• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Trump's Appointments

I wonder if Trump is picking assholes for cabinet positions, anticipating they will be rejected. Then picking lesser and smarter assholes that can get passed.

Yeah, I know. Just wondering.
You might think so but apparently what I’m hearing is that this is not the case.
 
I'm certain her experience in helping develop a massive wrestling kingdom (how much was her?) will be very helpful in guiding the Education Department, much like DeVos whose experience being in the Amway dynasty helped her.
 
I won't be happy until all these numbnuts do a televised cabinet meeting like The Asshole's Class of '17 where they went around the table and everyone told him what an awesome, mind-blowing, ecstatic thrill it was for them to work for Him. (What a cringey piece of video that is, bizarre beyond description.) Then the women showed off the MAGA tattoos on each breast and the men showed off their scrotal tattoos. On Gaetz the tattoo will reportedly have to fit next to the existing one, which reads Get 'Em Tiger.
 
I think my favorite is that gun violence is caused by anti-depressants. :image:
Unfortunately, this one might have grain of truth. One particular anti-depressant, not all of them.
We should probably regulate anti-depressants more because if we can save even one life this way it’ll be worth it.
There's one that looks like it might be problematic--as in very well might be behind the Colorado theater shooting. But nobody wants to study it to find out.
 
Matt Gaetz is a strong contender for Chump of the year. His confirmation depends on 100% from the Republican Senators, who will be forced to sit through the most embarrassing confirmation in history. That will be a very big and very bitter pill for even the most MAGA among them.
I thought that’s why Trump is planning for recess appointments.
We have to wait and see if the Republicians fold like a wet napkin and grant him recess appointments. That has yet to be confirmed if they will. Although it doesn't seem likely they will suddenly grow a spine. Even if they do grant it to him, the constitutionality can still potentially be challenged in court.

Article II Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution said:
[The President] 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.

If J.D. Vance, President of the Senate, goes along with Trump's adjournment I think neither the Senators nor Scotus will be asked for their opinions.
 
I think my favorite is that gun violence is caused by anti-depressants. :image:
Unfortunately, this one might have grain of truth. One particular anti-depressant, not all of them.
We should probably regulate anti-depressants more because if we can save even one life this way it’ll be worth it.
There's one that looks like it might be problematic--as in very well might be behind the Colorado theater shooting. But nobody wants to study it to find out.
I've read that had the person on medication not had access to those guns, the gun related murders wouldn't have happened.

Why is it that anti-depressants are an issue, but not the weapons?

That was a rhetorical question.
 
You likely have to some had some shady dealings or criminal behavior in the past to get selected for one of Trump's cabinet positions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...mcmahon-trump-administration-wwe-allegations/

But as she serves as a key adviser in Trump’s second termco-chairing his transition and chosen to lead his Education Department — a lawsuit against Linda and Vince McMahon is bringing fresh scrutiny to long-running claims that they mistreated WWE workers. Vince McMahon is also facing separate allegations of sexual abuse and trafficking.

Linda and Vince McMahon face a separate civil suit filed in October by five anonymous plaintiffs who worked decades ago as “ring boys,” teenagers who helped set up WWE events. The plaintiffs claim the McMahons were aware they were being sexually abused by other high-ranking WWE employees and did not do enough to protect them.
The McMahons are currently separated, according to Linda’s attorney, Laura Brevetti, who called the ring boys lawsuit “baseless.” Vince McMahon resigned from WWE one day after Grant’s lawsuit was filed in January, and he has described the complaint as “salacious, false and defamatory” in court documents. He issued a statement in January that the federal probe wouldn’t uncover any wrongdoing; representatives for him declined to provide further comment this week.

Sure right, it's baseless. /s
 
I wonder if Trump is picking assholes for cabinet positions, anticipating they will be rejected. Then picking lesser and smarter assholes that can get passed.

Yeah, I know. Just wondering.
That's more brains than he has.

Besides, he will just leave them as acting if they don't get confirmed.
 
