Pam Bondi, former AG of Florida (2011-2019), is the new AG pick, replacing Goetz.
The same Pam Bondi who dismissed the lawsuit against Trump University after he made a $25,000 donation to a PAC (Political Action Committee) that was supporting her. Bondi was also on the defense team at his first impeachment hearing. She is certainly more competent than Gaetz, by a long shot, and perhaps more potentially dangerous. (Begging the question, which is worse - competent danger or incompetent danger?) She'll no doubt follow orders, and it remains to be seen where/if she'll draw the line. Bondi also fits the reality-TV show nature of the Cabinet appointments. She's an attractive, telegenic younger blonde woman who delivers his talking points in a feisty style, has been defending the Big Lie for the last 4 years, and who has appeared frequently on FOX (see: attractive telegenic younger blonde).
Inquiring mind wants to know. If Gaetz resigned from the current congress, can he be able to be sworn in in the next congress without having to go through a special election? After all, he was duly re=elected just a few weeks ago.
Well, Gaetz is out for the good of the team, and Trump is looking to install someone who is closer to qualified.
I'm a little suspicious of how smoothly that happened, like Gaetz was obviously the godawful choice and so now whoever comes in next will look better because, horrible as they are, they aren't Matt Gaetz. Or it was all a sham to get him out of office before the radioactive tea spilled.
I hate this kind of speculating, but here we are.
It's conspiratorial, but I maintain that Gaetz's nomination was a craven, calculated move to get the report about him buried. That's it. That's the move. My take is that Gaetz never was in actual consideration. I think it makes the most sense.
Inquiring mind wants to know. If Gaetz resigned from the current congress, can he be able to be sworn in in the next congress without having to go through a special election? After all, he was duly re=elected just a few weeks ago.
As I understand it, the answer is “maybe.” When he resigned his seat, he also stated that he did not intend to take the oath in the 119th Congress, so as to enable Florida/DeSantis to call a special election. So it’s probably the call of DeSantis and the Florida Secretary of State whether to call a special election based on Gaetz’s previous representation or whether to certify his election ro the next Congress.
Of course, if there’s a special election, he could run. And either way, if he is seated, that ethics report gets a new lease on life.
Of course, if there’s a special election, he could run. And either way, if he is seated, that ethics report gets a new lease on life.
It should be noted that the House Ethics committee by design has an equal number of Democratic and Republican members, regardless of who controls the House as whole, so Republican control of the House is no bar to resurrecting the Gaetz ethics report.
Inquiring mind wants to know. If Gaetz resigned from the current congress, can he be able to be sworn in in the next congress without having to go through a special election? After all, he was duly re=elected just a few weeks ago.
As I understand it, the answer is “maybe.” When he resigned his seat, he also stated that he did not intend to take the oath in the 119th Congress, so as to enable Florida/DeSantis to call a special election. So it’s probably the call of DeSantis and the Florida Secretary of State whether to call a special election based on Gaetz’s previous representation or whether to certify his election ro the next Congress.
Of course, if there’s a special election, he could run. And either way, if he is seated, that ethics report gets a new lease on life.
Sounds like someone is going to have to kiss someone's @ss to return to congress.
Inquiring mind wants to know. If Gaetz resigned from the current congress, can he be able to be sworn in in the next congress without having to go through a special election? After all, he was duly re=elected just a few weeks ago.
As I understand it, the answer is “maybe.” When he resigned his seat, he also stated that he did not intend to take the oath in the 119th Congress, so as to enable Florida/DeSantis to call a special election. So it’s probably the call of DeSantis and the Florida Secretary of State whether to call a special election based on Gaetz’s previous representation or whether to certify his election ro the next Congress.
Of course, if there’s a special election, he could run. And either way, if he is seated, that ethics report gets a new lease on life.
Sounds like someone is going to have to kiss someone's @ss to return to congress.
He may not want to return to Congress if it could mean the ethics report gets resurrected. He might prefer to take a position in the White House that doesn’t require Senate confirmation or to make an obscene amount of money working for some über-conservative “news” outlet.
