International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   USA Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   White House Survivor (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=321828)

Meadmaker 20th June 2020 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babbylonian (Post 13131857)
Except for one tiny little thing: Unless they're run entirely by partisan hacks, courts generally want to hear reasons (they prefer good ones) for wildly unusual actions taken by government officials. This action is such a naked attempt to politicize the Justice Department that if it goes to court it will be pretty tough for a judge not to tell Barr to GTFO.

It's particularly unclothed given that the process was kicked off by the bald-faced lie that Berman was "stepping down." There's simply no getting around the obvious untruth of those words. It's passive-aggressive ******** that was almost certainly generated because there was some question as to whether Trump or Barr could fire film outright. The hope was likely that Berman would get the message and go away quietly, perhaps in the belief that fighting it would be more trouble than it's worth. Instead, they've given him the opportunity to parlay their ******** into a big step towards higher office by being the underdog crime-fighting hero.

That's true. I said it was a "losing" case, but I just meant that, ultimately, Barr/Trump will come out on top. Even if a judge rules that you can't fire him, he's still answerable to the executive branch, so they can certainly pull his funding or in other ways restrict his actions. He said his investigations will continue. I'm pretty sure Barr can make certain that doesn't happen.


However, on a personal level, that could end up a "win" for Berman, and if they overplay their hand as a loss for Trump/Barr.

Babbylonian 20th June 2020 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meadmaker (Post 13131865)
That's true. I said it was a "losing" case, but I just meant that, ultimately, Barr/Trump will come out on top. Even if a judge rules that you can't fire him, he's still answerable to the executive branch, so they can certainly pull his funding or in other ways restrict his actions. He said his investigations will continue. I'm pretty sure Barr can make certain that doesn't happen.

I get what you're saying, but pulling funding from ongoing investigations while/after fighting the US attorney presiding over those investigations is loud. What they wanted was to force a quiet resignation followed by quietly telling a [hopefully] compliant deputy to end/fatally slow down any politically undesirable cases. That would be followed by confirming the appointment of a replacement who would be just in time to announce a new groundbreaking investigation into one or more of Trump's political enemies.
Quote:

However, on a personal level, that could end up a "win" for Berman, and if they overplay their hand as a loss for Trump/Barr.
I think he's already got the personal win. If he's not running for a senate seat or a governorship in the next 2-4 years, I'll be shocked.

Segnosaur 20th June 2020 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza (Post 13131444)
Geoffrey Berman, Attorney for the SDNY, is getting replaced by Barr.
This would have nothing to do with him going after Guiliani's band or merry miscreants, would it?

Keeping mind that Berman was not some democrat... He actually donated to Trump's 2016 campaign.

I wonder if he can get his money back?

https://abc7ny.com/geoffrey-berman-r...trump/6257478/

(Admittedly it does reduce the sympathy I have for Berman... He supported an obvious conman for president... Did he think he would be immune to Trump's corruption?)

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk

Stacyhs 20th June 2020 01:09 PM

Barr has told Berman that Trump has fired him. However, it's very unclear as to whether Trump has that right. This could end up at the Supreme Court.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rr/3229354001/

ETA: Why am I not surprised that Trump wants to replace Berman with someone who has no prosecutorial experience?

pgwenthold 20th June 2020 01:23 PM

The concept of obstruction of justice means nothing any more, does it?

Stacyhs 20th June 2020 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgwenthold (Post 13132021)
The concept of obstruction of justice means nothing any more, does it?

Not in this administration.

If Biden wins, I expect Barr will be among the very first to go.

Skeptic Ginger 20th June 2020 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgwenthold (Post 13132021)
The concept of obstruction of justice means nothing any more, does it?

Let's hope it means something to the voters that matter.

Segnosaur 20th June 2020 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stacyhs (Post 13132025)
Not in this administration.

If Biden wins, I expect Barr will be among the very first to go.

Being a cabinet posting, the Attorney general always leaves when a president is replaced. He will leave at the same time Trump does.

(Well, unless he resigns or gets fired early.)

Trebuchet 20th June 2020 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Segnosaur (Post 13132091)
Being a cabinet posting, the Attorney general always leaves when a president is replaced. He will leave at the same time Trump does.

(Well, unless he resigns or gets fired early.)

