Should he stay or should he go?

[gowlerk 2,246]

4 prosecutors quit the case, one resigns, 1000 former and current officials sign a petition. Yet this barely even makes a ripple in the news in this day of extremes. I don't recall any mention of it here. WTF?

[JerryBaumchen 1,426]

7 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

WTF?

Hi Ken,

As I watched the news clips of Barr the last few days, I've thought that his days may be numbered.  I also thought that the Dufus Trump would not be above appointing himself the AG.

Jerry Baumchen

[gowlerk 2,246]

24 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

I also thought that the Dufus Trump would not be above appointing himself the AG.

Do you think he would agree to attend his confirmation hearing?

[JerryBaumchen 1,426]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Do you think he would agree to attend his confirmation hearing?

Hi Ken,

Honestly, with how Mitch is running the Senate, Trump could 'attend' remotely from the White House.  Mitch would OK it & Trump would be in.  No witnesses, no questions; just an up/down vote.

'OK, we're done here.'

Jerry Baumchen

[BIGUN 1,399]

Thank you so much for putting this in my head :) - 

 

[DJL 235]

17 hours ago, gowlerk said:

4 prosecutors quit the case, one resigns, 1000 former and current officials sign a petition. Yet this barely even makes a ripple in the news in this day of extremes. I don't recall any mention of it here. WTF?

To be replaced with a bigger patsy?  

[kallend 2,106]

11 minutes ago, DJL said:

To be replaced with a bigger patsy?  

Whoever agrees to replace him clearly will not have an ounce of self-respect.

In fact I don't think anyone who agrees to work for a proven liar, cheat, and con-man has an ounce of self-respect. 

[DJL 235]

2 minutes ago, kallend said:

Whoever agrees to replace him clearly will not have an ounce of self-respect.

In fact I don't think anyone who agrees to work for a proven liar, cheat, and con-man has an ounce of self-respect. 

I was thinking the same.  Who in their right might would want to step into the a role in which they have to at least be as much of a yes man as Barr and first spend several months with Democrats attempting to find any shred of history to use against you and then run the risk of your new boss, the President, trying to fire you and damage your reputation and career if you disagree over anything (which is inevitable).

[JoeWeber 2,810]

9 minutes ago, DJL said:

I was thinking the same.  Who in their right might would want to step into the a role in which they have to at least be as much of a yes man as Barr and first spend several months with Democrats attempting to find any shred of history to use against you and then run the risk of your new boss, the President, trying to fire you and damage your reputation and career if you disagree over anything (which is inevitable).

Who? Is there a shortage? I'd hazard there are a few just here.

[DJL 235]

2 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Who? Is there a shortage? I'd hazard there are a few just here.

Considering the quantity of unfilled positions in his administration, yes, there's a shortage.  Working for Trump means the risk of permanent damage to your career.

[turtlespeed 226]

16 minutes ago, DJL said:

Considering the quantity of unfilled positions in his administration, yes, there's a shortage.  Working for Trump means the risk of permanent damage to your career.

But . . . a lucrative book deal.

[ryoder 1,590]

31 minutes ago, DJL said:

Considering the quantity of unfilled positions in his administration, yes, there's a shortage.  Working for Trump means the risk of permanent damage to your career.

Over 3 years into a 4-year term, 1/4 of the positions don't even have a nominee:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/

[DJL 235]

34 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

But . . . a lucrative book deal.

If he loses the election the period between Nov 4 2020 and Jan 20, 2021 will be quite full of book-worthy material.

[JerryBaumchen 1,426]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

Whoever agrees to replace him clearly will not have an ounce of self-respect.

In fact I don't think anyone who agrees to work for a proven liar, cheat, and con-man has an ounce of self-respect. 

Hi John,

Again, I could not agree more.

Anyone working for Trump is simply not thinking long-term.

Then again, there will be book deals.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  I expect to start A Very Stable Genius by Phil Rucker soon.  It should be interesting reading.

