Project 2025: How to Start a Fascist Takeover in 180 Days!

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Looks like Putin has a rival for who can emulate Hitler the best. I'm surprised Trump didn't invade Mexico the last time he was president.

[wautd]

Trump to create a new efficiency department, lead by Musk and Ramaswamy, two inefficient, incompetent far right hacks with a huge conflict of interest. What can possibly go wrong? What's next, appoint an anti vax conspiracy nut like Robert F Kennedy in charge of the department of health?
Scary times ahead for the USA

Reuters

Trump names Elon Musk to lead government efficiency drive

- Musk and Ramaswamy will lead efficiency department
- DOGE intended to dismantle bureaucracy, cut regulations, restructure agencies
- Musk and Ramaswamy's work to conclude by July 4, 2026
- Will take 'advice and guidance' from outside government, work with OMB

Ramaswamy says he is withdrawing from consideration for Ohio Senate seat
Nov 13 (Reuters) - U.S. President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday named Elon Musk to a role aimed at creating a more efficient government, handing even more influence to the world's richest man who donated millions of dollars to helping Trump get elected.
Musk and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy will co-lead a newly created Department of Government Efficiency, an entity Trump indicated will operate outside the confines of government.

Trump said in a statement that Musk and Ramaswamy "will pave the way for my Administration to dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies."
Trump said the new department will realize long-held Republican dreams and "provide advice and guidance from outside of government," signaling the Musk and Ramaswamy roles would be informal, without requiring Senate approval and allowing Musk to remain the head of electric car company Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab, social media platform X and rocket company SpaceX.

The new department would work with the White House and Office of Management & Budget to "drive large scale structural reform, and create an entrepreneurial approach" to government never seen before, Trump said.
The work would conclude by July 4, 2026 - the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
Musk, ranked by Forbes as the richest person in the world, already stood to benefit from Trump's victory, with the billionaire entrepreneur expected to wield extraordinary influence to help his companies and secure favorable government treatment.

With many links to Washington, opens new tab, Musk gave millions of dollars to support Trump's presidential campaign and made public appearances with him.
Adding a government portfolio to Musk's plate could benefit the market value of his companies and favored businesses such as artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency.
"It's clear that Musk will have a massive role in the Trump White House with his increasing reach clearly across many federal agencies," equities analyst Daniel Ives of Wedbush Securities said in a research note.
"We believe the major benefits for Musk and Tesla far outweigh any negatives as this continues to be a 'poker move for the ages' by Musk betting on Trump," Ives said.
The move was criticized by Public Citizen, a progressive consumer rights NGO that challenged several of Trump’s first-term policies.
"Musk not only knows nothing about government efficiency and regulation, his own businesses have regularly run afoul of the very rules he will be in position to attack in his new ‘czar’ position," Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, said in a statement. "This is the ultimate corporate corruption."
MAXIMUM TRANSPARENCY PROMISED
Trump likened the efficiency effort to the Manhattan Project, the U.S. undertaking to build the atomic bomb that helped end World War Two, while Musk promised transparency.
"All actions of the Department of Government Efficiency will be posted online for maximum transparency," Musk said on X, inviting the public to provide tips.
"We will also have a leaderboard for most insanely dumb spending of your tax dollars. This will be both extremely tragic and extremely entertaining," Musk said.
Musk said at a Trump rally at Madison Square Garden in October that the federal budget could be reduced by "at least" $2 trillion. Discretionary spending, including defense spending, is estimated to total $1.9 trillion out of $6.75 trillion in total federal outlays for fiscal 2024, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
"Your money is being wasted and the Department of Government Efficiency is going to fix that. We're going to get the government off your back and out of your pocketbook," Musk said at the rally.
The acronym of the new department - DOGE - also references the name of the cryptocurrency dogecoin that Musk promotes.
In August Musk and Tesla won the dismissal of a federal lawsuit accusing them of defrauding investors by hyping dogecoin and conducting insider trading, causing billions of dollars of losses.
Dogecoin has more than doubled since Election Day, tracking a surge in cryptocurrency markets on expectations of a softer regulatory ride under a Trump administration.
Shares in Tesla fell on Wall Street ahead of the announcement but are up about 30% since the election.
Ramaswamy is the founder of a pharmaceutical company who ran for the Republican presidential nomination against Trump and then threw his support behind the former president after dropping out.
In his 2021 bestseller "Woke, Inc.," Ramaswamy decried decisions by some big companies to base business strategy around social justice and climate change concerns.
Ramaswamy said the appointment means he is withdrawing from consideration for the pending U.S. Senate appointment in Ohio, where Governor Mike DeWine will appoint a replacement for JD Vance, who will become Trump's vice president when they are inaugurated on Jan. 20.

