The Trump Cabinet and key post thread (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

Surely to be a clown show. We know that RFK certainly thinks he’s getting nominated for HHS, which includes FDA.

 

[LA 2 L.A.]

I’m going to stop - even though there is plenty more. I find it very difficult to believe Sendai is being truthful when he claims to not know if she is qualified to be US Attorney. He wants us to think he follows court cases, always chiming in. How could he be unaware of her past exploits?

I have no doubts that Sendai is a propaganda hack. He's clearly parroting and not actually thinking or speaking for himself, because when pressed about things he's said, either he just repeats himself or stumbles around without a clue when trying to explain or elaborate on what he's said. It's just my opinion, of course.

 

[Sendai]

I’m going to stop - even though there is plenty more. I find it very difficult to believe Sendai is being truthful when he claims to not know if she is qualified to be US Attorney. He wants us to think he follows court cases, always chiming in. How could he be unaware of her past exploits?

Yeah, I pretty much follow appeals court cases, especially the Supreme Court. Mostly those cases with constitutional issues. Not familiar with Habba’s exploits.

 

[Sendai]

Can you even admit that the firing was done to circumvent a legal appointment?

I haven’t questioned the judges authority in the appointment. I posted the ruling statute. I just pointed out the futility.

 

[LA 2 L.A.]

Yeah, I pretty much follow appeals court cases, especially the Supreme Court. Mostly those cases with constitutional issues. Not familiar with Habba’s exploits.

You have yet to demonstrate you're actually familiar with appeals court cases and the Supreme Court. You keep saying you are, but you haven't show that you actually are, in my opinion.

 

[LA 2 L.A.]

I haven’t questioned the judges authority in the appointment. I posted the ruling statute. I just pointed out the futility.

"Just give up," is your signature move whenever we point out corrupt and unconstitutional things that Trump and Republicans are doing.

You claim you didn't vote for them, but you defend their every move at every turn. Things that make you go hmm.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Donald Trump’s advisers have abandoned an effort to find a new chief of staff to the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, allowing senior adviser Ricky Buria to continue performing the duties in an acting role despite once viewing him as a liability, according to people familiar with the matter.

Buria is not expected to formally receive the White House’s approval to become the permanent chief of staff to Hegseth, a position that became vacant after the first chief of staff, Joe Kasper, left in the wake of major upheaval in the secretary’s front office earlier this year.

But the attempt by the Trump advisers to block Buria from getting the job has fizzled in recent months as the news cycle moved away from the controversies that dogged Hegseth at the start of Trump’s term and officials lost interest in managing personnel at the Pentagon, the people said.………

Trump advisers abandon effort to find new chief of staff to serve Pete Hegseth

Exclusive: White House has left Ricky Buria to continue in role in an acting capacity as efforts to block him fizzled

www.theguardian.com

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I’m saying they could have extended Habba’s term and waited for the Senate to vote on confirmation. Instead they have a pissing contest.

Did the judges follow the law, yes or no?

 

[MT15]

I haven’t questioned the judges authority in the appointment. I posted the ruling statute. I just pointed out the futility.

That wasn’t the question. You seem to be blaming the judges, when it’s actually Bondi who has dismissed a perfectly fine employee to circumvent a legal appointment. Can you even admit that the reason for the firing was to circumvent a legal appointment?

 

[TampaJoe]

That wasn’t the question. You seem to be blaming the judges, when it’s actually Bondi who has dismissed a perfectly fine employee to circumvent a legal appointment. Can you even admit that the reason for the firing was to circumvent a legal appointment?

Did Bondi break the law. Did she have the legal authority to terminate said employee? Obviously the judges were within their legal authority not to extend Abbas term to allow time for Senate confirmation. Whether someone is “perfectly fine” for that position is up to POTUS and the Senate under the Constitution.

So it appears everybody is playing by the rules. They just aren’t playing well together.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Did Bondi break the law. Did she have the legal authority to terminate said employee? Obviously the judges were within their legal authority not to extend Abbas term to allow time for Senate confirmation. Whether someone is “perfectly fine” for that position is up to POTUS and the Senate under the Constitution.

So it appears everybody is playing by the rules. They just aren’t playing well together.

No one questioned the legality of the firing, I questioned her reasoning! I KNOW the reason was to undermine the Judge's ruling. I was clear retaliation and it had zero to do with that AUSA's performance. Bondi usurped that Judge's Article III responsibility.

 

[TampaJoe]

No one questioned the legality of the firing, I questioned her reasoning! I KNOW the reason was to undermine the Judge's ruling. I was clear retaliation and it had zero to do with that AUSA's performance. Bondi usurped that Judge's Article III responsibility.

One might argue that not extending Abbas term to allow for Senate confirmation undermined the Senate. I dunno what motivated the judge. Do you? How do you know the judge wasn’t playing politics? Why not give the Senate time to act?

I do agree that it sucks that the replacement lost their job.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

One might argue that not extending Abbas term to allow for Senate confirmation undermined the Senate. I dunno what motivated the judge. Do you? How do you know the judge wasn’t playing politics? Why not give the Senate time to act?

I do agree that it sucks that the replacement lost their job.

Because of this administration's PAST ACTIONS! The Judge likely took in to account the fact that Habba was not immediately nominated to the position when she was named the interim and instead, was nominated just weeks before her term ended. BTW, the Senate's ability to confirm Habba was not at all undermined, they can still confirm her to the position!

