TRUMP 2024

624,143 Views | 7271 Replies | Last: 17 min ago by Bockwinkle
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
El Lobo Loco said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

DrummerboyWolf said:

Pam Bondi is an excellent pick for AG. She is really good and is a former homicide prosecutor and AG of Florida. Media and the Dems should have left Gaetz well enough alone. Be careful what you wish for.

As noted above by Cary's post from the Constitution. Trump can bypass all Cabinet confirmation hearings if he wants to. Get the people in there and destroy the Deep State. Sounds like a great plan to me!
No, he can't. This is a terrible interpretation and not what was intended. Besides, he's not going to get cooperation from the Senate. Senators (most of them) still take their job very seriously.
It certainly will get a ruling; however, this may be a place he could go to get some nominees through the process.

Based on what I understand, if the House says it's going on recess and the Senate doesn't, that becomes a disagreement. At that point, the President can force the two chambers into recess.

Now, I'm not sitting here saying this is constitutional; rather, I'm saying this is a crude understanding of how this may happen. Also, I am confident this will get challenged in the courts.

Also, the Senator's that were most vocal against Gaetz all voted for Garland. I think that is the kind of thing that causes issues. If an elected President, by the people, wants certain people to be in their cabinet, then the Senate should support that President.

And finally, Trump probably will "not" get any support, by the Democrats, on any of his nominees. Only the Republicans play by a different rule. I've said it before: Democrats play smash mouth Football, Republican sit on the sidelines.

Give all the credit to the Democrats!! They are just good at what they do...

So literally no matter who the President wants, the Senate should confirm them just because? That's ridiculous.

There's fair evidence Gaetz is heavy into drugs and prostitution at a minimum, and dudes that are heavy into drugs and prostitution seem fairly compromised, no? And that doesn't even speak of him running in sex trafficking circles or other illegal or illicit or unethical behavior. Gaetz's circumstance is extreme.

However little Dems support Trump's picks, there's almost certainly relativity there. Gaetz had zero shot at garnering any Dem support given his lunacy; he couldn't even get the necessary Republican support. If Trump nominates some like Roberts or Gorsuch I have a strong suspicion the outcome would be different.

We should run this by Hunter to confirm.

Sorry, which position in Biden's administration was Hunter nominated for again?

And if he was nominated, you're saying you'd be OK with it given his past conduct?

And you'd expect him to be confirmed?

No chance someone with his profile would be nominated and confirmed, which proves the point.
Gulfstream4
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

El Lobo Loco said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

DrummerboyWolf said:

Pam Bondi is an excellent pick for AG. She is really good and is a former homicide prosecutor and AG of Florida. Media and the Dems should have left Gaetz well enough alone. Be careful what you wish for.

As noted above by Cary's post from the Constitution. Trump can bypass all Cabinet confirmation hearings if he wants to. Get the people in there and destroy the Deep State. Sounds like a great plan to me!
No, he can't. This is a terrible interpretation and not what was intended. Besides, he's not going to get cooperation from the Senate. Senators (most of them) still take their job very seriously.
It certainly will get a ruling; however, this may be a place he could go to get some nominees through the process.

Based on what I understand, if the House says it's going on recess and the Senate doesn't, that becomes a disagreement. At that point, the President can force the two chambers into recess.

Now, I'm not sitting here saying this is constitutional; rather, I'm saying this is a crude understanding of how this may happen. Also, I am confident this will get challenged in the courts.

Also, the Senator's that were most vocal against Gaetz all voted for Garland. I think that is the kind of thing that causes issues. If an elected President, by the people, wants certain people to be in their cabinet, then the Senate should support that President.

And finally, Trump probably will "not" get any support, by the Democrats, on any of his nominees. Only the Republicans play by a different rule. I've said it before: Democrats play smash mouth Football, Republican sit on the sidelines.

Give all the credit to the Democrats!! They are just good at what they do...

So literally no matter who the President wants, the Senate should confirm them just because? That's ridiculous.