[wmw999 2,517]

8 hours ago, ryoder said:

Over 3 years into a 4-year term, 1/4 of the positions don't even have a nominee

Remember he said that was part of his plan to shrink government. We hear more about the unfilled position than we about the work not being done. And, well, while some of them are likely hurting badly, I hope some functions are being re-evaluated. Because sometimes a jobs function erodes with changes elsewhere, or advances in technology.  “We’ve always done it that way” is not really a better justification in government than it is in business.   

Wendy P. 

[TriGirl 329]

10 hours ago, ryoder said:

Over 3 years into a 4-year term, 1/4 of the positions don't even have a nominee:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/

But he did get more of the empty judge positions filled (with unqualified judges, but still...)

[normiss 845]

3 minutes ago, TriGirl said:

But he did get more of the empty judge positions filled (with unqualified judges, but still...)

The lack of proper states people with international relations experience is painfully obvious as well. The results of which left Pompeo bewildered recently. Seems somewhat normal for him, but still.

[kallend 2,106]

Why do we need an AG when we already have a "chief law enforcement officer"?  
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/post-impeachment-trump-declares-himself-the-chief-law-enforcement-officer-of-america/2020/02/18/b8ff49c0-5290-11ea-b119-4faabac6674f_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_first_reads&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_rainbow&wpmm=1

However, according to the DoJ itself:

The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the Office of the Attorney General which evolved over the years into the head of the Department of Justice and chief law enforcement officer of the Federal Government. The Attorney General represents the United States in legal matters generally and gives advice and opinions to the President and to the heads of the executive departments of the Government when so requested. In matters of exceptional gravity or importance the Attorney General appears in person before the Supreme Court. Since the 1870 Act that established the Department of Justice as an executive department of the government of the United States, the Attorney General has guided the world's largest law office and the central agency for enforcement of federal laws.

[turtlespeed 226]

23 minutes ago, kallend said:

Why do we need an AG when we already have a "chief law enforcement officer"?  
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/post-impeachment-trump-declares-himself-the-chief-law-enforcement-officer-of-america/2020/02/18/b8ff49c0-5290-11ea-b119-4faabac6674f_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_first_reads&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_rainbow&wpmm=1

However, according to the DoJ itself:

The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the Office of the Attorney General which evolved over the years into the head of the Department of Justice and chief law enforcement officer of the Federal Government. The Attorney General represents the United States in legal matters generally and gives advice and opinions to the President and to the heads of the executive departments of the Government when so requested. In matters of exceptional gravity or importance the Attorney General appears in person before the Supreme Court. Since the 1870 Act that established the Department of Justice as an executive department of the government of the United States, the Attorney General has guided the world's largest law office and the central agency for enforcement of federal laws.

I can't read the article - No subscription.

It does appear from the headlines that he is overreaching once again, though.

I really wish he would spend a little time researching things and ask a few questions before he mouths off.

[wmw999 2,517]

9 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

It does appear from the headlines that he is overreaching once again, though.

I really wish he would spend a little time researching things and ask a few questions before he mouths off.

Oh come on — he doesn’t even need security briefings because “he’s like a smart person.”

Why on earth should he research? He already knows everything that’s worth knowing! 

Wendy P. 

[turtlespeed 226]

13 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Oh come on — he doesn’t even need security briefings because “he’s like a smart person.”

Why on earth should he research? He already knows everything that’s worth knowing! 

Wendy P. 

I remember when I used to know everything too.

[wmw999 2,517]

You were 13, and have matured considerably since then...

Wendy P. 

[JerryBaumchen 1,426]

2 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

You were 13, and have matured considerably since then...

Hi Wendy,

In my case, I was 16; and, yes I have matured since then.

Jerry Baumchen

[turtlespeed 226]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

You were 13, and have matured considerably since then...

Wendy P. 

Thou dost provide me with an overabundance of credit.