Gaetz told associates that he believed Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine and Senator-elect John Curtis of Utah were fully opposed to his nomination and would effectively kill his bid to lead DOJ, New York Times journalist Jonathan Swan reported on Thursday.
(I would have used the NY Times article, but it is behind a paywall)
This may not bode well for Hegseth, or Gabbard or even Matthew Whitaker (named ambassador to NATO), as each of them have to be reported out by different committees which are strongly in favor of Defense, Intelligence, and NATO.
On the other hand, Trump will have free reign on some of the undersecretary nominations and department heads that are not confirmed by the Senate.
On the other hand, Trump will have free reign on some of the undersecretary nominations and department heads that are not confirmed by the Senate.
This is kind of true, but as this Wikipedia page illustrates you have to go pretty far down the org chart to find positions that don't require Senate approval.
On the other hand, Trump will have free reign on some of the undersecretary nominations and department heads that are not confirmed by the Senate.
This is kind of true, but as this Wikipedia page illustrates you have to go pretty far down the org chart to find positions that don't require Senate approval.
Impressive. When does the Senate have time to do all the other work?
Turns out the Tramp landing teams cannot even begin to take over the departments without the proper authorization papers being signed. They cannot even get in to figure out desk assignments. Tramp does not sign, transition cannot go forward.
Harris had already signed some of the transition papers even before the election, just in case she won. Tramp cannot even play the rules of the game.
Some Republican Senators are beginning to get a little uncomfortable with the impasse. One insists they have to do it by the numbers.
Part of Tramp's plan to run the government like a dictatorship?
Another thing. Remember when Trump said he did not know anything about Project 2025. How come are a large percentage of his nominees coming from the people who wrote it?
Remember when Trump said he did not know anything about Project 2025. How come are a large percentage of his nominees coming from the people who wrote it?
Because their lips are glued so firmly to his ass that he can't help but notice them.
Remember when Trump said he did not know anything about Project 2025. How come are a large percentage of his nominees coming from the people who wrote it?
Because their lips are glued so firmly to his ass that he can't help but notice them.
That, and he was lying. I am shocked, shocked to realize he was lying.
(BTW, there just isn’t enough brain bleach for that image.)
Remember when Trump said he did not know anything about Project 2025. How come are a large percentage of his nominees coming from the people who wrote it?
Because their lips are glued so firmly to his ass that he can't help but notice them.
That, and he was lying. I am shocked, shocked to realize he was lying.
(BTW, there just isn’t enough brain bleach for that image.)
As someone else pointed out, you don't get anywhere with trump unless you first kiss him on all four cheeks.
@Gramps49 I think comparing Trump to a homeless person is totally unfair to people who are homeless. People are homeless for a variety of reasons, many beyond their control. There are undoubtably ethical people who are homeless too.
As for using the word "tramp" for Trump - There is a sense in which you are using a word used by judgemental people to describe women who display a behaviour of which you disapprove.
I feel uncomfortable about this because it seems to me that by comparing his behaviour to a certain group of women you are using the fact that they are women to denigrate him further.
More the homeless person, but he has had a number of sexual partners his gender notwithstanding.
In what way do you think Trump is comparable to a homeless person?
If his administration doesn't get serious about climate, leading the nation through a massive programme of de-carbonisation of power generation, industrial processes and transport, then he's likely to find Mar-a-Lago swept away by increasingly severe hurricanes and rising sea water. Though, he'll probably just move somewhere else which won't be as easy for all the residents of Palm Beach and the rest of Florida.
Personally, I find all the various ways of avoiding writing/typing “Trump” juvenile and silly, though I can see how it might be cathartic up to a point. But “Tramp” for “Trump” is very problematic. It puts the poster in a much worse light than it puts Trump.
Tramp is a rather common name for male dogs. I am not going to change what I wrote or apologize for it. This is a Hell thread, after all.
But when I originally asked you to clarify your meaning, you wrote:
More the homeless person, but [Trump] has had a number of sexual partners his gender notwithstanding.
Nothing about a male dog there. Nor on either OED or Merriam-Websters. The latter does give "a tramp dog" as an example of "tramp" used as an adjective, but not as a synonym for "male dog".