[Tribble]

Trump to create a new efficiency department, lead by Musk and Ramaswamy, two inefficient, incompetent far right hacks with a huge conflict of interest. What can possibly go wrong? What's next, appoint an anti vax conspiracy nut like Robert F Kennedy in charge of the department of health?
Scary times ahead for the USA

Speaking of which:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Reveals Plans to Fire 600 Federal Health Workers

The Trump ally and anti-vax conspiracist takes aim at the agencies he loathes.

At an event late last week in Arizona, anti-vaccine activist and Donald Trump transition team member Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he’d fire and replace 600 people from the National Institutes of Health on “day one” of a second Trump term. The NIH is one of the public health agencies Kennedy loathes the most—and despite still lacking any defined role in a new administration, he’s clearly relishing the opportunity to promise retribution against them.

In comments that were first reported by ABC News, Kennedy declared, “We need to act fast, and we want to have those people in place on January 20, so that on January 21, 600 people are going to walk into offices at NIH and 600 people are going to leave.”

Kennedy, a long-standing opponent of vaccines, has consistently been critical of the NIH, the Centers for Disease Control, and other federal agencies that are part of the basic infrastructure of public health. His The Real Anthony Fauci attacked Fauci, a former NIH director, at book length, albeit with what one physician reviewer called “many errors and gross misrepresentations.”

The remarks offering some concrete details about Kennedy’s Trump-aligned and so-called “Make America Healthy Again” agenda came during an onstage interview at an entrepreneurship event in Scottsdale, which included discussions of Kennedy’s workout routine and his relationship with the once and future president.

Calley Means, a self-described health care reform activist who played a role in Kennedy’s independent presidential run sat alongside him for part of the interview. He framed the MAHA movement as “kicking the special interests and the Deep State” out of government, calling the NIH “an orgy of corruption.”

Kennedy made other eyebrow-raising claims during the interview, for instance claiming that “pilot studies” showed that anorexia could be cured with a “keto diets and other kind of diets.”

“NIH won’t do those studies because they don’t want to know the source or the cure or the treatment of chronic disease,” he declared. He also returned to his hobby horse, claiming links between vaccines and a spread in autism.

“I never saw anybody who was autistic when I was a kid,” Kennedy claimed. “Never.” He added that men his age—Kennedy is 70—don’t have “full blown autism,” which he defined as “wearing helmets” and “not being toilet trained” and “head-banging, stimming, toe-walking.”

(Experts believe that autism was underdiagnosed until recent decades; the earliest prevalence studies weren’t conducted until the 1960s and ’70s. Autistic adults have a range of abilities, and autistic self-advocates have said that Kennedy uses offensive and ableist language to talk about autism: rather than “full blown,” public health experts would generally say “profound autism.” Kennedy also still uses the term “Aspergers,” an outdated phrase referencing a scientist who worked with Nazis during the Holocaust.)

Kennedy also used his appearance in Scottsdale to continue fawning over Trump, saying the incoming president “has an aura of greatness around him” for his role in standing up to what he called “the globalist project.”

He also spoke critically about his own extended family, many of whom were critical of his presidential run, and some of whom called him “tragically wrong” about vaccines as far back as 2019. Kennedy said those relatives were “all under this kind of hypnosis” and have been “persuaded by this propaganda wall to turn on their own values.”

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... of-health/

First thing to do when setting up your fascist machine: purge all the intellectuals and anyone who opposes you! Doctors and educators must go!

Though in this case, it looks like the dude is literally just bat shit crazy… which is why Trump loves him of course.

[bilateralrope]

Trump declares Senate majority candidates should allow him to make recess appointments

The president-elect said the next Senate majority leader should be open to bypassing Senate confirmation for administration appointees.

Nov. 11, 2024, 12:05 PM GMT+13 / Updated Nov. 11, 2024, 12:24 PM GMT+13
By Julie Tsirkin and Alexandra Marquez

President-elect Donald Trump on Sunday involved himself publicly in the Senate leadership race for the first time, writing on Truth Social that anyone running to be the next Senate majority leader should agree to let him make recess appointments to his cabinet.

"Any Republican Senator seeking the coveted LEADERSHIP position in the United States Senate must agree to Recess Appointments (in the Senate!), without which we will not be able to get people confirmed in a timely manner," Trump wrote, adding, "Sometimes the votes can take two years, or more. This is what they did four years ago, and we cannot let it happen again. We need positions filled IMMEDIATELY!"

