A question of force is the only question that matters because the Senate has stated unwillingness to confirm Gaetz or to recess. 
Ground Rules
- For the purpose of this post, if you think Gaetz is the ideal candidate. I agree.
- For the purpose of this post, if you think Gaetz is totally unqualified. I agree.
- If you don’t know. Guess what, I agree, right there with you.
- A president can make recess appointments, provided the recess is of sufficient duration.
Assumptions
- Gaetz does not have the votes to be confirmed in the Senate. This is clear, but unproven.
- The Senate will not agree to mass appointment by recess. Again this is clear but unproven.
To discuss or reply to this post, you are bound by the ground rules and my assumptions.
I don’t want to hear your opinion that Trump has the votes, that Gaetz is or isn’t qualified, or anything else because it is irrelevant.
Background – Syllabus NLRB v. Noel Canning
Please consider Cornell Law’s review of NLRB v. Noel Canning, emphasis in bold is mine, italics as written.
Held:
1. The Recess Appointments Clause empowers the President to fill any existing vacancy during any recess—intra-session or inter-session—of sufficient length.
A Senate recess that is so short that it does not require the consent of the House under that Clause is not long enough to trigger the President’s recess-appointment power. Moreover, the Court has not found a single example of a recess appointment made during an intra-session recess that was shorter than 10 days.
For purposes of the Recess Appointments Clause, the Senate is in session when it says that it is, provided that, under its own rules, it retains the capacity to transact Senate business.
Because the Senate was in session during its pro forma sessions, the President made the recess appointments at issue during a 3-day recess. Three days is too short a time to bring a recess within the scope of the Clause, so the President lacked the authority to make those appointments.
Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined.
As a result of the above, the Supreme Court ruled invalid, an appointment made by President Obama.
Opinion of the Court Written by Breyer
Ordinarily the President must obtain “the Advice and Consent of the Senate” before appointing an “Office[r] of the United States.” U. S. Const., Art. II, §2, cl. 2. But the Recess Appointments Clause creates an exception. It gives the President alone the power “to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.” Art. II, §2, cl. 3. We here consider three questions about the application of this Clause.
The first concerns the scope of the words “recess of the Senate.” Does that phrase refer only to an inter-session recess (i.e., a break between formal sessions of Congress), or does it also include an intra-session recess, such as a summer recess in the midst of a session? We conclude that the Clause applies to both kinds of recess.
The second question concerns the scope of the words “vacancies that may happen.” Does that phrase refer only to vacancies that first come into existence during a recess, or does it also include vacancies that arise prior to a recess but continue to exist during the recess? We conclude that the Clause applies to both kinds of vacancy.
The third question concerns calculation of the length of a “recess.” The President made the appointments here at issue on January 4, 2012. At that time the Senate was in recess pursuant to a December 17, 2011, resolution providing for a series of brief recesses punctuated by “pro forma session[s],” with “no business . . . transacted,” every Tuesday and Friday through January 20, 2012. S. J., 112th Cong., 1st Sess., 923 (2011) (hereinafter 2011 S. J.). In calculating the length of a recess are we to ignore the pro forma sessions, thereby treating the series of brief recesses as a single, month-long recess? We conclude that we cannot ignore these pro forma sessions.
Our answer to the third question means that, when the appointments before us took place, the Senate was in the midst of a 3-day recess. Three days is too short a time to bring a recess within the scope of the Clause. Thus we conclude that the President lacked the power to make the recess appointments here at issue.
The Federalist Papers make clear that the Founders intended this method of appointment, requiring Senate approval, to be the norm (at least for principal officers). Alexander Hamilton wrote that the Constitution vests the power of nomination in the President alone because “one man of discernment is better fitted to analise and estimate the peculiar qualities adapted to particular offices, than a body of men of equal, or perhaps even of superior dis- cernment.” The Federalist No. 76, p. 510 (J. Cooke ed. 1961). At the same time, the need to secure Senate approval provides “an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to preventing the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity.” Id., at 513. Hamilton further explained that the “ordinary power of appointment is confided to the President and Senate jointly, and can therefore only be exercised during the session of the Senate; but as it would have been improper to oblige this body to be continually in session for the appointment of officers; and as vacancies might happen in their recess, which it might be necessary for the public service to fill without delay, the succeeding clause is evidently intended to authorise the President singly to make temporary appointments.” Id., No. 67, at 455.
we conclude that the Recess Appointments Clause does not give the President the constitutional authority to make the appointments here at issue. Because the Court of Appeals reached the same ultimate conclusion (though for reasons we reject), its judgment is affirmed.
It is so ordered.