Traditionally cabinet members resign when the new President takes office. Traditionally. I can well imagine them all refusing to do so, just to make trouble. There's nothing traditional about this administration.

Segnosaur 22nd June 2020 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trebuchet (Post 13132101)
Quote:

Being a cabinet posting, the Attorney general always leaves when a president is replaced. He will leave at the same time Trump does.

(Well, unless he resigns or gets fired early.)
Traditionally cabinet members resign when the new President takes office. Traditionally. I can well imagine them all refusing to do so, just to make trouble. There's nothing traditional about this administration.

I agree that this current administration is basically breaking all the norms for how the government should work.

But I really don't think cabinet members are able to stay on past the end of the president's term. These are not career public servants, they are individuals selected by the president to act as his personal advisors/minions/etc. They are members of the executive branch, which is identified with the president. It would make no sense for them to NEED to get fired after the president leaves office.

(I attempted to google anything about cabinet members having to officially resign at the end of the president's term but could find nothing. Perhaps you have some reference to back up your point?)

Regnad Kcin 22nd June 2020 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armitage72 (Post 13131612)
I've seen people paraphrasing his response as "Go **** yourself."

https://i.imgur.com/0Uv5Je6.jpg

Did no one proofread that release? Yikes!

alfaniner 22nd June 2020 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin (Post 13134521)
Did no one proofread that release? Yikes!

Aside from an odd placement and perhaps overuse of commas in one sentence, I don't see a problem with it. I understand the phrasing he was trying to portray, but it is awkward reading at best.

dudalb 22nd June 2020 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Segnosaur (Post 13134494)
I agree that this current administration is basically breaking all the norms for how the government should work.

But I really don't think cabinet members are able to stay on past the end of the president's term. These are not career public servants, they are individuals selected by the president to act as his personal advisors/minions/etc. They are members of the executive branch, which is identified with the president. It would make no sense for them to NEED to get fired after the president leaves office.

(I attempted to google anything about cabinet members having to officially resign at the end of the president's term but could find nothing. Perhaps you have some reference to back up your point?)

Even if they refuse to resign, once the new President takes office he can just fire them. They serve at the President's pleasure.

thaiboxerken 23rd June 2020 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stacyhs (Post 13132025)
Not in this administration.

If Biden wins, I expect Barr will be among the very first to go.

Yes. The GOP will accuse Biden of putting in a partisan loyalist to replace a perfectly fine AG. In fact, everything Trump's doing will be projected onto Biden. They'll call Biden a dictator, authoritarian, corrupt politician, and con artists. They'll accuse him of appointing cronies and yes-men, of racism, and of dividing the nation.

That's their standard MO, but it'll be on steroids after Trump loses.

Trebuchet 23rd June 2020 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Segnosaur (Post 13134494)
I agree that this current administration is basically breaking all the norms for how the government should work.

But I really don't think cabinet members are able to stay on past the end of the president's term. These are not career public servants, they are individuals selected by the president to act as his personal advisors/minions/etc. They are members of the executive branch, which is identified with the president. It would make no sense for them to NEED to get fired after the president leaves office.

(I attempted to google anything about cabinet members having to officially resign at the end of the president's term but could find nothing. Perhaps you have some reference to back up your point?)

Not off hand, I'd have to do some digging.

The other problem a Dem President is likely certain to have is getting the Senate to confirm his choices, especially if the R's retain control.

Babbylonian 23rd June 2020 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Segnosaur (Post 13134494)
I agree that this current administration is basically breaking all the norms for how the government should work.

But I really don't think cabinet members are able to stay on past the end of the president's term. These are not career public servants, they are individuals selected by the president to act as his personal advisors/minions/etc. They are members of the executive branch, which is identified with the president. It would make no sense for them to NEED to get fired after the president leaves office.

(I attempted to google anything about cabinet members having to officially resign at the end of the president's term but could find nothing. Perhaps you have some reference to back up your point?)

You won't find anything because there is no requirement to resign. In fact, cabinet members could remain in office indefinitely if they don't resign and aren't fired.

The Don 23rd June 2020 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trebuchet (Post 13135008)
Not off hand, I'd have to do some digging.

The other problem a Dem President is likely certain to have is getting the Senate to confirm his choices, especially if the R's retain control.