I think my favorite is that gun violence is caused by anti-depressants. :image:
Unfortunately, this one might have grain of truth. One particular anti-depressant, not all of them.
We should probably regulate anti-depressants more because if we can save even one life this way it’ll be worth it.
There's one that looks like it might be problematic--as in very well might be behind the Colorado theater shooting. But nobody wants to study it to find out.
I've read that had the person on medication not had access to those guns, the gun related murders wouldn't have happened.

Why is it that anti-depressants are an issue, but not the weapons?

That was a rhetorical question.
Disarming the population is impossible.

And you aren't addressing the issue--it's not all anti-depressants, but rather one that is suspected of having a rare side effect of turning people into killers.
 
I think my favorite is that gun violence is caused by anti-depressants. :image:
Unfortunately, this one might have grain of truth. One particular anti-depressant, not all of them.
We should probably regulate anti-depressants more because if we can save even one life this way it’ll be worth it.
Don't you go fucking with my anti depressant. I finally found one that actually works.
Mine is sleep but it wears off when I'm awake (I still do things I enjoy doing though and that helps).
 
I think my favorite is that gun violence is caused by anti-depressants. :image:
Unfortunately, this one might have grain of truth. One particular anti-depressant, not all of them.
We should probably regulate anti-depressants more because if we can save even one life this way it’ll be worth it.
There's one that looks like it might be problematic--as in very well might be behind the Colorado theater shooting. But nobody wants to study it to find out.
I've read that had the person on medication not had access to those guns, the gun related murders wouldn't have happened.

Why is it that anti-depressants are an issue, but not the weapons?

That was a rhetorical question.
Disarming the population is impossible.

And you aren't addressing the issue--it's not all anti-depressants, but rather one that is suspected of having a rare side effect of turning people into killers.
But just one anti-depressant is such a small fraction of all anti-depressants, which all have some bad side effects, is it really worth addressing?
 
I think my favorite is that gun violence is caused by anti-depressants. :image:
Unfortunately, this one might have grain of truth. One particular anti-depressant, not all of them.
We should probably regulate anti-depressants more because if we can save even one life this way it’ll be worth it.
There's one that looks like it might be problematic--as in very well might be behind the Colorado theater shooting. But nobody wants to study it to find out.
I've read that had the person on medication not had access to those guns, the gun related murders wouldn't have happened.

Why is it that anti-depressants are an issue, but not the weapons?

That was a rhetorical question.
Disarming the population is impossible.
Of course it's possible. Just not politically correct.

And you aren't addressing the issue--it's not all anti-depressants, but rather one that is suspected of having a rare side effect of turning people into killers.
Rare being the key word.
 
Disarming the population is impossible.
No more so than preventing the use of anti-depressants.

Nitpick: Our fascist overlord or his Health Czar RFK can outlaw any drug with a stroke of the pen. There'll be uniformed oafs or orcs goose-stepping to arrest anyone not in compliance.

The Second Commandment enshrining guns as Jesus' special gift to the American people, OTOH was etched in stone on the summit of Mount Doom by the Hand of God, and delivered to His Chosen People by Moses of Mordor and Trump the Terrible.
 
I wonder if Trump is picking assholes for cabinet positions, anticipating they will be rejected. Then picking lesser and smarter assholes that can get passed.

Yeah, I know. Just wondering.
That's more brains than he has....

He doesn't need brains. He's surrounded by $5000-per-trick lawyers provided by Charles Koch, Elon Musk et al.

But picking literally the worst possible people for high posts is probably his own idea. The grifting over the past eight years have made Trump and his children rich beyond dreams, and Trump will focus his remaining years not on petty grifts but on Revenge. Like the embittered uncle who lays a juicy fart deliberately at Thanksgiving dinner, Trump's fondest dream now is to leave an unforgettable legacy. He hopes to join the select company of Vlad Dracula the Impaler, Pol Pot of the Khmer Rouge, and even fictional villains like Hannibal Lecter or Sauron of Mordor
 
Back
Top Bottom