Opinion Short Synopsis
The Obama appointee was rejected because the recess was not long enough. And (emphasis mine) “We conclude that we cannot ignore these pro forma sessions.”
Simply put. There must be a recess of at least 10 days by Congress, before a president can make recess appointments.
The president can make recess appointments IF Congress (Senate and House) is in recess for the requited time. I am not disputing this.
What If?
What if the Senate refuses to go into recess but the House does?
Can Trump “force” the Senate into recess?
That is the key question because my assumption, unarguable for discussion purposes, is Gaetz does not have the votes, and the Senate will refuse to recess.
Article II, Section 3
Article II, Section 3 of the constitution addresses the question directly (emphasis mine)
Article II, Section 3:
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Key Phrase – Time of Adjournment
My constitutional law expert friend who has argued cases before the Supreme Court writes:
I’ve looked at the provision and I don’t think it works for Trump. Here’s why.
Under the Scalia concurrence — in which three current justices joined — the vacancy filled by the recess appointment has to occur during the recess. So, the recess has to begin BEFORE the transfer of power on January 20. But Trump is not president and has no power to to adjourn anything before January 20. And if he uses the power (which I don’t think he has, but I’m assuming he does for illustrative purposes) after January 20, the vacancies will have occurred before the recess. Ergo, even if he has the power to adjourn, he can’t create a qualifying recess for appointments.
Now, I don’t think he has the power. First, the power to adjourn exists only in the event of a disagreement” about the “time of adjournment.” The Senate can avoid a disagreement simply by ignoring the House’s adjournment resolution. An absence of action does not create a “disagreement.” In fact, adjournment resolutions often sit around for days before the other chamber acts on them. Inaction is not disagreement. Second, and more importantly, canons of construction — which textualists love — say that every word must be given meaning. And here, the Constitution points to a disagreement about “time of adjournment” not “adjournment. And if there is an ostensible disagreement, it would be as to whether you can adjourn at all, not the time of an adjournment.
One last point. The Framers were fairly familiar with Charles I’s adjournment — aimed at the House of Commons — of parliament because it triggered the English Civil War. It is unimaginable that they would have given hte President the power to adjourn a house of Congress.
That’s a bridge too far. Roberts and Barrett will not vote to uphold this. And because of the language issue, I doubt that Gorsuch would. He’d lose in the Supreme Court.
I am not interested in your opinion on why Senator so-or-so is a RINO, or rants about McConnell or Thune.
If you have a better legal analysis than I just presented, have at it.
Otherwise, accept the idea that Gaetz will not be attorney general.
Watch and Learn
Leo Terrell and Hannity will be the ones to “watch and learn”, assuming Trump does not back down.
And if Trump does back down, it will be due to what I pointed out, not whatever nonsense Trump spouts.
Does Gaetz Have the Votes?
The answer to that is no, as discussed in How Many Senators Would Vote Against Gaetz for Attorney General?
For the purpose of this post, you are not allowed to disagree.
Media Attack Dogs Go After Tulsi Gabbard
In a related post, more opinion oriented than a discussion of law, please consider Media Attack Dogs Go After Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s Pick for National Intelligence
You were right Mish and I was wrong on this one.
Well Mish, this is a rather interesting development. I suppose there are going to be many theories on why exactly. One could easily accept what was given, as it makes sense, is plausible, and Trump can’t afford to risk His momentum right now. When on top, you do what you must, to stay right there. That fight can easily be addressed later, and it’s not clearly over with this announcement either, but rather perhaps simply delayed.
I have my own thoughts on why that I will share, but we don’t really truly know, and won’t for quite sometime still, if ever.
1. A great way to take a look at the other sides plans. A clear way to see where the pitfalls are laid. Who is with, and against you. What area’s you need to address before it’s too late to, etc. A great strategy if used.
2. We know that He didn’t need the confirmation, so that seemed irrelevant, as it turns out.
3. We know all 3 House Leaders were 100% with Trump, so whomever He selected was with him, so a recess appointment also seemed irrelevant.
There are many other thoughts for sure, but those were the most obvious and best bets IMO, but then again, I did not see that coming. That is also why I am not quite sure it’s over just yet…
Mish, you were correct that Gaetz “Did Not” get Confirmed, just yet anyway. In fact, I believe you suggested that he wouldn’t even get a vote, so you were also correct there as well. Nicely done so far, I must say, but I am not so sure that this won’t be revisited before we are too far into it. We shall yet see how everything plays out, as much time is left… Your right “On Top” of it though!!!
Yep, credit to Mish on this one. He called it.