To be honest, I was actually coming around to thinking that you had just intended "tramp" as a generic insult, similar to "jerk", without thinking deeply about the literal meaning. And that's a pretty forgivable lapse. If you want to let that stand as your explanation, I'd personally(can't speak for others) be prepared to accept it and move on.
I’d say “was,” maybe in the 40s and 50s. I haven’t encountered a “Tramp” in at least 50 years, and I’ve met lots of dogs.
Seems irrelevant, though, since, as @stetson has noted, you’ve already said why you used “tramp,” and there was no mention of dogs.
I am not going to change what I wrote or apologize for it.
Your prerogative.
This is a Hell thread, after all.
It is indeed. And you’ve managed to descend far enough into the Netherworld that your playground taunts sound just like the person you’re trying to taunt. You sound like Trump. Well done.
CBS is now reporting that H3gs3th does not have the votes for confirmation. He has been accused of financial mismanagement of two veteran's he was managing. He is also accused of sexual abuse of women, and public intoxication.
Also, it appears the Trump transition team has finally signed the documents necessary for the Department of Justice to do the background checks on the cabinet nominations.
That Florida sheriff tapped to head the DEA has decided he'd rather not, as "the gravity of this very important responsibility set in." Wish they'd all have this much sense.
That Florida sheriff tapped to head the DEA has decided he'd rather not, as "the gravity of this very important responsibility set in." Wish they'd all have this much sense.
Since DeSantis will be apparently replaced by his lieutenant governor who is a Latina from Miami, if the rumor that DeSantis might be picked for the department of defense is true, given that Trump will pick someone horrible no matter what happens, I don’t know whether to hope for that or not. I feel like she would be probably less horrible than DeSantis and I live in Florida. He’s done so much damage here. But then again if DeSantis doesn’t get picked or if he gets shot down for the job, maybe we would get someone less horrible for the department of defense even though they would still be awful. I really hate having to make guesses like this… Then again I have absolutely no control over this whatsoever. But living in Florida makes me hope he stops ruining my state (he has destroyed my first college down in Sarasota, called New College and named after the one in Oxford, and it’s really horrible and very sad –It was the most liberal college in the state and quite possibly in the southeastern United States and he decided to wage a full scale ideological assault on it by essentially taking it over and putting extremist, evil right wing people in charge, including Christopher Rufo, who might be picked for something else so he can do the same to the country).
That Florida sheriff tapped to head the DEA has decided he'd rather not, as "the gravity of this very important responsibility set in." Wish they'd all have this much sense.
Why do you think Gabbard will get axed? Personally, I could see her foreign-policy views pissing off the more neo-con factions of the GOP. But that's assuming anyone's really paying attention to that sorta thing.
Why do you think Gabbard will get axed? Personally, I could see her foreign-policy views pissing off the more neo-con factions of the GOP. But that's assuming anyone's really paying attention to that sorta thing.
From the article: "But former US national security officials and lawmakers have raised concerns that the choice of Gabbard - a fierce opponent of America's involvement in foreign wars and whom critics accuse of echoing Kremlin narratives - could negatively affect intelligence co-operation."
Former national security officials don't matter anymore. No lawmakers were interviewed for this piece. A retired diplomat is quoted -- retired, so again, he doesn't matter anymore. An old quote from Romney on social media is trotted out, but he also doesn't matter anymore as he's retiring. So there's nothing here that says Gabbard's nomination is in trouble.
A number of GOP senators are skeptical about her foreign policy dealings and her trustworthiness in potentially heading the nation’s intelligence apparatus.
Although Gabbard is a favorite of Trump World, the Senate Republican Conference remains a different type of playing field, as it still contains a number of defense hawks and supporters of Ukraine in their ongoing war with Russia.
Some members of that crowd remain skeptical of Gabbard especially due to her past remarks about the Ukraine war that were sympathetic to Moscow and echoed by Russian state media — which has also praised her selection.
. . .