Yes,.a GOP controlled senate could ensure that any role that requires confirmation remains unfilled regardless of the candidate. They're also the kind of people to do it too. :mad:

pgwenthold 23rd June 2020 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Don (Post 13135132)
Yes,.a GOP controlled senate could ensure that any role that requires confirmation remains unfilled regardless of the candidate. They're also the kind of people to do it too. :mad:

He could just put people in the positions on an interim basis, like Trump has done.

CORed 23rd June 2020 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trebuchet (Post 13135008)
Not off hand, I'd have to do some digging.

The other problem a Dem President is likely certain to have is getting the Senate to confirm his choices, especially if the R's retain control.

I suspect that even with a Democratic majority, the Republicans will try to filibuster every appointment, unless the Dems get smart and just do away with the filibuster entirely. If the Republicans hold a Senate majority, I expect they will go to full scale obstruction of just about everything Biden or the House initiate, be it legislation or appointments, just as they did during most of the Obama administration.

quadraginta 23rd June 2020 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babbylonian (Post 13135098)
You won't find anything because there is no requirement to resign. In fact, cabinet members could remain in office indefinitely if they don't resign and aren't fired.


I think (don't 'know') that it is customary for cabinet members to off their resignations to an incoming president. It's up to him whether he wants to accept them or not.

There are good reasons why a chief executive of good conscience and sincere motives might solicit the advice and support of experts who were not ideologically and politically aligned with his own personal beliefs, and accept their contributions without prejudice.

Sadly, Trump has not been one such. And it is doubtful that he will have left anyone in his cabinet who could offer any value to his replacement.

quadraginta 23rd June 2020 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CORed (Post 13135163)
I suspect that even with a Democratic majority, the Republicans will try to filibuster every appointment, unless the Dems get smart and just do away with the filibuster entirely. If the Republicans hold a Senate majority, I expect they will go to full scale obstruction of just about everything Biden or the House initiate, be it legislation or appointments, just as they did during most of the Obama administration.


So Biden will have a large collection of "acting" cabinet members,etc..

Thankfully for him there has been an abundance of recent precedent for that.

thaiboxerken 23rd June 2020 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 13135352)
So Biden will have a large collection of "acting" cabinet members,etc..

Thankfully for him there has been an abundance of recent precedent for that.

It won't stop the GOP from complaining about it as if it's never happened before.

Babbylonian 23rd June 2020 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 13135351)
I think (don't 'know') that it is customary for cabinet members to off their resignations to an incoming president. It's up to him whether he wants to accept them or not.

Yes, it is customary. It's even customary for cabinet officers to offer re-elected presidents their resignations. That way, the president has the option to appoint new cabinet officers without the PR baggage of firing them or specifically requesting their resignations.

Still, let's hypothesize that the current attorney general was a brilliant, supremely ethical lawyer whom the next president would love to remain in that office. There's nothing stopping said next president from talking with said honorable AG and the two of them agreeing that there will be no resignation or firing and that this great, totally fictional AG would continue serving in that office.

The most famous and notorious example of indefinite (de facto lifetime) appointment isn't a cabinet-level position, but J. Edgar Hoover was the director of the FBI (and its predecessor) for 48 years until he [thankfully] died.

Delphic Oracle 24th June 2020 07:47 AM

Obama kept Gates on as Defense Secretary.

d4m10n 24th June 2020 10:10 AM

In recent days the DOJ has lost Brian A. Benczkowski (head of the criminal division), Joseph H. Hunt (head of the civil division) and Noel J. Francisco, solicitor general.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/u...jody-hunt.html

https://twitter.com/nytpolitics/stat...22799436832769

I've no idea why these guys are scurrying off the ship of state in rapid succession, presumably they have their reasons.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Crossbow 1st July 2020 05:05 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/trump-camp...041455477.html

This particular lackey assured Trump that the recent Tulsa stadium event would be overflowing with Trump supporters, it turned out that the Tulsa stadium was less than half full of Trump supporters.

Therefore, Michael Glassner has been flushed from his job and replaced with a different Trump lackey.

Trump campaign shakes up top staff after Tulsa rally debacle

Trump campaign chief operating officer Michael Glassner, who had been heavily involved in planning the presidentís rallies, has been replaced by Trump's 2016 Arizona chair Jeff DeWit, a major shakeup at the top of the presidentís campaign following the Tulsa rally debacle and four months from Election Day, multiple sources tell ABC News.

...