One of the demands he outlined is the ability to make recess appointments, which would allow the president to appoint people to senior administration positions and bypass Senate confirmation.

Currently, both chambers of Congress enter "pro forma" sessions, even when the House and the Senate are out of town, as a tactic to block the president from bypassing confirmation votes.

The Supreme Court rebuked President Barack Obama when he made recess appointments, ruling 9-0 that he made them during a three-day break and that recesses are technically longer than that. The ruling gave the Senate more power to thwart such appointments in the future.

In 2020, during the throes of the Covid pandemic, Trump threatened to unilaterally adjourn Congress so he could make recess appointments, but the threat never materialized.

Trump's post Sunday is his first time he has weighed into the race to replace Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Republicans' de facto leader in the Senate.

GOP Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Rick Scott of Florida and John Thune of South Dakota, the minority whip, are running to replace him.

Scott quickly weighed Sunday, writing on X that he agrees with Trump about recess appointments.

"100% agree. I will do whatever it takes to get your nominations through as quickly as possible," Scott wrote.

Cornyn wrote on X that it is “unacceptable” for Senate Democrats to block Trump appointments.

“The Constitution expressly confers the power on the President to make recess appointments,” he wrote in the post. “Article II, Section 2, Clause 3: The President shall have 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.”

Thune said members of the Senate must act "quickly and decisively" on Trump appointments.

“We must act quickly and decisively to get the president’s nominees in place as soon as possible, & all options are on the table to make that happen, including recess appointments. We cannot let Schumer and Senate Dems block the will of the American people," he wrote on X.

The race to succeed McConnell has heated up since Election Day, with rank-and-file GOP senators publicly endorsing their picks.

Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Marco Rubio of Florida and Bill Hagerty of Tennessee have all endorsed Scott.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has endorsed Cornyn.

On Thursday, Thune urged Trump not to endorse in the race, telling CNBC in an interview, “Obviously, if he wants to, he could exert a considerable amount of influence on that, but honestly, I think my preference would be, and I think it’s probably in his best interest, to stay out of that."

Scott told Trump in May that he would run to succeed McConnell and asked for his endorsement, a source familiar with the call told NBC News.

Cornyn, Scott and Thune will meet Tuesday evening at a candidates forum organized by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah. On Wednesday morning, just hours before Trump meets with President Joe Biden at the White House, senators will vote for a new majority leader by secret ballot.

In the second part of his Truth Social post Sunday, Trump called on Democrats not to confirm any additional judicial nominees before the start of the next congressional session.

"Additionally, no Judges should be approved during this period of time because the Democrats are looking to ram through their Judges as the Republicans fight over Leadership. THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. THANK YOU!" Trump wrote, suggesting Republicans should stop Democrats from confirming judges during the lame duck session.

That would work only if Republicans slow-walk the process. They cannot unilaterally stop Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., from putting nominees on the floor.

Sure, they say it's to avoid Democrat opposition.

But it also means that Trump gets to pick people that Republican senators don't want to vote for.


Oh and here's a list of his picks. Highlights include:
Including Kristi Noem for the role of secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Because shooting a hunting dog for behaving exactly like you'd expect from one of that age and breed, then a goat for smelling like a goat, makes someone a good pick for government roles.

[Zaune]

So... yeah. Any news on that recount?

[Raw Shark]

Highlights include:
Including Kristi Noem for the role of secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Because shooting a hunting dog for behaving exactly like you'd expect from one of that age and breed, then a goat for smelling like a goat, makes someone a good pick for government roles.

Is there something wrong with me that I'm picturing that meeting played for comedy at this point, to laugh so I don't cry?

DONNY JINGLES: I want a serial killer to handle the border. A real bigly psychopath. The best psychopath. Can we get Jeffrey Dahmer on the phone?

YES MEN: He's dead, Sir.

DONNY JINGLES: Is that a problem?

YES MEN: It is, Sir.

DONNY JINGLES: Okay, how about Hannibal Lecter? I hear he gets shit done.

YES MEN: He's not real, Sir.

DONNY JINGLES: Goddamnit! Can't you guys do anything? What about that nice piece of ass from South Dakota who gets off on killing puppies, can you do that at least?

YES MEN: Right away, Sir.

[bilateralrope]

So... yeah. Any news on that recount?

Harris is fundraising for Senate and Congress recounts, but not the presidency. Which might be useful depending on how many people Trump takes from there into his cabinet.