“Behind closed doors, people think she might be compromised. Like it’s not hyperbole,” the aide continued. “There are members of our conference who think she’s a [Russian] asset.”
Republican senators in public have rejected that idea and have defended Gabbard — who was a Democrat until 2022 and joined the Republican Party earlier this year — in the wake of those charges.
Some top Democrats, such as House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), a onetime colleague of Gabbard’s in the House, also say they do not believe she is a Russian asset, but Gabbard is not expected to win Democratic votes in her confirmation.
That means she can lose no more than three GOP votes and still get across the finish line.
“She’s not going to get any Democratic votes,” one Senate Republican said. “You can do the mental math.”
I would prefer not to name names, but the princess in question believes to this day that you-know-who was the actual winner of the previous Presidential election. She ran unsuccessfully for governor of Arizona in the last election but fought the decision in court after court, losing every time. Google should be your friend in determining who it is that I am talking about.
The nominee for Voice of America director is so low on my news interest it did not show up on the two services I follow.
Voice of America, though, has always been a propaganda arm of the United States. I can think of several times when it was not exactly known for accuracy in its reporting. Think Viet Nam War or the lead up to the Iraqi War. I really do not find it unusual for, as you say, the chief of liars to appoint another liar to the post.
Not going to use her real name either, except to say it rhymes with Fake.
---
Under the category of Will the Real Kash Patel please stand up? Rolling Stone calls him the sickest nominee yet. He really started in the justice department as a counter terrorism prosecutor, but NPR reports he had no significant cases. Trump liked him because he is so loyal to the Trump cause. Problem is, everywhere he goes he does a lot of damage. Rolling Stone tells of a time he deceptively caused the Pentagon to launch a rescue mission in Nicaragua for a supposed American held hostage. He also blew a cover for a Seal Team mission. The CIA director even threatened to resign if he were appointed to the CIA.
Everyone knows Kash has a book out talking about the Deep State. But did you know he also has three children's books out entitled The Plot Against the King, It is a trilogy. Amazon lists two of the books. The king's name is. King Don.
@Amanda B Reckondwyth I want you to know I respected your decision. But I liked the pairing of Fake with the one radio station that has been well known for that type of news.
Comments
It's conspiratorial, but I maintain that Gaetz's nomination was a craven, calculated move to get the report about him buried. That's it. That's the move. My take is that Gaetz never was in actual consideration. I think it makes the most sense.
Of course, if there’s a special election, he could run. And either way, if he is seated, that ethics report gets a new lease on life.
It should be noted that the House Ethics committee by design has an equal number of Democratic and Republican members, regardless of who controls the House as whole, so Republican control of the House is no bar to resurrecting the Gaetz ethics report.
Sounds like someone is going to have to kiss someone's @ss to return to congress.
Newsweek reports
(I would have used the NY Times article, but it is behind a paywall)
This may not bode well for Hegseth, or Gabbard or even Matthew Whitaker (named ambassador to NATO), as each of them have to be reported out by different committees which are strongly in favor of Defense, Intelligence, and NATO.
On the other hand, Trump will have free reign on some of the undersecretary nominations and department heads that are not confirmed by the Senate.
This is kind of true, but as this Wikipedia page illustrates you have to go pretty far down the org chart to find positions that don't require Senate approval.
Impressive. When does the Senate have time to do all the other work?
Turns out the Tramp landing teams cannot even begin to take over the departments without the proper authorization papers being signed. They cannot even get in to figure out desk assignments. Tramp does not sign, transition cannot go forward.
Harris had already signed some of the transition papers even before the election, just in case she won. Tramp cannot even play the rules of the game.
Some Republican Senators are beginning to get a little uncomfortable with the impasse. One insists they have to do it by the numbers.
Story here,https://politico.com/news/2024/11/23/trump-team-barred-from-agencies-amid-legal-standoff-00191399
Part of Tramp's plan to run the government like a dictatorship?
Another thing. Remember when Trump said he did not know anything about Project 2025. How come are a large percentage of his nominees coming from the people who wrote it?
Because their lips are glued so firmly to his ass that he can't help but notice them.
(BTW, there just isn’t enough brain bleach for that image.)