The shake up and Glassnerís reassignment are in part a result of how badly things went in Tulsa, sources tell ABC News.

...

Jim_MDP 1st July 2020 11:08 PM

The Trump Admin should have an official motto.
Something like...
"No time like the present for updating the ol' resume."
[emoji1]

Norman Alexander 2nd July 2020 01:40 AM

Just remember the Trump Admin Mission Statement: Don't **** it up...Full Stop.


[Thank you, Rue Paul]

Craig4 2nd July 2020 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crossbow (Post 13143585)
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/trump-camp...041455477.html

This particular lackey assured Trump that the recent Tulsa stadium event would be overflowing with Trump supporters, it turned out that the Tulsa stadium was less than half full of Trump supporters.

Therefore, Michael Glassner has been flushed from his job and replaced with a different Trump lackey.

Trump campaign shakes up top staff after Tulsa rally debacle

Trump campaign chief operating officer Michael Glassner, who had been heavily involved in planning the presidentís rallies, has been replaced by Trump's 2016 Arizona chair Jeff DeWit, a major shakeup at the top of the presidentís campaign following the Tulsa rally debacle and four months from Election Day, multiple sources tell ABC News.

...

The shake up and Glassnerís reassignment are in part a result of how badly things went in Tulsa, sources tell ABC News.

...

So a different monkey ******* the same football.

Segnosaur 11th July 2020 11:46 AM

Quote:

Geoffrey Berman, Attorney for the SDNY, is getting replaced by Barr.
This would have nothing to do with him going after Guiliani's band or merry miscreants, would it?
Related to that:

From: Politico
The Eastern District of New York has a new U.S. attorney. Seth DuCharme, a former senior official at Justice Department headquarters...was sworn in Friday by the district’s chief federal judge...Rich Donoghue, the former head of that office, resigned Friday. ...Donoghue will take a new role in Washington...DuCharme, meanwhile, is back in his old stomping ground. Before his stint at Main Justice, he was chief of the Criminal Division of the Brooklyn U.S. Attorney’s Office. He also was counsel to Barr, advising him on national security issues.

Notice what was missing? Confirmation by the senate (along with the traditional veto power given over attorneys to senators from the state).

So, Barr has once again managed to install one of "his own" people in what could be a key legal position (just as he did in washington, and just as he tried to do in the southern district of NY.)

a_unique_person 15th July 2020 07:22 PM

Trumps campaign manager sacked.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...-brad-parscale

Norman Alexander 15th July 2020 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a_unique_person (Post 13158577)

Any original players left in the team? Miller is the only one I can think of.

Segnosaur 16th July 2020 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a_unique_person (Post 13158577)

Almost enough to make you feel sorry for him.

After all, Trump's unpopularity results from things trump himself has done. And even if Parscale had some great plan to reverse the decline, it is doubtful Trump would actually listen.

But then I realize he openly supports a racist con-artist, and realize that he deserves the humiliation.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk

d4m10n 16th July 2020 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13158672)
Any original players left in the team? Miller is the only one I can think of.

Other than Miller, no one outside the family comes to mind...

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...7b57cf89fc.jpg

Trebuchet 16th July 2020 11:52 AM

Who is that guy, anyhow? And will he survive the convention?

Norman Alexander 23rd August 2020 09:09 PM

Catching this one up.

Have we mentioned Herman Cain? In the Survivor game, he...well...didn't.

Norman Alexander 23rd August 2020 09:10 PM

And as noted elsewhere, Kellyanne Conway.

I actually admire her for keeping a straight face for so long.

Matthew Ellard 23rd August 2020 11:19 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13199637)
And as noted elsewhere, Kellyanne Conway.I actually admire her for keeping a straight face for so long.

I'm going to miss Kellyanne's exquisite taste in fashion inspired by the USA's war of independence.

Norman Alexander 23rd August 2020 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard (Post 13199710)
I'm going to miss Kellyanne's exquisite taste in fashion inspired by the USA's war of independence.

You know how the British redcoats had a big white cross on their uniforms to act as a target?

...about that hat!

Meadmaker 24th August 2020 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard (Post 13199710)
I'm going to miss Kellyanne's exquisite taste in fashion inspired by the USA's war of independence.

I loved that outfit. Cosplay comes to the White House. Very fashionable and expensive cosplay, but cosplay nonetheless.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.