Much deserved, as he was steadfast, and had plenty of ammo! One of the many reasons why I visit here! You can always rely on all sorts of view points, and thoughts and is generally good at keeping discussions on topic and civil.
We can all thank Mish for that!
Well, at least you gave Mish credit for being correct on his Gaetz political analysis. I think it was fairly obvious as well, but so many commenters here would not hear it.
Less than two days ago, you were telling Mish “I am 100% sure that Gaetz gets the job!” after so many different posts explaining why. You were absolutely wrong yet even here, you’re hedging your original opinions still
If or until, another persons hat was tossed into the ring, I had no choice, but to hedge. With no clear explanation on a path forward, nobody initially knew what that meant. Shortly afterwards Pam was named, and so that’s that for now, unless something changes again. I will not rule that out, but it seems over for Gaetz at this point for sure!
Yes my call was two-fold
There would not be a vote and he would not be AG
I expected him to back out
But what I was sure of is that he would not be AG because I was even more confident of the legal case
Your inside track with your friend was spot on! I did not see him backing down however, and honestly thought he had a really decent shot, but I was clearly wrong. Again, nicely called, and adamantly I must say!!!
So Mish, as the dust settles, it is slowly coming out, that it was all a ruse! A little 4D at play once again by “The Trumpster!!
1. So they got a fantastic look see at All 4 Senators that wanted outright, to BLOCK the pretend pick in Gaetz. These fools never saw it coming, because as usual, they let their emotions get in the way. Now they once again played right into Trumps Play! Nicely Done “Future President” and a Strategy Only YOU Can Do!!!
2. Gaetz only had to fake them out that he was leaving, and they fell for the bait. So as Gaetz stepped down from His Current Seat, with his future seat firmly in place as voted for the last session, where He will go right back to doing what He Does Best!!! His Job!
3. Pam Bondi, now slides into the chair, The “Person Trump Truly Wanted” as a wonderfully qualified AG if there ever was one. A “True Fighter” well versed in LAW!!! She could wipe the floor with the incompetent Dems she will face off with. She is so talented, and fearless, and is really Gaetz 2.0 but a Woman as well, so even more fodder for the Dems to deal with because of there fear of “Powerful Woman” in the Republican Party, which She clearly is!
This is working out way better than I had planned, but it now appears as though it’s also working out Exactly as Trump and the WH Planned!! Such a Beautiful Thing to Behold, I just gotta say!!
While You were correct Mish, in your call, it was exactly the same call Trump and the Republican Party was hoping for as well! I must say, now they I see what they were doing, or now did, it was perfectly executed and smoothly played! I am very happy I was wrong, and that you were right. Everything is moving along very nicely.
I was with you along for the ride, and was played too. I truly thought He was looking for that Bulldog! I had the wrong dog for the fight too, it appears. In fact I didn’t even know much about the Lady, and her Florida accomplishments, and why would I, as I live in New England. I did some research and she is quite the Woman and very Professional and knowledgeable in Law! She will make a Fantastic AG from the accolades she gets from what I have come across.
Did you know much about her? Your much more involved in Politics than I, so I would love to hear your thoughts on Pam as “His Pick” Do you think she is qualified, as I think you were a bit skeptical about Gaetz, and understandably, if I’m correct. My emotions left me thinking he would fight and learn his way though it, but that’s not the right attitude either, so I played myself there… alls good!
Still a great call by you!!
Pam Bondi former Fl AG.
I just saw that myself! That was awfully quick, and it makes me wonder if that was the intended goal all along?
Speaker McCarthy said it from day one: Gaetz will never be Attorney General.
He never had the votes and he was never going to get them.
Gaetz is now moot. Meanwhile, it looks as if Putin has fired hypersonic missiles at Ukraine.
Gaetz can do as much damage to the liberal cause if he works with Musk et al.
Although I would have loved to have seen him as Attorney General, I was shocked by the nomination and just assumed Trump had something up his sleeve, besides the recess gimmick, like blackmail against many of the RINOs. Apparently, he did not. This all is looking like just a really bad idea, unless Trump has some strategy of nominating someone very hard for the establishment to accept, but put an even harder to accept Gaetz up as a sacrificial lamb in order to make his ‘real’ choice more palatable. That’s my hope, but I doubt that it is true.
Have you heard the news? Now that senator idea is sounding less wacky.
Gaetz is not going away. He has huge support in Florida.