There's fair evidence Gaetz is heavy into drugs and prostitution at a minimum, and dudes that are heavy into drugs and prostitution seem fairly compromised, no? And that doesn't even speak of him running in sex trafficking circles or other illegal or illicit or unethical behavior. Gaetz's circumstance is extreme.

However little Dems support Trump's picks, there's almost certainly relativity there. Gaetz had zero shot at garnering any Dem support given his lunacy; he couldn't even get the necessary Republican support. If Trump nominates some like Roberts or Gorsuch I have a strong suspicion the outcome would be different.

We should run this by Hunter to confirm.

Sorry, which position in Biden's administration was Hunter nominated for again?

And if he was nominated, you're saying you'd be OK with it given his past conduct?

And you'd expect him to be confirmed?

No chance someone with his profile would be nominated and confirmed, which proves the point.


Hunter was appointed business development for "the big guy" earning him a nice 10%.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
El Lobo Loco said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

DrummerboyWolf said:

Pam Bondi is an excellent pick for AG. She is really good and is a former homicide prosecutor and AG of Florida. Media and the Dems should have left Gaetz well enough alone. Be careful what you wish for.

As noted above by Cary's post from the Constitution. Trump can bypass all Cabinet confirmation hearings if he wants to. Get the people in there and destroy the Deep State. Sounds like a great plan to me!
No, he can't. This is a terrible interpretation and not what was intended. Besides, he's not going to get cooperation from the Senate. Senators (most of them) still take their job very seriously.
It certainly will get a ruling; however, this may be a place he could go to get some nominees through the process.

Based on what I understand, if the House says it's going on recess and the Senate doesn't, that becomes a disagreement. At that point, the President can force the two chambers into recess.

Now, I'm not sitting here saying this is constitutional; rather, I'm saying this is a crude understanding of how this may happen. Also, I am confident this will get challenged in the courts.

Also, the Senator's that were most vocal against Gaetz all voted for Garland. I think that is the kind of thing that causes issues. If an elected President, by the people, wants certain people to be in their cabinet, then the Senate should support that President.

And finally, Trump probably will "not" get any support, by the Democrats, on any of his nominees. Only the Republicans play by a different rule. I've said it before: Democrats play smash mouth Football, Republican sit on the sidelines.

Give all the credit to the Democrats!! They are just good at what they do...

So literally no matter who the President wants, the Senate should confirm them just because? That's ridiculous.

There's fair evidence Gaetz is heavy into drugs and prostitution at a minimum, and dudes that are heavy into drugs and prostitution seem fairly compromised, no? And that doesn't even speak of him running in sex trafficking circles or other illegal or illicit or unethical behavior. Gaetz's circumstance is extreme.

However little Dems support Trump's picks, there's almost certainly relativity there. Gaetz had zero shot at garnering any Dem support given his lunacy; he couldn't even get the necessary Republican support. If Trump nominates some like Roberts or Gorsuch I have a strong suspicion the outcome would be different.

We should run this by Hunter to confirm.
BOTTOM LINE, if the DC establishment had one iota of dirt on Gaetz he'd been in Ft Leavenworth - YESTERDAY.

Cary and I are on the same side of the fence but going back and forth w #daSieve when he doesn't nothing but throw out his MSM propaganda is what I'd call wasting time. Sieve is so far into the MSM matrix of lies he'll never get out.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'll just leave this one right here…


SmaptyWolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

I'll just leave this one right here…





You can leave it next to the big tax cut Trump is about to add to the deficit which I'm sure you'll cheer for.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If America can grow some balls and sling the Govt crutches away we can return ourselves to the prosperity of 19th century tariffs and tariffs without any federal income taxes and the IRS.

hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trumps labor secretary nominee was one of only 3 house Republicans to support the PRO Act, which could have overturned right to work laws in a majority of states. Seems like a real winner of a pick.

But I'm sure you guys will tell me why I'm wrong because Trump is playing 10D chess
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
#Sieve, whatcha think? I think she'll do a great job. Do you think your side will find a man to accuse her of rape 10-15 years ago?



Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldsouljer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Trumps labor secretary nominee was one of only 3 house Republicans to support the PRO Act, which could have overturned right to work laws in a majority of states. Seems like a real winner of a pick.

But I'm sure you guys will tell me why I'm wrong because Trump is playing 10D chess
No, I agree with you on this one. More concerning to me is Dan Hoffman and his Cipher Brief deep staters lobbying Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe to infiltrate their ilk back into their old haunts in the various ABC agencies.
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldsouljer said:

hokiewolf said:

Trumps labor secretary nominee was one of only 3 house Republicans to support the PRO Act, which could have overturned right to work laws in a majority of states. Seems like a real winner of a pick.

But I'm sure you guys will tell me why I'm wrong because Trump is playing 10D chess
No, I agree with you on this one. More concerning to me is Dan Hoffman and his Cipher Brief deep staters lobbying Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe to infiltrate their ilk back into their old haunts in the various ABC agencies.
If Republicans can't stand up to Trump here, they are completely useless.

This is worse than just an unqualified pick because it directly undermines everything the right has been pushing for on unions, education, and worker's rights for years.
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I know I've never seen a post from hokie about the labor secretary before Trump's nominee. Here's more info on the fascist misogynist's pick. Seems fine to me.

https://www.npr.org/2024/11/22/nx-s1-5197010/trump-labor-department-chavez-deremer-cabinet
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trump's pick for surgeon general, Janette Nesheiwat, doesn't seem to align with the RFK pick. She called the Covid vaccine "a gift from god." Wonder if she still thinks that. On that alone, I'm not a fan. Have to think a few tds folks here should love her based on her Covid position.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cuban's a greedy WEF/NWO globalist, at a minimum. Wondering if his got some P.Diddy type skeletons in his closet.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Trumps labor secretary nominee was one of only 3 house Republicans to support the PRO Act, which could have overturned right to work laws in a majority of states. Seems like a real winner of a pick.

But I'm sure you guys will tell me why I'm wrong because Trump is playing 10D chess
I'm all for people wanting to unionize. Personally, I don't want to union as I like negotiating, on my own. I think I can do negotiations best, for my needs.

That said, I have no problem with States wanting something like the Pro's Act. The Federal Government needs to stay out of it. No power, within the Constitution, for laws regarding this.

As far as 10D Chess, perhaps he is…. I think you have to consider that Trump is a New York businessman and might see Union's differently than we may. I've said it before, I don't agree with him on everything.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Tony Seruga seems to find stuff outside of the narrative. Just putting this out there.......


Yet here she is saying all the right things.

hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

I know I've never seen a post from hokie about the labor secretary before Trump's nominee. Here's more info on the fascist misogynist's pick. Seems fine to me.

https://www.npr.org/2024/11/22/nx-s1-5197010/trump-labor-department-chavez-deremer-cabinet
so you're good with forced unionization?
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

packgrad said:

I know I've never seen a post from hokie about the labor secretary before Trump's nominee. Here's more info on the fascist misogynist's pick. Seems fine to me.

https://www.npr.org/2024/11/22/nx-s1-5197010/trump-labor-department-chavez-deremer-cabinet
so you're good with forced unionization?
I'm not! Especially from the Federal Government. Now, if people from a State vote for representatives that enact forced unionization, well… that what they asked for.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A spiritual reawakening in America on display.
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is a prime example of why we talk about RINO fake conservatives, the Uniparty, the Deep State, etc…

https://instagr.am/p/DCuAQfLuP_F
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Exactly!
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

No
Well, you're going to have a Labor Secretary who does, and I bet she gets votes from every single democratic senator.
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ok. Shocking she doesn't have the enthusiastic support of the unions then. Trump doesn't have a history that suggests he supports forced unionization so I don't think that should be a concern.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trump has always been friendly with unions. He's had to be. Also, he was friendly with Union leadership in the past election. So much so, that some didn't endorse Harris. That's a big deal.

Unions aren't going anywhere unless we continue to change manufacturing locations and membership continues to go down.

