I’m not sure what we do except prepare 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23463

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Just a reminder that Anastasis will never, ever, ever come out against something that is useful for Russia. 

LOL yeah I know. I was told the same thing in discussions here about nordstream, afghan bounties, alpha bank, prague, the steele dossier, etc. But maybe my memory is just selective. 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31440

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude.  It's too late.

Now is the time to figure out what companies are going to be best positioned to profit from building "camps," and invest.  If you can get a patent on a "shower head" designed to distribute poison gas, that would also be a good plan.  Stuff like that.  There were a SHITLOAD of Germans who 1) made a fortune off of the activities of the Nazi regime, and then 2) booked it for Argentina before the allies got to 'em. 

Keep reading those history books.  While they're full of warnings we've completely chosen to ignore, they're also full of ideas on how to get rich in the horror and chaos.

For the record, any of you degenerates comes to me about a shower head, I'm declining representation.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13509

Posted
Posted

Trump will hurt America and Americans but the one ray of hope that I have is that we’re seeing more examples of Trump being able the adequately get things done. He was pathetic at doing the easiest things as president the first time. Now as president-elect, everyone is simultaneously laughing at his picks while being horrified with the thought of them in power.

Perhaps the one worst rep or senator (now or recent) that Trump could have chosen instead of Gaetz was George santos. No one in Congress likes Gaetz and now they’re all tasked with keeping gaetz’s secrets and confirming his appointment. Kevin McCarthy will use any last power he has to ensure that ethics report is made public.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wood

wood 11225

Posted
Posted (edited)

Conservative Jonah Goldberg has some thoughts on Gaetz, Gabbard, RFK, Hegseth, and senators' obligations to the constitution. Pretty, pretty good.

https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/gfile/the-worst-pick/

Quote

At the inaugural Dispatch Summit—a smashing success, if I do say so myself—Paul Ryan and Mike Pence were pretty upbeat about the appointments so far. Of course, about four hours after the summit, Trump announced that he intended to name Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense. And the next day he announced his plans for Tulsi Gabbard. Not long after came the news about Matt Gaetz and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 

Spoiler

There’s a robust discussion on the right about how bad these picks are, and I’ll say this in defense of Hegseth—he comes out as the least bad. I don’t think he’s a good choice. But that’s mostly because I don’t think he has the skill sets to run one of the largest, most complicated and important organizations in the world. And while I have plenty of issues with Hegseth, I am confident that he starts from defensible, patriotic assumptions about America that make him the least objectionable of the group. I don’t like his effort to seek—and get—pardons for accused war criminals. But if you stipulate that his version of the facts was correct—which I believe he believed—it was defensible.

Some folks think Gabbard is the worst pick. She’s a seriously unserious person with a penchant for blame-America-first arguments and flip-flopping like a wounded moth trying to find the limelight. The director of national intelligence should be a stolid, solid man or woman in a gray suit, an answer to a tough trivia question, not a political and ideological exotic.

Others think Kennedy is the worst pick. I have to agree that he’s the worst person of the bunch, and I say this even if all of the allegations against Matt Gaetz are true (and I’m open to the possibility that some aren’t). Kennedy is a profoundly dishonest and dishonorable man. In 2001 alone, he cheated on his wife 37 times. This isn’t gossip. This is his own account. And it wasn’t bragging. That number comes from his own diary. His wife found the journal, and it apparently played a role in her suicide. 

We can come back to his shoddiness in a moment. But I am happy to concede, as an intellectual matter, that an adulterous sleazeball could make for a competent Health and Human Services secretary. His grotesque personal behavior should be a reason to disqualify him from any honored role in public life—yes, I’m one of those judgy conservatives—but reasonable people can disagree about such things. But it is his “professional,” public behavior that should make him unacceptable. 

For starters, there’s nothing in his résumé that qualifies him to oversee 1 in 4 dollars spent by the federal government. Then there’s the fact that he’s a crank and fabulist who insists, to name just two examples, that cell phones and Wi-Fi cause cancer. Think about how much you’ve been exposed to Wi-Fi and cell phone signals over the last 20 years. It’s certainly true that massive exposure to electromagnetic radiation is best avoided. But if he was right, you’d think we’d see an increase in the cancers he says are caused by moderate exposure. There has been none. The Heritage Foundation and others think he’s a hero because of his anti-vaccine crusade in the COVID era. I think that’s all nonsense for the most part. But he was anti-vax when conservatives were mocking anti-vaxxers as left-wing loons. His anti-vax group directly contributed to the deaths of 83 Samoan children from measles, and the supposedly science-driven Kennedy simply lied about it.