The election was stolen:
https://www.planetcritical.com/p/cyber-security-experts-warn-election-hacked
Okay Mish then Trump cannot have any of his appointments that the Senate doesn’t absolutely in its sole discretion heartily endorse. Fine! That of course means that the left gets what it wants which is a Trump Presidency that is nothing more than a neutered lame duck holding pattern until the Democratic experiment begins again in earnest 4 years from now. I submit that the framers of the Constitution and its various amendments didn’t envision a state of affairs where a political party might be hijacked by a political dogma that was working against the interests of the nation. Be that as it may there are enough Republican Senators that will oppose virtually anything Trump wants done. Clearly the people may as well not have bothered voting and we should just give up and end this model of government that can no longer work within the current construct that values money and position ahead of country. Thus we are all forced to just watch the nation dissolve while the gentlemen of power and wealth hollow it out.
Please. It’s called politics. I voted for Trump and I’m extremely happy Gaetz is gone.
Exactly! Politics-101 in play, so get used to it. This was merely the first contested vote for somebody being suggested by Trump. This will happen again, and again as Trump try’s placing “His Team” together. This is Politics, like it or not.
Someone said recently that JD Vance, as Vice President and President of the Senate, can step in and take over for the new Senate Majority Leader. Not sure if it is true, but if so, Vance could step in an put the Senate in recess.
False
He cannot “step in”
He could be “voted” in.
He wasn’t – so end of discussion
If Jamal Bowman can pull the fire alarm for ten days, will this count as recess?
And here in Paris we are covered in snow today thanks to Climate Change.
Isn’t that when the temperature changes a degree here or there, and someone says “Hmm… the weather feels different today. Maybe a slight change in the climate (ie. Weather) is in store. Best bring an umbrella, just in case.
That sounds more like a snow storm, or blizzard as we call them in the MSM here in the U.S. True, be it a climate/weather change, but that’s insignificant unless it’s a Storm! Some call it “Bluster”
Another tenth of a degree warmer and we will have glaciers forming in Scandinavia.
Well the next “Ice Age” should go quickly for your area. So you got that going for you!!
Snow is racist.
Unless it’s yellow, then it was a full bladder
Don’t eat yellow snow.
Don’t eat snow where the huskies go.
Well, well, well… Hmm… This just in:
“Politico Said This”: The chances that President-elect Donald Trump’s nominees are confirmed by the Senate are quite good, according to Jeff Greenfield, a contributing writer at Politico Magazine.
Greenfield’s opinion contradicts the mainstream media’s narrative on the confirmation chances of Pete Hegseth, Matt Gaetz, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Big media outlets have been claiming for days the three have almost a zero chance of confirmation. Punchbowl News told readers last week Gaetz “can’t get confirmed.”
Greenfield, a Yale-trained lawyer and former speechwriter of President John F. Kennedy informed Politico Magazine readers that history supports the confirmation of Trump’s nominees, who he characterized as “the most unqualified individuals ever to be nominated.”
In an op-ed published Tuesday, Greenfield gave three reasons why all of Trump’s nominees will be confirmed:
“The last time a nominee was rejected on the floor of the Senate was in 1989.”
“Trump has consistently demonstrated his capacity to intimidate Republican legislators into doing his bidding.”
“[T]he Republican majority in the next Senate is wholly different from the majority Trump faced in his first term…”
Politico Toplines further summarized Greenfield’s argument:
Placing bets that the Senate will vote down some of Donald Trump’s more hair-raising Cabinet appointees? History might make you think twice. As POLITICO Magazine’s Jeff Greenfield writes in his latest column, it’s been nearly three and a half decades since the Senate rejected a president’s Cabinet nominee — and that streak isn’t likely to end now.
The Senate last bucked a Cabinet nominee back in 1989, when it voted against Sen. John Tower, George H.W. Bush’s pick to become Defense secretary. Tower was staring down accusations of substance abuse and sexual assault — sound familiar? — but those weren’t even the major factors in his defeat, which “was mostly a matter of party alignment,” Jeff writes.
Long story short: Don’t hold your breath: “The landscape of the Senate … suggests that the astonishing, almost contemptuous challenge Trump has made — confirm my picks or I will recess appoint them without your votes — is likely to succeed.”
Btw, I love this place. You guys have no idea who I am.
By your identifier I would guess that you are Jerome Powell.
Why don’t you tell us, instead of playing bullsh*t games?
By the way. The election is over and your side lost for a large part by using the same tactics you are using now.
Nobody really cares who you are, only what you post.
Post enough nonsense and you’ll just be totally ignored and have to create another handle.
You are AOC masquerading as a slightly unattractive and underqualified economist.
If Trump wants his pick for the role and the senate refuses and neither side budges does that mean the role remains vacant for weeks, months, 4 years?