 

[TampaJoe]

Because of this administration's PAST ACTIONS! The Judge likely took in to account the fact that Habba was not immediately nominated to the position when she was named the interim and instead, was nominated just weeks before her term ended. BTW, the Senate's ability to confirm Habba was not at all undermined, they can still confirm her to the position!

I don’t disagree. But now that she has been formally nominated, what is wrong with leaving her in that position allowing sufficient time for Senate confirmation? I’m am not saying indefinitely but allow a reasonable amount of time for the Senate to act? As Sendai said, this has just created a pissing match that accomplishes nothing.

It is the POTUS job to nominate whom he wants to fill that role and the Senate decides whether or not that individual is “perfectly fine”. It isn’t up to the court to decide who is or is not “perfectly fine”. I agree that the administration should have acted quicker. But I would have extended the time and then if the Senate hadn’t acted, replace Abbas in the interim.

 

[MT15]

One might argue that not extending Abbas term to allow for Senate confirmation undermined the Senate. I dunno what motivated the judge. Do you? How do you know the judge wasn’t playing politics? Why not give the Senate time to act?

I do agree that it sucks that the replacement lost their job.

Because Habba is uniquely unfit for this position. The judges (plural) knew that. Habba should have lost her position. When someone does a horrifically bad job, that’s what should happen. Evidently you think otherwise.

What shouldn’t happen is that someone competent should lose their job because the AG wants to throw a fit about a legal appointment by the judges. That’s improper politicization.

You don’t even know her name, let alone anything about her, but you are in here defending the actions of Pam Bondi in firing an actual competent lawyer in a fit of pique.

 

[TampaJoe]

Because Habba is uniquely unfit for this position. The judges (plural) knew that. Habba should have lost her position. When someone does a horrifically bad job, that’s what should happen. Evidently you think otherwise.

What shouldn’t happen is that someone competent should lose their job because the AG wants to throw a fit about a legal appointment by the judges. That’s improper politicization.

As to point 1. That is up to the Senate. It isn’t up to you or to me or to the judge to make the determination as to fitness. That is a Senate function under the Constitution. Judges have no say in the matter.

As to point 2. I don’t disagree that it’s unfortunate. That is precisely why the judge IMO should have avoided the entire conflict. Judge could have extended a reasonable amount of time for the Senate to act on the nomination. Sadly, innocent people get caught up in political food fights. It’s happened before. Probably will happen again.

 

[MT15]

As to point 1. That is up to the Senate. It isn’t up to you or to me or to the judge to make the determination as to fitness. That is a Senate function under the Constitution. Judges have no say in the matter.

As to point 2. I don’t disagree that it’s unfortunate. That is precisely why the judge IMO should have avoided the entire conflict. Judge could have extended a reasonable amount of time for the Senate to act on the nomination. Sadly, innocent people get caught up in political food fights. It’s happened before. Probably will happen again.

Nope, judges have the authority to name the person for that position once her allotted days are up, and there has been no confirmation. They shouldn’t extend someone who is horribly unqualified. They have the same duty to the constitution as every other public servant. Habba is uniquely unfit, and should have never been put in that position to begin with. The judges (plural) would have been negligent to compound that error by extending her.

So as to confirmation, yes, it’s up to the Senate. But Trump and the GOP let her time expire without a vote to confirm. Thats on them, mostly Trump because he evidently didn’t even nominate her until recently. So now the decision was up to the judges and they made the responsible decision.

If you are the judges, you don’t extend an incompetent, unfit appointee. You put someone in there who is competent. It doesn’t affect her confirmation in the least. If the Senate wants to confirm someone of her caliber, well, they’ve been confirming unqualified and unfit appointees all along. So that’s their decision. But the judges needed to make a sound decision, and they did so.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

As to point 1. That is up to the Senate. It isn’t up to you or to me or to the judge to make the determination as to fitness. That is a Senate function under the Constitution. Judges have no say in the matter.

As to point 2. I don’t disagree that it’s unfortunate. That is precisely why the judge IMO should have avoided the entire conflict. Judge could have extended a reasonable amount of time for the Senate to act on the nomination. Sadly, innocent people get caught up in political food fights. It’s happened before. Probably will happen again.

A political food fight started by Pam Bondi after the judges pointed out that there is a time limit at the buffet, and Habba has been there long enough that she's about to violate the rules put in place by management.

The judges acted within the scope of the law. Bondi fired someone in order to circumvent the law. This isn't both sides. Bondi is openly defying federal judges in order to violate the spirit and letter of the law.

 

[MT15]

I find it endlessly fascinating that our 2 conservatives, when presented with this scenario both pivot to blaming the judges who acted completely within the law and above board in refusing to extend someone who is clearly unfit for office and has in fact bungled at least 2 different cases in her short time there.

Instead they take the side of the AG, who clearly is only acting in a completely partisan manner, and who, out of spite, fired a competent lawyer who did nothing wrong. You don’t treat people this way - firing them to get back at judges. Or at least any person who has a normal psyche doesn’t act in this manner. You have to be pretty cruel and heartless. Oh and extremely petty. All ugly traits. Not to mention, you have to have complete indifference to the incompetence displayed by Habba.

It wouldn’t surprise me if Trump told Bondi to fire that poor lawyer. He has all those traits in abundance.