Is calling Trump "Tramp" meant to compare him to a homeless transient, or a woman with a supposedly excessive number of sexual partners?
In what way do you think Trump is comparable to a homeless person?
As someone else pointed out, you don't get anywhere with trump unless you first kiss him on all four cheeks.
As for using the word "tramp" for Trump - There is a sense in which you are using a word used by judgemental people to describe women who display a behaviour of which you disapprove.
I feel uncomfortable about this because it seems to me that by comparing his behaviour to a certain group of women you are using the fact that they are women to denigrate him further.
Personally, I find all the various ways of avoiding writing/typing “Trump” juvenile and silly, though I can see how it might be cathartic up to a point. But “Tramp” for “Trump” is very problematic. It puts the poster in a much worse light than it puts Trump.
But when I originally asked you to clarify your meaning, you wrote:
Nothing about a male dog there. Nor on either OED or Merriam-Websters. The latter does give "a tramp dog" as an example of "tramp" used as an adjective, but not as a synonym for "male dog".
To be honest, I was actually coming around to thinking that you had just intended "tramp" as a generic insult, similar to "jerk", without thinking deeply about the literal meaning. And that's a pretty forgivable lapse. If you want to let that stand as your explanation, I'd personally(can't speak for others) be prepared to accept it and move on.
Seems irrelevant, though, since, as @stetson has noted, you’ve already said why you used “tramp,” and there was no mention of dogs.
Your prerogative.
It is indeed. And you’ve managed to descend far enough into the Netherworld that your playground taunts sound just like the person you’re trying to taunt. You sound like Trump. Well done.
Point is, Tramp was a dog. Now most dogs are nice and friendly, some dogs are mean and ruthless.
I thought it was just an autocorrect
Or miss type.
Also, it appears the Trump transition team has finally signed the documents necessary for the Department of Justice to do the background checks on the cabinet nominations.
Look for G@bb@d to fail next.
He was getting resistance from MAGA people because he had arrested a minister who conducted a worship service during the lockdown in the pandemic. He realized he could not get the votes needed to be confirmed https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-nominees-live-updates-dea-pick-chad-chronister-withdraws-amid-backlash/ar-AA1vdAFc?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Of course, doing the right thing even once damages you in MAGA land…
Why do you think Gabbard will get axed? Personally, I could see her foreign-policy views pissing off the more neo-con factions of the GOP. But that's assuming anyone's really paying attention to that sorta thing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c14l6jpykmjo
Former national security officials don't matter anymore. No lawmakers were interviewed for this piece. A retired diplomat is quoted -- retired, so again, he doesn't matter anymore. An old quote from Romney on social media is trotted out, but he also doesn't matter anymore as he's retiring. So there's nothing here that says Gabbard's nomination is in trouble.
Fingers crossed…
More information would be appreciated by me, at least.
Voice of America, though, has always been a propaganda arm of the United States. I can think of several times when it was not exactly known for accuracy in its reporting. Think Viet Nam War or the lead up to the Iraqi War. I really do not find it unusual for, as you say, the chief of liars to appoint another liar to the post.
Not going to use her real name either, except to say it rhymes with Fake.
---
Under the category of Will the Real Kash Patel please stand up? Rolling Stone calls him the sickest nominee yet. He really started in the justice department as a counter terrorism prosecutor, but NPR reports he had no significant cases. Trump liked him because he is so loyal to the Trump cause. Problem is, everywhere he goes he does a lot of damage. Rolling Stone tells of a time he deceptively caused the Pentagon to launch a rescue mission in Nicaragua for a supposed American held hostage. He also blew a cover for a Seal Team mission. The CIA director even threatened to resign if he were appointed to the CIA.
Everyone knows Kash has a book out talking about the Deep State. But did you know he also has three children's books out entitled The Plot Against the King, It is a trilogy. Amazon lists two of the books. The king's name is. King Don.
My wife really hates the man. I can see why.
Trump had named Kari Lake to head Voice of America.
Thank you.
I want to interest you in a piece of news of great significance, but nobody to know what it is.