Media Frenzy over Trump's Cabinet appointments

Vambram · Nov 15, 2024

Although I am NOT a huge fan of Bill O'Reilly, he does give reasonable explanations of his opinions and reasonable analysis of news worthy topics. What do y'all think about Mr O'Reilly's commentary concerning the cabinet appointments? He branches off into a slightly different topic after the 14 minute mark.

Hazelelponi · Nov 15, 2024

I agree with his remarks about Pete Hegseth and Elizabeth Warren. Her issue is the fact she wants a woke military which all reasonable people disagree with I'm sure.

Other than that, I like the fact he pointed out that these appointments aren't going in and setting policy. The policy directives come top down and so do any failures. Ultimately, everything rests on the President - his policy, his direction.

Whatever weird special interest initiatives people are particularly fond of - such as Elizabeth Warren's desire to see a woke and incompetent military - they want department heads who would say no and refuse to faithfully execute orders from their commander in chief in order to keep their weird special interest initiatives.

During the Obama Administration he had our ROTC soldiers doing 5k walks in heels for goodness sakes in order to shame them for being born as men - but a Trump Administration is evil when we want to say no more and never to that type of abuse.

There's definitely something wrong in our country. But I digress.

I do believe these appointments are all perfectly reasonable, like he pointed out this administration has some disasters for appointments who have messed things up royaly so it's not like we can do worse.

The people complaining about various appointments are just angry they might lose their weird and often very corrupt pet projects that ultimately, weaken our nation - or seek to destroy it all together.

FenderTL5 · Nov 15, 2024

Hazelelponi said:
During the Obama Administration he had our ROTC soldiers doing 5k walks in heels for goodness sakes in order to shame them for being born as men - but a Trump Administration is evil when we want to say no more and never to that type of abuse.

Is this the event(s) you are referring to?
If yes, what was Obama's role? If yes, what's the shaming part?

Hazelelponi · Nov 15, 2024

FenderTL5 said:
Is this the event(s) you are referring to?
If yes, what was Obama's role? If yes, what's the shaming part?

Instead of fighting about my thoughts on the Bill O'Reilly segment why don't you share your thoughts? It would be on topic.

Fantine · Nov 15, 2024

The faster he crashes and burns, the faster his administration crashes and burns. The faster his administration crashes and burns, the faster our national nightmare ends.

Hopefully he'll mess up so badly that Congress will pass a law for a recall election! Hey US government: California has a good idea out there.

Servus · Nov 15, 2024

Fantine said:
The faster he crashes and burns, the faster his administration crashes and burns. The faster his administration crashes and burns, the faster our national nightmare ends.

Hopefully he'll mess up so badly that Congress will pass a law for a recall election! Hey US government: California has a good idea out there.

Well it seems guaranteed they'll try anything and everything to stage a coup. Why should this time around be any different?

Fantine · Nov 15, 2024

ozso said:
Well it seems guaranteed they'll try anything and everything to stage a coup. Why should this time around be any different?

So his cabinet is like a bloodless coup?

ThisIsMe123 · Nov 15, 2024

Fantine said:
The faster he crashes and burns, the faster his administration crashes and burns. The faster his administration crashes and burns, the faster our national nightmare ends.

Hopefully he'll mess up so badly that Congress will pass a law for a recall election! Hey US government: California has a good idea out there.

This is interesting, as Trump intends on getting confirming his cabinet by adjourning both houses of Congress and recess appointing them.
Ed Wheland of the EPPC goes on to more detail, but the House Speaker needs to say NO to this.

Vambram · Nov 15, 2024

I love watching the left wing liberals in the media. IMO, those media progressive left wing liberals with their attacks against Trump are just one of the reasons Americans voted for him.

Servus · Nov 15, 2024

Fantine said:
So his cabinet is like a bloodless coup?

No, I'm saying the Democrats have a history of trying to take over the presidency though indictments and impeachments, and now maybe as you suggested a recall election. I mean does anyone really think they're not going to try usurping the presidency again this time around?

A2SG · Nov 15, 2024

ozso said:
Well it seems guaranteed they'll try anything and everything to stage a coup. Why should this time around be any different?

A recall election is not a coup.

-- A2SG, does that word even mean anything anymore, after the way the right has been throwing it around lately?

A2SG · Nov 15, 2024

ozso said:
No, I'm saying the Democrats have a history of trying to take over the presidency though indictments and impeachments,

When has that ever happened?

