Max Peck wrote:Purging -- if it's good for Turkey, then...
If he wins the presidency, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would seek to purge the federal government of officials appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama and could ask Congress to pass legislation making it easier to fire public workers, Trump ally, Chris Christie, said on Tuesday. Christie, who is governor of New Jersey and leads Trump's White House transition team, said the campaign was drawing up a list of federal government employees to fire if Trump defeats Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 presidential election. “As you know from his other career, Donald likes to fire people,” Christie told a closed-door meeting with dozens of donors at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, according to an audio recording obtained by Reuters and two participants in the meeting. Christie was referring to Trump's starring role in the long-running television show "The Apprentice," where his catch-phrase was "You're fired!" The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
The employees targeted are political appointees and I can understand why an incoming administration would want to put their own people in and sweep out anyone who's not on the same page as the new president.
Except that they are explicitly planning to use the excuse of appointees to make it easier to fire employees (who are not inherently appointees). Career civil servants are generally apolitical, and the Trumpistas aren't planning business as usual for a new administration if they need to pass new laws to do enact their agenda.
I was trying to see if Christie was saying that and I got the sense that it was more targeted towards appointees that have burrowed in. However, I won't deny that the ability to more easily fire your run of the mill career civil servant isn't something that the Trump administration would mind having.
This is what caught my attention:
"One of the things I have suggested to Donald is that we have to immediately ask the Republican Congress to change the civil service laws. Because if they do, it will make it a lot easier to fire those people," Christie said. He said firing civil servants was "cumbersome" and "time-consuming."
If "burrowing" is a thing, how has it been handled in previous changes of administrations, within the existing legal framework? Taken in the context of gutting the EPA, or maybe rebuilding an FBI that's more inclined to go after political opponents ("Lock her up!"), I find it interesting that they want to make legislative changes immediately upon entering power. YMMV.
It's entirely possible that I'm just more sensitive to the issue because of what is going on in Turkey (I have no doubt that a lot of the civil service being purged there are being targetted because they're not Erdogan loyalists rather than because they had any connection to the coup attempt).
"What? What?What?" -- The 14th Doctor
It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
One day this past May, Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., reached out to a senior adviser to Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, who left the presidential race just a few weeks before. As a candidate, Kasich declared in March that Trump was “really not prepared to be president of the United States,” and the following month he took the highly unusual step of coordinating with his rival Senator Ted Cruz in an effort to deny Trump the nomination. But according to the Kasich adviser (who spoke only under the condition that he not be named), Donald Jr. wanted to make him an offer nonetheless: Did he have any interest in being the most powerful vice president in history?
When Kasich’s adviser asked how this would be the case, Donald Jr. explained that his father’s vice president would be in charge of domestic and foreign policy.
Then what, the adviser asked, would Trump be in charge of?
“Making America great again” was the casual reply.
Vice President Pence would be one inevitable scandal away from the Presidency anyway.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
Max Peck wrote:Purging -- if it's good for Turkey, then...
If he wins the presidency, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would seek to purge the federal government of officials appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama and could ask Congress to pass legislation making it easier to fire public workers, Trump ally, Chris Christie, said on Tuesday. Christie, who is governor of New Jersey and leads Trump's White House transition team, said the campaign was drawing up a list of federal government employees to fire if Trump defeats Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 presidential election. “As you know from his other career, Donald likes to fire people,” Christie told a closed-door meeting with dozens of donors at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, according to an audio recording obtained by Reuters and two participants in the meeting. Christie was referring to Trump's starring role in the long-running television show "The Apprentice," where his catch-phrase was "You're fired!" The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
The employees targeted are political appointees and I can understand why an incoming administration would want to put their own people in and sweep out anyone who's not on the same page as the new president.
Except that they are explicitly planning to use the excuse of appointees to make it easier to fire employees (who are not inherently appointees). Career civil servants are generally apolitical, and the Trumpistas aren't planning business as usual for a new administration if they need to pass new laws to do enact their agenda.
I was trying to see if Christie was saying that and I got the sense that it was more targeted towards appointees that have burrowed in. However, I won't deny that the ability to more easily fire your run of the mill career civil servant isn't something that the Trump administration would mind having.