Kennedy is an intellectual lightweight hungry for respect as an expert. So he talks like an expert with the hope that people won’t notice that he’s just making stuff up. In a secret recording, he just made up nonsense about COVID being bioengineered to target black and Caucasians while sparing Jews and Asians. It was all nonsense. So by all means … let’s give him a $2 trillion budget? 

And then there’s Matt Gaetz. Personally, I think he’s the worst pick, because the attorney general is a lodestone of the executive branch. I totally get how under the theory of the unitary executive, the attorney general is just an extension of presidential authority. But there’s a longstanding expectation that the attorney general is supposed to be a de facto—if not necessarily a de jure—check on abuses of executive authority. This is why conservatives complained so bitterly about previous attorneys general being too chummy with the president, starting in the modern era with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s father. 

Over the years, thousands of right-wing op-eds and cable news diatribes have excoriated Janet Reno, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland et al. for too much water-carrying for Democratic presidents. The factual merits of those indictments vary, but the principle they invoked was correct. The only argument for Gaetz boils down to “we should do it too!” If you believe that overly politicized AGs are bad, if you wax righteous about the rule of law, and if you decry politicized prosecutions (accurately or not), arguing “now it’s our turn” is not an honorable, moral, or patriotic argument. But that is the only argument for Gaetz. 

America can handle a flibbertigibbet in the DNI’s office. It can handle a dangerous loon at HHS. It can even handle an anti-woke cable news host as defense secretary. But an attorney general whose only “qualification” is to be a MAGA version of the Hand of the King, makes the burden of handling those other things infinitely more burdensome. Gaetz would not see getting to the bottom of executive branch excesses as part of his portfolio—he would see defending and enabling those excesses as central to his mission. Trump wants a Roy Cohn to run the Department of Justice, and that alone is reason to reject his preferred choice. 

Indeed, that’s the real problem with all of these picks: the picker. Trump wants loyalists, enablers, and TV pitchmen to staff his administration. There’s nothing we can do—now—to change that. He was legitimately and decisively elected president. But every senator was elected to be a senator, too. And, according to the Constitution, their job isn’t to “support the president,” but to protect and defend the Constitution and, with that in mind, to advise and consent to presidential appointments. I understand that the unwritten commandment of the GOP is to empower Trump, but that is not the oath these people took. 

 

 