Can he not be appointed but be de facto in the role, attend cabinet meetings, make decisions and with an appointed deputy to officially rubber stamp his decisions? Such de facto powers exist in both France and the Netherlands where the real party heads (Geert Wilders and Le Pen) are blocked by legal means from officially carrying out the roles that in reality they do.
Gaetz is completely unsuitable for the job and an embarrasment to the Republican party. Why would Trump expend the energy and political capital in a push to get him installed that has a low probability of success? This does not seem to make a lot of sense.
It is like he learned nothing from his first term.
– It is like he learned nothing from his first term.
> You are absolutely correct, which is why he will never have another term. He really wasn’t elected to be President, I am sure you know that, but rather the puppet that he was and remains.
The puppet masters made there mistake, when they forgot the puppet they created had emotions still.when the pulled his strings to tightly, he got his diapers in a wad, and went of the reservation.
They literally hung the puppet out to dry, and he pissed all over them for it!
He turned out to be the good (for Us) little puppet we thought he would be, and they got there fingers stuck trying to work his mouth too much…
He didn’t have a first term, Hillary won, fair and square, she was the first lady president, and Bill was the first ladyboy.
Jeff Sessions folded like a cheap suit, played by the Russia Russia hoax. Barr was an analyst at CIA, his father Donald was OSS and actually hired Epstein as a teacher at the Dalton prep school in Manhattan. Eric Holder stated publicly that he was Obama’s wingman. DoJ needs an enema, along with many other federal agencies. The ability to do that is what qualifies the candidate.
President Putin of the USA will make it happen!
Can Trump prorogate (extend) the recess beyond 10 days, declaring an emergency rule : yes !
I do believe He can, and I could be wrong, but he can go as far as 240 days on his own, or might need sign off for that, but then he runs into some issues… it’s pretty messy, or can be when people are trying to hold things up on you on purpose.
Surely the world has had enough demented political games for one decade?
The clause apply to BOTH vacancies that arise prior to the recess, but cont to exist during the recess, or after the recess.
Florida
Rubio Campaign Press Release – Fact Check: Donald Trump Used Illegal Immigrants to Build Trump Tower
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rubio-campaign-press-release-fact-check-donald-trump-used-illegal-immigrants-build-trump
Trump knows we need illegal labor. Homan and Vance have indicated the focus will be on criminals, not workers. Why do Dems in sanctuary cities want to protect criminals who aren’t even supposed to be in the U.S.? That’s lunacy. That’s why Trump is POTUS.
But Trump said they are stealing our jobs ? That is what I heard during the campaign.
And aren’t all illegal aliens criminal by the very nature of crossing the border ILLEGALLY. They have violated a law the moment they set foot across the border. I thought he got elected to deport every illegal. Am I missing something about the election ? If you read closely, Trump got rid of all his illegal workers. In fact he laid them off and hired people overseas in their home country for the Trump organization instead.
– But Trump said they are stealing our jobs ? That is what I heard during the campaign.
> You must of missed a couple sentences. He said “Democrat Sanctuary Cities” are hiring them hand over fist illegally, because they are and they can, because the Party in Power worships the idea!
Money galore, power if they get them to be able to vote for them, and a hatred for Our Country, and obviously Not there’s…
The border was closed back then silly…
ROTFLMA!!!
Virtually every structure built in the USA over the last 30 years has used illegal aliens.
Nothing new here, kiddo. Move along.
Oh a “fact check”… is that like a Wikipedia edit?
Trump is a hypocrite when it comes to illegal immigration
Report: Trump Happily Employing Undocumented Workers While ICE Rounds Them Up
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/trump-organization-undocumented-workers?srsltid=AfmBOopGIbZNl1N7Th_U8p-oqmtjr8d0TcmW_jMxyDpKASp6vf-rywLT
Mis-Information on the Report. It said: Trump Happily “Enjoying seeing Undocumented Workers “AS” ICE Rounds Them Up, for Deportation”
Me thinks You Need Readers…
We love hypocrites here – that’s why we’re all Democrats.
Donald Trump announced yesterday that heart surgeon-turned-TV-host Dr. Oz would lead the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. During the early days of the COVID, Oz promoted hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug, as a COVID treatment. A business owned by Dr. Oz family faced the largest fine in ICE history for hiring illegal migrants in 2017. What a coincidence. You can google the news for more details. Republican employers hire illegal migrants for their businesses, but during the election time they talk about deporting illegal migrants, so hypocritical.
Your keyboad must be crawling with bacteria after all that frothy-mouthed thrashing.
Constant chaos. Why are people who don’t believe in government appointing people to government. Why can’t Trump appoint himself to the head of all agencies
You Ask: “Why can’t Trump appoint himself to the head of all”
The Citizens of America did, and overwhelmingly I might add! You actually got what you asked for, and you’re still miserable.