Neither Trump's many indictments nor his impeachments would have led to any Democrat taking over the presidency. Unless you have some other historical example in mind?

ozso said:
and now maybe as you suggested a recall election. I mean does anyone really think they're not going to try usurping the presidency again this time around?

Personally, I don't think a constitutional amendment creating provisions for a possible recall election for President would be the worst idea I've ever heard, but I doubt it will ever happen.

But, again, there has never been an attempt to usurp the presidency, not by Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else. No one even claimed that back when Gerald Ford was appointed to the office.

-- A2SG, enough with the ridiculous hyperbole already.....

ThisIsMe123 · Nov 16, 2024

Vambram said:
I love watching the left wing liberals in the media. IMO, those media progressive left wing liberals with their attacks against Trump are just one of the reasons Americans voted for him.

That's stating the obvious. Of course, they would have voted for Trump anyway

Vambram · Nov 16, 2024

A2SG said:
When has that ever happened?

Neither Trump's many indictments nor his impeachments would have led to any Democrat taking over the presidency. Unless you have some other historical example in mind?

Personally, I don't think a constitutional amendment creating provisions for a possible recall election for President would be the worst idea I've ever heard, but I doubt it will ever happen.

But, again, there has never been an attempt to usurp the presidency, not by Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else. No one even claimed that back when Gerald Ford was appointed to the office.

-- A2SG, enough with the ridiculous hyperbole already.....

IMO, presidencies can be usurped by ridiculous impeachments and also by a administrative bureaucracy which believes that the entrenched administrative state of 3 and 4 letter agencies should have more power in the government than does the Congress and the President.

Pommer · Nov 17, 2024

Vambram said:
IMO, presidencies can be usurped by ridiculous impeachments and also by a administrative bureaucracy which believes that the entrenched administrative state of 3 and 4 letter agencies should have more power in the government than does the Congress and the President.

Congress specifically grants the alphabet agencies the power to make rules and regulations (that have the power-of-law), if an agency’s decisions fall afoul of what Congress intended, it is up to Congress to “fix” it.

Allowing the Executive Branch to lay waste to Federal Agencies, violates the Separation-of-Powers doctrine that underpins our entire structure of governance. (Congress is willingly making itself moot).

A2SG · Nov 17, 2024

Vambram said:
IMO, presidencies can be usurped by ridiculous impeachments and also by a administrative bureaucracy which believes that the entrenched administrative state of 3 and 4 letter agencies should have more power in the government than does the Congress and the President.

"Can be" isn't the same as actually happened. The claim was: "the Democrats have a history of trying to take over the presidency though indictments and impeachments," and as far as I know (and I've been around a while now), that has never happened.

As to your specific charges, first, whether or not Trump's impeachments were "ridiculous" is debatable. Abusing Presidential authority by withholding military aid in order to have foreign governments investigate one's political opponents and obstructing the investigation by ordering members of his administration to ignore subpoenas are not ridiculous charges. Nor is the charge of inciting an insurrection. There is nothing ridiculous about these allegations and, if true, they would have serious implications, no matter who the individual was who committed them.

Granted, Trump was not removed from office for either impeachment, since there weren't enough guilty votes to clear the two-thirds required, but that doesn't make the charges ridiculous. The Senate didn't even view the evidence before voting so the vote doesn't seem to be based on the facts of the case, rather on politics alone.

But, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by the other charge, referring to the "entrenched administrative state of 3 and 4 letter agencies." Could you be more specific, and perhaps explain how that could constitute an attempt to "take over the presidency."

-- A2SG, though, I'm still unaware of any attempts by any agency, no matter how many letters in its name, having done anything remotely close to that.....

Pommer · Nov 18, 2024

A2SG said:
But, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by the other charge, referring to the "entrenched administrative state of 3 and 4 letter agencies." Could you be more specific, and perhaps explain how that could constitute an attempt to "take over the presidency."

Agencies existing (by literal Acts of Congress) are “disloyal” because the President-elect would like them to cease existing.

A2SG · Nov 18, 2024

Pommer said:
Agencies existing (by literal Acts of Congress) are “disloyal” because the President-elect would like them to cease existing.

Yeah, I think we're going to see how much the current President-elect values loyalty much more than he values competence.

-- A2SG, be an "interesting" four years, though, no question.....

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Media Frenzy over Trump's Cabinet appointments

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Well-Known Member

Κύριε, ἐλέησον.

Well-Known Member

Dona Quixote

<><

Dona Quixote

This And That

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

<><

Gumby

Gumby

This And That

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Gumby

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Gumby

Similar threads