Edited by wood
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105079

Posted
Posted
Conservative Jonah Goldberg has some thoughts on Gaetz, Gabbard, RFK, Hegseth, and senators' obligations to the constitution. Pretty, pretty good.
https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/gfile/the-worst-pick/
At the inaugural Dispatch Summit—a smashing success, if I do say so myself—Paul Ryan and Mike Pence were pretty upbeat about the appointments so far. Of course, about four hours after the summit, Trump announced that he intended to name Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense. And the next day he announced his plans for Tulsi Gabbard. Not long after came the news about Matt Gaetz and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 
There’s a robust discussion on the right about how bad these picks are, and I’ll say this in defense of Hegseth—he comes out as the least bad. I don’t think he’s a good choice. But that’s mostly because I don’t think he has the skill sets to run one of the largest, most complicated and important organizations in the world. And while I have plenty of issues with Hegseth, I am confident that he starts from defensible, patriotic assumptions about America that make him the least objectionable of the group. I don’t like his effort to seek—and get—pardons for accused war criminals. But if you stipulate that his version of the facts was correct—which I believe he believed—it was defensible.
Some folks think Gabbard is the worst pick. She’s a seriously unserious person with a penchant for blame-America-first arguments and flip-flopping like a wounded moth trying to find the limelight. The director of national intelligence should be a stolid, solid man or woman in a gray suit, an answer to a tough trivia question, not a political and ideological exotic.
Others think Kennedy is the worst pick. I have to agree that he’s the worst person of the bunch, and I say this even if all of the allegations against Matt Gaetz are true (and I’m open to the possibility that some aren’t). Kennedy is a profoundly dishonest and dishonorable man. In 2001 alone, he cheated on his wife 37 times. This isn’t gossip. This is his own account. And it wasn’t bragging. That number comes from his own diary. His wife found the journal, and it apparently played a role in her suicide. 
We can come back to his shoddiness in a moment. But I am happy to concede, as an intellectual matter, that an adulterous sleazeball could make for a competent Health and Human Services secretary. His grotesque personal behavior should be a reason to disqualify him from any honored role in public life—yes, I’m one of those judgy conservatives—but reasonable people can disagree about such things. But it is his “professional,” public behavior that should make him unacceptable. 
For starters, there’s nothing in his résumé that qualifies him to oversee 1 in 4 dollars spent by the federal government. Then there’s the fact that he’s a crank and fabulist who insists, to name just two examples, that cell phones and Wi-Fi cause cancer. Think about how much you’ve been exposed to Wi-Fi and cell phone signals over the last 20 years. It’s certainly true that massive exposure to electromagnetic radiation is best avoided. But if he was right, you’d think we’d see an increase in the cancers he says are caused by moderate exposure. There has been none. The Heritage Foundation and others think he’s a hero because of his anti-vaccine crusade in the COVID era. I think that’s all nonsense for the most part. But he was anti-vax when conservatives were mocking anti-vaxxers as left-wing loons. His anti-vax group directly contributed to the deaths of 83 Samoan children from measles, and the supposedly science-driven Kennedy simply lied about it.
Kennedy is an intellectual lightweight hungry for respect as an expert. So he talks like an expert with the hope that people won’t notice that he’s just making stuff up. In a secret recording, he just made up nonsense about COVID being bioengineered to target black and Caucasians while sparing Jews and Asians. It was all nonsense. So by all means … let’s give him a $2 trillion budget? 
And then there’s Matt Gaetz. Personally, I think he’s the worst pick, because the attorney general is a lodestone of the executive branch. I totally get how under the theory of the unitary executive, the attorney general is just an extension of presidential authority. But there’s a longstanding expectation that the attorney general is supposed to be a de facto—if not necessarily a de jure—check on abuses of executive authority. This is why conservatives complained so bitterly about previous attorneys general being too chummy with the president, starting in the modern era with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s father. 
Over the years, thousands of right-wing op-eds and cable news diatribes have excoriated Janet Reno, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland et al. for too much water-carrying for Democratic presidents. The factual merits of those indictments vary, but the principle they invoked was correct. The only argument for Gaetz boils down to “we should do it too!” If you believe that overly politicized AGs are bad, if you wax righteous about the rule of law, and if you decry politicized prosecutions (accurately or not), arguing “now it’s our turn” is not an honorable, moral, or patriotic argument. But that is the only argument for Gaetz. 
America can handle a flibbertigibbet in the DNI’s office. It can handle a dangerous loon at HHS. It can even handle an anti-woke cable news host as defense secretary. But an attorney general whose only “qualification” is to be a MAGA version of the Hand of the King, makes the burden of handling those other things infinitely more burdensome. Gaetz would not see getting to the bottom of executive branch excesses as part of his portfolio—he would see defending and enabling those excesses as central to his mission. Trump wants a Roy Cohn to run the Department of Justice, and that alone is reason to reject his preferred choice. 
Indeed, that’s the real problem with all of these picks: the picker. Trump wants loyalists, enablers, and TV pitchmen to staff his administration. There’s nothing we can do—now—to change that. He was legitimately and decisively elected president. But every senator was elected to be a senator, too. And, according to the Constitution, their job isn’t to “support the president,” but to protect and defend the Constitution and, with that in mind, to advise and consent to presidential appointments. I understand that the unwritten commandment of the GOP is to empower Trump, but that is not the oath these people took. 
 

Jonah Goldberg should drink hemlock. He helped create the unprincipled monstrosity, he should be the among first ones consumed by it.
He knew what he was doing. He thought he could intellectually control the monstrous philosophy he stoked. He was wrong. He should suffer.
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Hermanator

Hermanator 7032

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
19 hours ago, C-Man said:

6ca2a7f4b4a245373cdfdce9f507b8ad.jpg

Everyone sees it. 

But no one can do anything about it now. 

The DOJ under Biden refused to press to do anything about it. 

The American people in this election stated they want this. 

American democracy is over. It's quasi-authoritarian Oligarchy now.  

Democrats needs to fight dirty and attack with dirty tactics too. The game has changed. There needs to be a wide spread social media propaganda machine just hammering these idiots for everything they're going to fuck up. Turn the people against them. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52487

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Jonah Goldberg should drink hemlock. He helped create the unprincipled monstrosity, he should be the among first ones consumed by it.
He knew what he was doing. He thought he could intellectually control the monstrous philosophy he stoked. He was wrong. He should suffer.

How could he have known?  It’s not as if there’s innumerable real-life or literary examples of being unable to control the thing you created. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...