Are You sure, you’re not a Democrat is Republican clothing (RINO)? Asking for a friend…
I sure hope your expert is proven wrong. Fingers crossed.
I’m just glad Mitch “Mr. Freeze” McConnell is still urinating in the congressional hallways. If it wasn’t for him, the other geriatrics wouldn’t have a reliable rummi-q partner or stock picker. 3 cheers for Mitch. Now someone needs to get him his pills and nightly jello cup. Otherwise he won’t let anyone use the remote.
Here is the Politico story from 2008.
Kennedy for EPA would be a normal move. For FDA not so much. How come no one is saying more regulations on foods would make grocery prices go up ? That’s what they say if a Democrat is in charge. Regulations flies in the face of smaller/no government.
You are assuming regulations will go up. Many will go down. It is nuts that Costco recently had to dispose of a large quantity of milk because although labelled as MILK it lacked the official health warning saying it contained MILK. Such stupid current regulations are why Penn state went red with the Amish vote due to the government interfering with the Amish selling raw milk to discerning adults.
It is slightly cheaper to make Cheerios in Canada as they don’t allow the use of certain cancer related additives ( that cost money) to make them of a brighter colour to appeal to children and idiots. Do you think it is bad to ban certain suspect food additives just because it interferes with the “free market”?
I thought regulations were supposed to go down not up ? Regulations cost businesses money. That is what I was told during the campaign.
Appointing a vaccine denier won’t save money on anything. More people will end up in hospitals with diseases that were cured by vaccines.
Regarding cereals and additives, you want to become like Europe or Canada then when it comes regulations on additives yes ? Now if you are serious about improving health outcomes, you should go after banning HFCS. But I bet it never happens because corn farmers voted for Trump.
Some regulations save business money, if they are directed at the right targets and streamlined to deliver return on taxpayer investment.
They put a hideous ladyboy clown in a military uniform in charge last time, the bar really can’t get much lower now can it.
The Federalist Papers make fascinating reading. In this case, they are quite clear: power is to be divided between the executive and the body of elected officials. The result is a rolling snowball that gathers speed as it steamrolls over the wishes of the imperial president as crafted in his own mind.
The Republicans are being hypocritical, those who support the Gaetz appointment. When Obama used the “Senate is not in session” rationale to ramrod his appointment, they were all over him like a cat on cream. When Trump does it, it’s a “reasonable” measure designed to prevent Senate obfuscation.
The simple fact is, Gaetz is a loyalist. He exists to paper over deficiencies within the Trump administration that are sure to arise. Don’t get me wrong: I like Trump. But he is clearly planning to be on the extreme edge of legality throughout much of his administration, and this jujitsu move of appointing Gaetz is the clearest indicator of that possible.
You can read more of my writings by going to: dark . sport . blog … on the net
Bottom line is Trump is the President and can do whatever he wants to the DOJ because HE is in charge. He can fire everyone and shut the whole department down if he chooses. There is zero independence of any govt agency.
That said, Take Jack Smith, His whole operation was ILLEGAL and not authorized by the SENATE. He spent over $35 million prosecuting Trump.
So there ya go, Trump can simply Hire Matt Gaetz to do whatever he wants, No Senate Approval Needed, Precedent is Set.
Maybe there’s some 5D chess in play which we’re to dim to fathom.
It seems to be a nope. That being said I think I remember Thune saying he would allow Trump to do it. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/11/13/south-dakota-senator-john-thune-says-recess-appointments-still-an-option-for-trump-cabinet/76265376007/
What I like about Gaetz is that he tears the numb nuts like Garland and Wray a new ass when they attempt to obfuscate their duty to directly answer questions. Also the 3-4 star Generals with 10 times as many ribbons on their chest as Eisenhower ever wore. He is without a doubt the best interrogator (sorry Sen Kennedy) in Congress. That’s why we need him as Attorney General.
Regarding the sex charge against him, why didn’t the FBI press charges after their investigation years ago?
Legal opinions do not mean much to me because I have seen judges tear through the law time and again. I have seen them say even number like 15 are open to interpretation.
Apparently, Trump wanted to do this before and McConnell would not put the Senate in recess. Thune is new and he may do it so as to distinguish himself from McConnell. Keep in mind McConnell kept Garland out of SCOTUS by blocking his nomination for a year, so shenanigans like this happen all the time. Instead of looking at the law, what would Thune want in return from Trump? With the right horse trade, I put this at plus 75%. I think Trump may be willing to deal.