As for Congress, last I heard they still had votes to count before we can know who has the majority, but it will be by a thin margin either way.

On eve of House GOP leadership vote, Johnson shares opposition to punitive rules change

“I don’t think we will have a need for party discipline and I expect everybody to be working on singing from the same sheet of music,” Johnson told POLITICO.

By Olivia Beavers and Jordain Carney

11/12/2024, 8:26pm ET

On the eve of the House GOP’s leadership elections, Speaker Mike Johnson is making clear he does not back new internal GOP rules proposals that would take punitive measures against Republicans who prevent GOP bills from coming to the floor.

“I have made clear to members, as I've been having discussion with them, that I am not in favor of punitive measures and rules. I think that we are going to work together as a cohesive team. It’s a brand new time, a brand new day,” Johnson exclusively told POLITICO. “I don’t think we will have a need for party discipline and I expect everybody to be working on singing from the same sheet of music.”

His remarks come as Johnson, according to two sources, had privately told various members that he didn’t support punitive measures. POLITICO first reported over the weekend that centrists had filed an amendment to the rules to allow for members who voted against bringing GOP policies to the floor be removed from committees.

But some conservatives worry that even if Johnson doesn’t support it, a majority of his GOP conference will move to punish conservatives who block him from bringing bills to the floor, which became common practice last term. Republicans will meet on Thursday to vote on internal rules for the next Congress.

One GOP member, who was granted anonymity to speak frankly, added that leadership just “wants to just calm these waters and move forward,” but supporters of the rules proposal might be able to get “a majority to vote on Thursday ... a certain way. We’ve got to address that.”

Another conservative put it this way: “If Johnson is going to try to change the rules and go backwards — I think that is where the motivation is coming from to mount an effort against him. … If he made a public commitment that he is not going to [punish members] or not going to change the motion to vacate, I think that it’ll be a slam dunk for him.”

Johnson’s remarks come as Republicans say he isn’t sweating a potential challenger from conservatives, despite some members saying they reserve the right to put one forward. Part of the reason hardliners are leaning toward mounting a challenge against Johnson is to attempt to push him rightwards on House rules.

Others are hoping that while they point the finger at Republicans being united while Democrats are in chaos, they will be able to avoid similar charges directed at them if a challenger emerges.

“Many of us would like to see Mike not having a challenge, but rather recognizing that he's the only candidate,” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), noting that former Speaker Kevin McCarthy faced a similar challenger from the right who only got about 30 votes. “Now the question is, why put up a candidate symbolically to be humiliated by getting a handful of votes.”

“There's nobody you could put up that could propose anything more conservative,” he added.

The conservatives who want to see a challenger have so far failed to name who that member may be, but the group is expected to meet Tuesday night to discuss their plans.

“May or may not happen,” Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), a House Freedom Caucus member, said of a potential challenger. “Honestly, I don’t know that they will.”

Another member involved in the talks added that: “We’re reserving the right to have an alternative. I think we probably will.”

Johnson also said he expects Trump to endorse him Wednesday, before Republicans gather to vote by secret ballot about who will serve in their leadership lineup.

“He’s been talking very publicly everywhere about this, so I expect he’ll do it again tomorrow,” Johnson added.

It sounds like Congress will be a mess under a Republican majority.

[Tribble]

Highlights include:
Including Kristi Noem for the role of secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Because shooting a hunting dog for behaving exactly like you'd expect from one of that age and breed, then a goat for smelling like a goat, makes someone a good pick for government roles.

Is there something wrong with me that I'm picturing that meeting played for comedy at this point, to laugh so I don't cry?

DONNY JINGLES: I want a serial killer to handle the border. A real bigly psychopath. The best psychopath. Can we get Jeffrey Dahmer on the phone?

YES MEN: He's dead, Sir.

DONNY JINGLES: Is that a problem?

YES MEN: It is, Sir.

DONNY JINGLES: Okay, how about Hannibal Lecter? I hear he gets shit done.

YES MEN: He's not real, Sir.

DONNY JINGLES: Goddamnit! Can't you guys do anything? What about that nice piece of ass from South Dakota who gets off on killing puppies, can you do that at least?

YES MEN: Right away, Sir.

Also reminds me of Yes Minister, where the Minister of Health is a chronic chainsmoker, the Minister of Education dropped out of school, the Minister of Economics having no clue on how to run the economy etc…

Only it’s real life, and they’re actual fascists.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

So many people forget that the first country the Nazis invaded was their own.