This is what caught my attention:
"One of the things I have suggested to Donald is that we have to immediately ask the Republican Congress to change the civil service laws. Because if they do, it will make it a lot easier to fire those people," Christie said. He said firing civil servants was "cumbersome" and "time-consuming."
If "burrowing" is a thing, how has it been handled in previous changes of administrations, within the existing legal framework? Taken in the context of gutting the EPA, or maybe rebuilding an FBI that's more inclined to go after political opponents ("Lock her up!"), I find it interesting that they want to make legislative changes immediately upon entering power. YMMV.
It's entirely possible that I'm just more sensitive to the issue because of what is going on in Turkey (I have no doubt that a lot of the civil service being purged there are being targetted because they're not Erdogan loyalists rather than because they had any connection to the coup attempt).
So burrowing is really a bipartisan thing which has taken place for probably almost as long as we had a gov. Back in the day I believe it was called the "spoils system" but there have been many reforms since the good old bad old days of political patronage. Is it bad? Well that depends. Many times the person in place may have done a very good job so it's in the best interest to retain that person. The article I'm quoting says that many political appointees don't mind leaving because they can parlay their experience into more quatloos in the private sector vs Federal Gov wages. With hiring freezes across many departments I can see the rank and file being more resistant toward burrowers than usual since they would be taking a slot that would be open to them to compete for. Here's a nice article on the process dated from Dec 2015:
Jeff V wrote:If someone knocks off Trump before the election, does Pence get elevated to the top of the ticket?
I believe it would be up to the party to decide.
There's a strategy, I guess. Take out Trump a week or so before the election, throw up an unknown puppet that nobody knows anything about, and count on a large number of votes from those so turned off by Trump they will hold their nose and vote for Hillary (or not at all). The Clinton campaign will have no time to expose what a cretin the new guy is.
So when asked about the call for Hillary execution made by the New Hampshire Trump delegate and Trump advisor on veterans issue, the campaign dog whistles it away,
In response to Baldasaro's attack, Trump Campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks said: "We’re incredibly grateful for his support, but we don’t agree with his comments."
Pardon the weak vocab, but this is incredibly fucking sick. How can he not immediately disavow any connection to them? I am sure it has nothing to do with dog whistles for his more inflamed supporters, oh no... of course not.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream
“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
That kind of language is the death of democracy. It's appalling.
We're used to it from the cesspool of the internet, but this is coming from the campaign itself. There's something very wrong with Trump and his followers, and I don't know how the country gets away from it.
Enough wrote:
Pardon the weak vocab, but this is incredibly fucking sick. How can he not immediately disavow any connection to them? I am sure it has nothing to do with dog whistles for his more inflamed supporters, oh no... of course not.
You expected something stronger from the guy who admires Putin, Saddam Hussain, and Kim Jong-un?
I spent 90% of the money I made on women, booze, and drugs. The other 10% I just pissed away.
He even called into question whether, as president, he would automatically extend the security guarantees that give the 28 members of NATO the assurance that the full force of the United States military has their back.
For example, asked about Russia’s threatening activities that have unnerved the small Baltic States that are the most recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing whether those nations “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”
Xmann wrote:Wouldn't me or you be potentially arrested for making such public statements?
How is that not against the law? Am I missing something?
No, it's not against the law to say someone should be shot for treason. It's not even against the law to say someone should be shot, although that's getting closer.
The secret service is investigating because it's their job to see if anything real is going on behind the scenes that might actually be a crime or conspiracy to commit a crime.
Xmann wrote:Wouldn't me or you be potentially arrested for making such public statements?
How is that not against the law? Am I missing something?
No, it's not against the law to say someone should be shot for treason. It's not even against the law to say someone should be shot, although that's getting closer.
The secret service is investigating because it's their job to see if anything real is going on behind the scenes that might actually be a crime or conspiracy to commit a crime.
I assumed it was illegal to say such a thing against someone of her stature
He even called into question whether, as president, he would automatically extend the security guarantees that give the 28 members of NATO the assurance that the full force of the United States military has their back.