Now there is SCOTUS. Look at the personal versus the law. https://www.vox.com/2020/3/5/21165479/chuck-schumer-neil-gorsuch-brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-whirlwind-threat
“I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”
Kavanaugh had an assassination attempt. Protestors showed up at Gorsuch’s home. Biden routinely mouthed of to Roberts. The decision overturning Roe was leaked.
I see SCOTUS putting their personal safety above all else and wanting to give the Democrats a massive middle finger. I say 95% odds Trump wins if it goes to SCOTUS.
I’ll take the bet at those odds for $1,000
Is that Mexican?
Bad Bet!
TG SCOTUS doesn’t work like that. They have not destroyed there roles, unlike Democrats in power have, by letting “Emotions” get in the way of there obligated duty as Chief Justices of Our Great Country.
Politicians could learn a lot, as well as many, many Voters. Emotions rarely belong in decision making. When they get involved, more often than not, bad or unintended decisions are the unfortunate outcome. At least that’s been my conclusion from watching it occur, and in my own life, when I have made the mistake.
Why not, more entertaining as the clown show starts.
Like a homework assignment from one of my paralegal courses.
I am strongly inclined towards the sad view that the government is so dysfunctional that an otherwise unqualified candidate such as Gaetz might offer some crude improvement. Like Trump (!!) In the current climate of possible nuclear war, I suspect many Americans silently pray “if it happens God, please while Congress is in session”. I am also disgusted that sexual misconduct accusations are hyped (with public effect) while other far more practical matters are ignored. Let the chips fall where they may, I guess.
So you like the likes of the old rinos running the show. We are close enough to going WW3 and you are complaining about shaking up the normal cabal. So many of you haven’t a clue.
Request: To discuss or reply to this post, you are bound by the ground rules and my assumptions.
Ground Rules:
For the purpose of this post, if you think Gaetz is the ideal candidate. I agree. > We Agree
For the purpose of this post, if you think Gaetz is totally unqualified. I agree. > “Totally” No, because He is in fact qualified in many areas, but Not “Totally” I agree. >> Must this now pose the question’s: 1. Should it matter that He is not “Totally” qualified? (I have not been for most Jobs I have held, but became a semi-expert (technology specific) in my field), If it doesn’t/shouldn’t matter, then we agree, and if it does, then “Why” if not “Totally”? Are there not Presidents through the years that you could possibly say that about? I was told many said that about Tricky Dick.
If you don’t know. Guess what, I agree, right there with you. > We Agree
A president can make recess appointments, provided the recess is of sufficient duration. > We Agree (What/Who? Constitutes Sufficient? The President?)
Assumptions:
Gaetz does not have the votes to be confirmed in the Senate. This is clear, but unproven. We Agree “Unproven” But however, there is precedence (see 1. below) that The President doesn’t need confirmation by the Senate.
The Senate will not agree to mass appointment by recess. Again this is clear but unproven. We Agree “Unproven” I believe this too is covered below.
My Notes:
1. Throughout the history of the republic, Presidents have also sometimes used the recess appointment power for political reasons. For example, recess appointments have sometimes enabled the President to temporarily install an appointee who probably would not be confirmed by the Senate.
A discussion of the clause by Alexander Hamilton, in The Federalist Papers, suggests that its purpose was to provide an alternative method of appointment that would allow the filling of vacancies “without delay” during periods of Senate absence.’ Opinions by later Attorneys General also supported this general notion, suggesting that the purpose of the clause was to allow the President to maintain the continuity of administrative government through the temporary filling of offices during periods when the Senate was not in session, at which time his nominees could not be considered or confirmed.?
>>> It is an extremely convoluted situation, and with many variables in play. Some cross out others that may have been in play, or so thought perhaps. At best it will take some serious discussions by our “Leaders” so let’s hope they can get together on an agreement, that allows this to have a civil outcome. Like we agree, who knows at the moment anyway…
I appreciate the discussion, so “Thank You” for your time!
You need better sources. Canning held the exact opposite of what your source said it held. “The phrase “vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate,” Art. II, §2, cl. 3, applies both to vacancies that first come into existence during a recess and to vacancies that initially occur before a recess but continue to exist during the recess.” The Scalia concurrence was rejected. I doubt the Supreme Court ever hears the Gaetz appointment.
Gaetz has already resigned from Congress. If Trump were to appoint Marjorie Taylor Greene to some position, she would resign as well. Then have the Senate turn them both down for those cabinet positions, and the country hits a home run……we would never have to hear their names again…
Trump will give Gaetz the FBI Director job if he isn’t confirmed for AG. Wray is going to be fired – probably Day 1.