Looks like history is repeating itself.

[PainRack]

The first problem they are going to have with this is removing the civil servants.

If you fire them all, besides the union based lawsuits, and possibility of them locking out elected officials, you now have dozens of computer systems no one knows how to use, etc. With computers that were password locked on the way out, servers that were password locked on the way out, etc.

Computers, that bypassing the security is a serious criminal offense of.

And if you have a bunch of idiots come in to a government office, going 'we are your replacements', etc, even if a government official is with them, unless it was all done properly, you'll have a manager or someone calling the police. Just make the call 'we have terrorist trying to take over the building', and then the shit hits the fan, hard.

So, that leaves keeping the civil servants, to train their replacements. Which brings up the problem of if the civil servants even suspect this is to set them up to be surplussed, will resist. As in - not training, taking their time with security clearances, etc.

To phase out the civil servants and replace them with their people? A quick mass replacement is not going to work.

Especially as all it takes is the IT team going 'nope, fuck this', and fighting back.

In many cases making the agency not work effectively will be the point.

On a hopefully unrelated note, I saw speculation the other day that Trump will come through for his people for once by pardoning the January 6th insurrectionists. And that they might end up forming the nucleus of a proper Brownshirts.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Shi ... ed_States)


Don't need a new color. The original red shirts did the exact same thing, blocking electoral results and forcing Republicans to end reconstruction n start Jim Crow.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jan-6-defe ... lay-cases/


And their lawyers know it, citing Trump victory to delay their cases.

[bilateralrope]

Trump baffles Republican senators by picking Matt Gaetz for attorney general

The Florida congressman will need support from the majority of the Senate to be confirmed, which some Republicans said will be a "significant challenge."

Nov. 14, 2024, 11:19 AM GMT+13
By Sahil Kapur, Brennan Leach, Frank Thorp V and Syedah Asghar

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump stunned Senate Republicans by announcing Wednesday that he will nominate Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., to be attorney general.

Gaetz, a Trump loyalist known for being a rabble-rouser in Congress, will need a majority of the Senate to be confirmed as the country’s top law enforcement officer. Republicans will have a majority of 52 or 53 seats beginning Jan. 3, depending on the outcome of the Pennsylvania Senate race. That means Gaetz won't have a large margin for error, assuming every Democrat opposes him.

Some Senate Republicans said the process won’t be smooth sailing.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said it will be “a significant challenge” for Gaetz to win enough votes to be confirmed.

“I don’t think it’s a serious nomination for the attorney general. That’s Lisa Murkowski’s view,” Murkowski said. “We need to have a serious attorney general. And I’m looking forward to the opportunity to consider somebody that is serious. This one was not on my bingo card.”

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, said, “He’s got his work cut out for him.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who is on the Judiciary Committee, which oversees the nomination, said the Senate will “have to consider any nominee by the president seriously, but we also have a constitutional responsibility.”

“I don’t know the man, other than sort of this public persona,” Cornyn told reporters.

Asked about Gaetz’s being investigated by the House Ethics Committee over allegations of sexual misconduct, Cornyn deadpanned: “Well, that might come up.”

“I don’t know whether there’s any basis to it or not,” he added. “So yeah, I’m sure we’ll be asking a lot of questions.”

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who is also on the Judiciary Committee, said that the Senate will give Gaetz an “honest look” and that the investigations involving him will be “part of the process.”

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, sounded a note of skepticism.

“Obviously, the president has the right to nominate whomever he wishes, but I’m certain that there will be a lot of questions,” she said.

Collins said the ethics probe will be “one of the issues that’s going to be raised, because, as I understand it, there’s an active investigation by the House Ethics Committee.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said Gaetz's confirmation prospects were "a long shot," adding that it’s “very possible” Trump is testing the limits of how far he can push the Senate.

Other Senate Republicans refused to comment on Trump's latest Cabinet selection.

“I got nothin’ for you on that,” said Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala.

But some GOP senators sounded open to the possibility of Gaetz.

“The president gets to pick his nominees,” said Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., without saying how he would vote.

Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., didn’t directly comment on Gaetz, but he said he looks “forward to getting President Trump’s nominees after we hear their plans for the departments.”

Asked whether that meant he'd vote yes, he said, “Everybody has to go through committee hearings, but we want to work to confirm President Trump’s nominees.”

‘You can record me as speechless’

Senate Democrats were also flummoxed.

“You can record me as speechless,” said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., who is on the Judiciary Committee.

“That was in The Onion, right?” said Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt.