As I said earlier, I'm not a fan of unions; however, I understand that some disagree. If we continue to eliminate Federal law and/or regulations and allow States to do their own thing, then I don't have a problem with them.

At some point, the free market, within the US, will win out.
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
doge going to cost more than it save with the easy lawsuits federal employees are going to win with Musk violating civil servant protection laws.

Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
Oldsouljer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

doge going to cost more than it save with the easy lawsuits federal employees are going to win with Musk violating civil servant protection laws.


Heh, well if I'm about to get a pink slip, I hope Musk will put his autograph on it.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

doge going to cost more than it save with the easy lawsuits federal employees are going to win with Musk violating civil servant protection laws.
Let me say that I don't know all these laws; however, I have very little doubt these laws are far more strenuous than the private sector. That is where laws need to be changed, if so…

Being able to be fired (if that's difficult) would change culture. Just look at large corporations! They buy into the whole HR world and make it difficult for a manager to make change.
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
On the OUTRIGHT LIES from the deranged, frothing-at-the-mouth communist DemoniRats regurgitating the muh Russia hoax, and now slandering Tulsi Gabbard as a "muh Russian asset":



Quote:

JUST IN: Senator Markwayne Mullin completely dismantles the idea that Tulsi Gabbard is a "Russian asset."

"Tulsi Gabbard is still a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army. She commands the Reserve Unit here in Oklahoma and Missouri."

"If she was compromised, if she wasn't able to pass a background check, she wouldn't still be in the Army."

He totally decimated Senator Tammy Duckworth, who claimed that @TulsiGabbard is compromised.

"Tammy is absolutely dead wrong on this and she should retract those words. It's the most dangerous thing she could say, that a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army is compromised and is an asset of Russia."
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

doge going to cost more than it save with the easy lawsuits federal employees are going to win with Musk violating civil servant protection laws.
Let me say that I don't know all these laws; however, I have very little doubt these laws are far more strenuous than the private sector. That is where laws need to be changed, if so…

Being able to be fired (if that's difficult) would change culture. Just look at large corporations! They buy into the whole HR world and make it difficult for a manager to make change.
You know why you've never heard of the lady Musk called out on Twitter? Because she does a good job, could make a lot more in the private sector and choose not to and instead serve her country. That's 99% of the people who hold non political appointed jobs, non law enforcement, or military jobs in the Federal Government. You only hear about the idiots who do dumb things. Unfortunately all the good people are now being judged by the actions of the bad, labeled "The Deep State", and on top of that the threat of being publicly humiliated by a billionaire.

Just a bad idea all around to turn average Americans into villains for political expediency
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I find it interesting that all the **** you guys rail about here, when the Presidents nominations for cabinet don't fit the bill of those things, you just decide to switch your opinion or don't even say anything. For instance Scott Bessent, Trump's U.S. Treasury pick, gay, married with two children so raising them against Gods word, worked for George Soros as his top investor , went to Yale so probably a Skull and Bones member, part of the billionaire class.

Crickets…. From you far right populists guys


Aside from his agreement on tariffs, which I don't think grow the economy and cost money rather than raises money, and does nothing to add manufacturing to the US, I love his 3-3-3 plan of reducing spending 3%, increasing gdp 3%, and producing an additional 3 million barrels of oil a day.

Look, I said something good about Trump!
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
lol at hokie crying at the people that voted to let Trump put the people in place he wanted to put in place not crying about his picks the way hokie wants them to cry.

Deranged.
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Way to avoid the question. I think it's a great pick!

I'm just wondering why you accept the pick without any blowback to the fact that it goes against the core populist beliefs? You aren't concerned about that?
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Way to avoid the question. I think it's a great pick!

I'm just wondering why you accept the pick without any blowback to the fact that it goes against the core populist beliefs? You aren't concerned about that?


Who said I'm a populist? Pretty common of you to use that label for Trump supporters. I know why though so no need to discuss that further.

No. I'm not concerned about his picks

I find it interesting you're only concerned with cabinet picks now though considering the outgoing administration.
First Page
Page 207 of 208
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.