For example, asked about Russia’s threatening activities that have unnerved the small Baltic States that are the most recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing whether those nations “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”
This is unbelievable. I have no words.
If the Mexico wall is too hard to pull off, maybe Trump could offer to rebuild Russia's?
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. What would happen if the Democratic candidate basically made a campaign promise to let Putin have Ukraine and whichever Baltic states he wanted, then threatened NATO with withdrawal of support, forcing the NATO Secretary General to issue a public reassurance to our most important allies?
WTF Jezebel? I've enjoyed a number of stories on the site and occasionally have really been impressed with their writing. Not this. Ugh, so ugly, petty and stupid to poke fun at a woman for trying to start a business. I'm not the target audience, but I love me some wine charms and can see how if you frequently swim, go to the beach, a place that hands out towels that all look the same, this could be a nifty doodad.
Karen Pence, Your Future Second Lady, Sells the Least Useful Item In Existence
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream
“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
Yeah that's a pretty bad misfire. I'm glad Mrs. Pence has a business she presumably enjoys, and that's FAR from the most useless product I've seen for sale.
/. "She climbed backwards out her
\/ window into Outside Over There."
The huge railroad ties will help you be less weighted down your materialistic urges...
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream
“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
Yeah that's a pretty bad misfire. I'm glad Mrs. Pence has a business she presumably enjoys, and that's FAR from the most useless product I've seen for sale.
I don't know...I'm hard pressed to think of more useless shit at the moment. The baffling part is someone actually thinks this is a problem crying for a solution. Yeah, I want to spend $6 on a bauble so my $5 beach towel doesn't get picked up by someone else? And if I'm at a pool or resort that is providing towels, what difference does it make? Go to the towel rack and grab another one.
He even called into question whether, as president, he would automatically extend the security guarantees that give the 28 members of NATO the assurance that the full force of the United States military has their back.
For example, asked about Russia’s threatening activities that have unnerved the small Baltic States that are the most recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing whether those nations “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”
In other words, if you're too poor to be of immediate use to use, Fuck off.
Sounds like something the GOP folks who voted for Trump would eat up.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Yeah that's a pretty bad misfire. I'm glad Mrs. Pence has a business she presumably enjoys, and that's FAR from the most useless product I've seen for sale.
I don't know...I'm hard pressed to think of more useless shit at the moment. The baffling part is someone actually thinks this is a problem crying for a solution. Yeah, I want to spend $6 on a bauble so my $5 beach towel doesn't get picked up by someone else? And if I'm at a pool or resort that is providing towels, what difference does it make? Go to the towel rack and grab another one.
Any media source going after the wives of candidates for something this trivial makes them sound petty and ridiculous...and further reinforces the Trump supporter belief that the media is out to get them.
Yeah that's a pretty bad misfire. I'm glad Mrs. Pence has a business she presumably enjoys, and that's FAR from the most useless product I've seen for sale.
I don't know...I'm hard pressed to think of more useless shit at the moment. The baffling part is someone actually thinks this is a problem crying for a solution. Yeah, I want to spend $6 on a bauble so my $5 beach towel doesn't get picked up by someone else? And if I'm at a pool or resort that is providing towels, what difference does it make? Go to the towel rack and grab another one.
Any media source going after the wives of candidates for something this trivial makes them sound petty and ridiculous...and further reinforces the Trump supporter belief that the media is out to get them.
Exactly. That and it's just a mean-spirited article that frankly makes me less likely to return to the site in the future.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream
“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
Trumps NATO stance really could hurt him with more mainline conservatives, perhaps in ways that the social conservative/wall/immigration stuff hasn't yet done so. Strong defense and distrust of Russia are two of the primary calling cards of the neocon wing on the Republican party. Here's an interesting read in the Atlantic on how big a deal this is.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream
“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
In the photos, they actually have those towel charms hanging off the towels in a bathroom. I don't know, I'd never have a metal thing hanging off of my towel, I'd probably smack myself in the face with it. Imagine when someone asks, "toss me that towel" and you toss it to them...sharp metal first
That's what capitalism is all about.