Added outgoing Sen. Joe Manchin, I-W.Va.: “I just heard the news. I can’t even believe it.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., a member of the Judiciary Committee, said Gaetz lacks basic qualifications for the job.

“He will have a lot of problems in the Senate,” Blumenthal said. “I think that this nomination will be the first major test of whether they’re willing to stand up to Donald Trump. And we’ll soon know.”

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., laughed and called Gaetz’s selection “God-tier-level trolling” to “own the libs in perpetuity.”

“Obviously, it’s not serious,” he said. “No one’s going to confirm him. And I’m certainly not going to freak out.”

House Republicans react to the pick

As Trump’s social media post announcing the pick made the rounds, Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, said the reaction in the room where House Republicans were meeting was: “Oh, my God.”

Asked whether Gaetz has the character to be attorney general, Simpson replied, “Are you sh---ing me?”

“No,” he said, and he called on the House Ethics Committee to release its report on Gaetz now.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said he’s worried that the already slim GOP majority is thinning further as a result of Trump’s plucking several lawmakers for administration jobs.

“We met with President Trump and said, ‘Please, no more House members after Matt Gaetz,’” Scalise said.

Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, called the pick “silly.”

“I believe that the president is probably rewarding him for being such a loyal soldier to the president,” he said. “But the president is smart enough and his team is smart enough to know that Mr. Gaetz will never get confirmed by the Senate whatsoever.”

Looks like Trump isn't wasting any time finding out which senators will do as he demands.


Also, if Gaetz is confirmed, that means he resigns from his seat in Congress. How will his replacement be selected ?

[Solauren]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jan-6-defe ... lay-cases/

And their lawyers know it, citing Trump victory to delay their cases.

The Justice department will never dismiss the charges, so I don't see the point in delaying.

After all, you can only Pardon a crime someone was convicted of.

Pardoning them before conviction is pointless. Trump pardons them, and they are not convicted? The pardon doesn't cover that.
(At least, that's my understanding of how US Pardons work at the Federal level)

[Tribble]

Trump baffles Republican senators by picking Matt Gaetz for attorney general

The Florida congressman will need support from the majority of the Senate to be confirmed, which some Republicans said will be a "significant challenge."

Nov. 14, 2024, 11:19 AM GMT+13
By Sahil Kapur, Brennan Leach, Frank Thorp V and Syedah Asghar

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump stunned Senate Republicans by announcing Wednesday that he will nominate Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., to be attorney general.

Gaetz, a Trump loyalist known for being a rabble-rouser in Congress, will need a majority of the Senate to be confirmed as the country’s top law enforcement officer. Republicans will have a majority of 52 or 53 seats beginning Jan. 3, depending on the outcome of the Pennsylvania Senate race. That means Gaetz won't have a large margin for error, assuming every Democrat opposes him.

Some Senate Republicans said the process won’t be smooth sailing.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said it will be “a significant challenge” for Gaetz to win enough votes to be confirmed.

“I don’t think it’s a serious nomination for the attorney general. That’s Lisa Murkowski’s view,” Murkowski said. “We need to have a serious attorney general. And I’m looking forward to the opportunity to consider somebody that is serious. This one was not on my bingo card.”

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, said, “He’s got his work cut out for him.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who is on the Judiciary Committee, which oversees the nomination, said the Senate will “have to consider any nominee by the president seriously, but we also have a constitutional responsibility.”

“I don’t know the man, other than sort of this public persona,” Cornyn told reporters.

Asked about Gaetz’s being investigated by the House Ethics Committee over allegations of sexual misconduct, Cornyn deadpanned: “Well, that might come up.”

“I don’t know whether there’s any basis to it or not,” he added. “So yeah, I’m sure we’ll be asking a lot of questions.”

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who is also on the Judiciary Committee, said that the Senate will give Gaetz an “honest look” and that the investigations involving him will be “part of the process.”

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, sounded a note of skepticism.

“Obviously, the president has the right to nominate whomever he wishes, but I’m certain that there will be a lot of questions,” she said.

Collins said the ethics probe will be “one of the issues that’s going to be raised, because, as I understand it, there’s an active investigation by the House Ethics Committee.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said Gaetz's confirmation prospects were "a long shot," adding that it’s “very possible” Trump is testing the limits of how far he can push the Senate.

Other Senate Republicans refused to comment on Trump's latest Cabinet selection.

“I got nothin’ for you on that,” said Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala.

But some GOP senators sounded open to the possibility of Gaetz.

“The president gets to pick his nominees,” said Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., without saying how he would vote.

Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., didn’t directly comment on Gaetz, but he said he looks “forward to getting President Trump’s nominees after we hear their plans for the departments.”

Asked whether that meant he'd vote yes, he said, “Everybody has to go through committee hearings, but we want to work to confirm President Trump’s nominees.”

‘You can record me as speechless’

Senate Democrats were also flummoxed.

“You can record me as speechless,” said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., who is on the Judiciary Committee.

“That was in The Onion, right?” said Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt.

Added outgoing Sen. Joe Manchin, I-W.Va.: “I just heard the news. I can’t even believe it.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., a member of the Judiciary Committee, said Gaetz lacks basic qualifications for the job.

“He will have a lot of problems in the Senate,” Blumenthal said. “I think that this nomination will be the first major test of whether they’re willing to stand up to Donald Trump. And we’ll soon know.”

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., laughed and called Gaetz’s selection “God-tier-level trolling” to “own the libs in perpetuity.”

“Obviously, it’s not serious,” he said. “No one’s going to confirm him. And I’m certainly not going to freak out.”

House Republicans react to the pick

As Trump’s social media post announcing the pick made the rounds, Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, said the reaction in the room where House Republicans were meeting was: “Oh, my God.”

Asked whether Gaetz has the character to be attorney general, Simpson replied, “Are you sh---ing me?”

“No,” he said, and he called on the House Ethics Committee to release its report on Gaetz now.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said he’s worried that the already slim GOP majority is thinning further as a result of Trump’s plucking several lawmakers for administration jobs.

“We met with President Trump and said, ‘Please, no more House members after Matt Gaetz,’” Scalise said.

Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, called the pick “silly.”

“I believe that the president is probably rewarding him for being such a loyal soldier to the president,” he said. “But the president is smart enough and his team is smart enough to know that Mr. Gaetz will never get confirmed by the Senate whatsoever.”

Looks like Trump isn't wasting any time finding out which senators will do as he demands.


Also, if Gaetz is confirmed, that means he resigns from his seat in Congress. How will his replacement be selected ?

Ya for sure. This one is like watching Tony Soprano make a bad joke just to see who fears him enough go along and laugh with them anyways, and who’s not laughing and has to be taken care of.

And he definitely picked this guy to do some really nasty work, no question. Can’t have nice guys when you wanna kick off your own purges.

[Ralin]

The Justice department will never dismiss the charges, so I don't see the point in delaying.

After all, you can only Pardon a crime someone was convicted of.

Pardoning them before conviction is pointless. Trump pardons them, and they are not convicted? The pardon doesn't cover that.
(At least, that's my understanding of how US Pardons work at the Federal level)

I don't know the exactly how the legal mechanism works but mass pardoning people for taking part in a rebellion or insurrection 'for the good of the nation' does seem in line with the history and intent of what the pardon power is for. Leaving aside who is doing it and why.

Also 1) as president Trump will have great influence over the Justice Department, 2) it does indeed seem pointless in some sense to hold an expensive trial knowing that anyone convicted will immediately be pardoned and 3) making these requests is a convenient way for the defendants to issue thinly unveiled threats to the judges hearing their cases.

[Raw Shark]

“That was in The Onion, right?” said Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt.

There's a lot of comedy gold here, but this was my favorite nugget.

[bilateralrope]

The Justice department will never dismiss the charges, so I don't see the point in delaying.

After all, you can only Pardon a crime someone was convicted of.

Pardoning them before conviction is pointless. Trump pardons them, and they are not convicted? The pardon doesn't cover that.
(At least, that's my understanding of how US Pardons work at the Federal level)

Nope. Most famously, Nixon was pardoned before conviction. The only requirements are it must be a federal charge and covered by the text of the pardon. Also something about the pardon having to be after the crime and for a non-corrupt purpose, but you can guess how Trump's SCOTUS will rule there.

When the pardon is presented to a court, any criminal process on a crime it it covers halts immediately. No conviction if it was before the conviction. No appeals if it's after the conviction and someone wants to clear their name. Immediate release from incarceration.

As for the justice department, they will be taking orders from Trump now. If he wants the case dismissed, it gets dismissed.

[Tribble]

The Justice department will never dismiss the charges, so I don't see the point in delaying.

After all, you can only Pardon a crime someone was convicted of.

Pardoning them before conviction is pointless. Trump pardons them, and they are not convicted? The pardon doesn't cover that.
(At least, that's my understanding of how US Pardons work at the Federal level)

Nope. Most famously, Nixon was pardoned before conviction. The only requirements are it must be a federal charge and covered by the text of the pardon. Also something about the pardon having to be after the crime and for a non-corrupt purpose, but you can guess how Trump's SCOTUS will rule there.