DeSantis could appoint Gaetz to Rubio’s seat. DeSantis is probably also considering appointing himself to Rubio’s seat, but that would be stupid if he wants to run for president. Senator is a step down from governor of FL for a presidential aspirant. Also, that kind of self-dealing rubs people the wrong way.
It would be funny if the Senate rejects Gaetz and then he becomes a senator. Things could get tense in then Senate steam room. I assume there’s a senate steam room.
I agree it’s a possibility. Gaetz will hold out for a while to be confirmed. They won’t want to leave Rubio seat vacant for too long.
Term limits will prevent DeSantis from running for Governor again. So he either steps up to President or steps down to Senator if he wants to remain in politics.
So appointing himself makes sense.
Wray should resign now and save himself the embarrassment.
There is going to be this fellow J D Vance is his name.
Unless an argument addresses the Constitutional powers granted to a US Vice President whose seat chairs over Senate all there is, is speculation.
It is his chair, not Chuck Schumer, not Mitch McConnell and not John Thunes chair.
Everyone takes Vice President as a ceremonial seat until it is not.
There are many checks and balances built into Constitution and as consequence the Founders would have made provisions for a sitting President, as head of executive branch, not to be deprived of administrating, when there was an adverse Senate or Congress.
In my view this will be a balance of powers issue. Being how important George Washington was to getting the Republic started the founders would never have allowed the Presidency to get over run by partisan hacks sitting in Congress.
If anyone thinks Trump does not have a mandate from voters to sit the Cabinet he wants so as to illicit policy, then you were asleep for past couple weeks and are just waking up.
One more thought J D Vance is not Mike Pense.
He is fully on board with MAGA and .
Trump picking Vance for his VP, which most assumed was to bring the Mid West on board, is taking on another aspect regarding implementing MAGA.
Trump is a strategic thinker and he would be aware of how much his first term was restricted by an adverse Congress. Thought does arise he had four years to sit and think about how to prevent that from occurring a second time.
Trump is very much a proven thinker, and a very good one at that! He selected another good proven thinker in Vance. Together we have the “Best Duo” in the WH is quite some time, but I digress…
I agree, there is more to this then what the general superficial take on it is at the moment.
I agree, and it’s a whole lot more, and I also think it’s not just the Dems, Libs, RINO’s, but also a whole lot of Republicans, Independents and Green and Gold are all in on whatever this is, but it isn’t representing the peoples will, and that’s clear to many imo.
Strange Times…
“Trump is a proven thinker”
What a hoot!
Seriously Mish? You honestly feel Trump got where He is today, as an “unproven Thinker” I don’t think Your thinking clearly if you do.
Think about what this Man has accomplished in His Life, and He isn’t a “Proven Thinker” Did He guess his way to becoming Rich & Famous and our Countries President Twice?
Maybe you feel it was all Luck, which would be even worse…
Oh yea Mish…I’m just one of many, many, poorly educated Trump voters. I don’t have any friends that are constitutional scholars. I did use a court appointed lawyer on several occasions though.
I know you are consumed with Gaetz, as if he is some threat to the anti-establishment movement, but nothing can be more important than the Neocons doing everything in their power to start WWIII. Putin building mobile bomb shelters and the US has closed its Embassy in Kyev, which would not happen if they didn’t think there would be retaliation for shooting US-guided missiles into Russia. All the focus must be on exposing the Nutjob Neocons and NATO.
Incitatus would be a vast improvement over Garland.
By the time I digest the GR&As, you’ll have your next post up, so I’ll pass here (or read tonight).
Plus, this reminds me of a Contracts of Adhesion …don’t like them … although that’s what life is these days so have to choose not to participate.
Yet, without reading, I’ll comment that Robert’s found Obama-care ok (forced consumer purchase under the guise of a tax law), so he’s “flexible”. We are post-constitutional so let’s roll-the-dice.
You have spent more time on the Gaetz nomination than you did on the entire Cabinet of Biden . We will see what happens
Good point. Seems like a hang up.
Back in the good old days 30 years ago a couple of Billy Jeff’s AG nominees had nanny issues, which would be rewarded now.
Trump hasn’t even taken office yet and already he’s facing opposition from the RINOs in the party. 2016 all over again. We’ve got to get rid of these RINOs once and for all.
Only Constitutional lawyers can comment if I understand your rules.
Between the “not allowed to disagree” & the answer is “no”…
it would appear that Mish has reached a conclusion.
I am no Constitutional lawyer…
but the question posed in the title appears to be rhetorical.
Why are you assuming the Senate will refuse to recess? They have to at some point.
They’ve refused to recess since like 2015.