When the pardon is presented to a court, any criminal process on a crime it it covers halts immediately. No conviction if it was before the conviction. No appeals if it's after the conviction and someone wants to clear their name. Immediate release from incarceration.

As for the justice department, they will be taking orders from Trump now. If he wants the case dismissed, it gets dismissed.

Yep! And you can bet that SCOTUS will for whatever reason find that Democrats like Clinton, Obama and Biden were not acting “officially” in whatever crimes they end up getting charged with while Trump of course was acting officially for everything he did (and will do).

[AniThyng]

“That was in The Onion, right?” said Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt.

There's a lot of comedy gold here, but this was my favorite nugget.

Rep Simpson saying "are you sh-ting me" is funny too.

[Raw Shark]

“That was in The Onion, right?” said Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt.

There's a lot of comedy gold here, but this was my favorite nugget.

Rep Simpson saying "are you sh-ting me" is funny too.

I mean, there's a lot there.

I'm pretty much in, "No more fucks left," mode and just gonna laugh at this for a few days.

I'm an Eagle Scout. I have less skin in this game than most people. I can just disappear into the forest if I have to. It's the rest of you I worry about.

[Raw Shark]

...and don't worry, if I really mean to get lost and stay that way, I'm walking north. We'll be neighbors! Kind of.

[Solauren]

...and don't worry, if I really mean to get lost and stay that way, I'm walking north. We'll be neighbors! Kind of.

Come up to Canada, and move to Toronto.
We wouldn't meet (probably), but I have a few friends you'd probably get along with that live there.

[Raw Shark]

Or maybe I should take a bus to Mexico. My Spanish is not the best. Could use a little work. So many options! I loved being an American so much. 248 years was a pretty good run.

[Raw Shark]

Come up to Canada, and move to Toronto.
We wouldn't meet (probably), but I have a few friends you'd probably get along with that live there.

Okay, realistically that's probably where I'd end up. I've been to Toronto and know a few people there who'd probably tolerate my bullshit for a while until I got a job and whatever.

I know I don't come off like it on the internets, but I make friends everywhere I go in the meatspace. It's not as difficult as some people think. I'm autistic, and I do it all the time. I just talk to everybody. If they seem like a dick, I talk to somebody else.

[Tribble]

Come up to Canada, and move to Toronto.
We wouldn't meet (probably), but I have a few friends you'd probably get along with that live there.

Okay, realistically that's probably where I'd end up. I've been to Toronto and know a few people there who'd probably tolerate my bullshit for a while until I got a job and whatever.

I know I don't come off like it on the internets, but I make friends everywhere I go in the meatspace. It's not as difficult as some people think. I'm autistic, and I do it all the time. I just talk to everybody. If they seem like a dick, I talk to somebody else.

Only problem is we have a similar movement up here, though perhaps less obvious and pronounced. Quite a number of people are upset about the economy and levels of immigration here too. Even if our current conservatives aren’t as extreme as the Republicans, who knows how much they would be influenced by the far right, especially if they’re getting American support / being pressured by a Trump administration?

Our economy is entirely dependent on the US, and we don’t really have much of a military at the moment (no disrespect to people in the forces, but we’re zero match for the US). No WMDs as a deterrent either (by choice). We exist solely at the grace and pleasure of the US, and unfortunately fascists aren’t exactly known for being particularly graceful towards their easy to conquer neighbours.

[Raw Shark]

Only problem is we have a similar movement up here, though perhaps less obvious and pronounced. Quite a number of people are upset about the economy and levels of immigration here too. Even if our current conservatives aren’t as extreme as the Republicans, who knows how much they would be influenced by the far right, especially if they’re getting American support / being pressured by a Trump administration?

Our economy is entirely dependent on the US, and we don’t really have much of a military at the moment (no disrespect to people in the forces, but we’re zero match for the US). No WMDs as a deterrent either (by choice). We exist solely at the grace and pleasure of the US, and unfortunately fascists aren’t exactly known for being particularly graceful towards their easy to conquer neighbours.

Don't ruin this for me, man. If I don't have an escape route I'm not going out quietly.

"When they came for the journalists, I said 'Meh, I'm not a journalist'.
When they came fOr the hipsters, I said, 'Meh, I'm not a hipster.'
When they came for my girlfriend I FOUGHT LIKE TEN THOUSAND TIGERS AND THAT'S HOW I DIED."