NM11046 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 This made me guffaw: "Spicer was asked about lack of Latino in cabinet by cites Elaine Chao and literally points to Ben Carson in the room." Link to comment
zoogs Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 I didn't understand what the Department of Energy was, either. Although I did after I Googled it. I didn't even need to Google it to get the gist, because the first article I read described it to me. Rick Perry also did not understand what the Department of Energy was until after he agreed to take the job. Four YEARS after running for President of these United States and incorporating its elimination as part of policy platform. How do you come back from that? 4 Link to comment
Fru Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 I didn't understand what the Department of Energy was, either. Although I did after I Googled it. I didn't even need to Google it to get the gist, because the first article I read described it to me. Rick Perry also did not understand what the Department of Energy was until after he agreed to take the job. Four YEARS after running for President of these United States and incorporating its elimination as part of policy platform. How do you come back from that? Where you at Trumpeters and GOPers? Come defend this buffoonery. Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 A little bit of levity in this process. I don't have confirmation that this is real. I just hope it is. 3 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 This is going to get really really interesting. Link to comment
Fru Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Not sure if this is gross incompetence, or strategic. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Not sure if this is gross incompetence, or strategic. I'd be interested in knowing how this is different from other Presidents. I have a hard time believing all other Presidents hire 690 people in two months. 2 Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 That was my thought when I read that as well, BRB. Without context that 28/690 number doesn't mean much. I want to know how that compares to past presidents before I make a judgment. And I don't think "As of 12:15 Fri. there won't be an Executive branch" is true. Government will still function. 2 Link to comment
AR Husker Fan Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 A nice, brief read concerning transitions and jobs is HERE. To summarize, no, all of those 690 positions are not normally filled by the inauguration of the incoming President - the goal is August for most of them.An exception would be if the incoming administration called for each presidential-appointed position to submit a letter of resignation effective on the date of the inauguration. So far as I know, that's never happened. But if Trump's team did that, then the onus is on the incoming administration to have replacements in place - an impossibility due to the need for Senate approval. But the incoming team hasn't exactly shown itself to be the best and brightest... 2 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share Posted January 19, 2017 Trump has asked 50 senior admin leaders to stay on during transition. http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/United-States-Transition/2017/01/19/id/769387/ while some are deciding not to stay on http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/senior-us-diplomats-not/2017/01/19/id/769469/ Link to comment
zoogs Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 A nice, brief read concerning transitions and jobs is HERE. To summarize, no, all of those 690 positions are not normally filled by the inauguration of the incoming President - the goal is August for most of them. An exception would be if the incoming administration called for each presidential-appointed position to submit a letter of resignation effective on the date of the inauguration. So far as I know, that's never happened. But if Trump's team did that, then the onus is on the incoming administration to have replacements in place - an impossibility due to the need for Senate approval. But the incoming team hasn't exactly shown itself to be the best and brightest... Who would do such a thing? Link to comment
Fru Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Not sure if this is gross incompetence, or strategic. I'd be interested in knowing how this is different from other Presidents. I have a hard time believing all other Presidents hire 690 people in two months. Not necessarily hire, but nominate. Granted it is a process. But I would imagine that it would typically be more than 28 with less than 24 hours till inauguration. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 A nice, brief read concerning transitions and jobs is HERE. To summarize, no, all of those 690 positions are not normally filled by the inauguration of the incoming President - the goal is August for most of them. An exception would be if the incoming administration called for each presidential-appointed position to submit a letter of resignation effective on the date of the inauguration. So far as I know, that's never happened. But if Trump's team did that, then the onus is on the incoming administration to have replacements in place - an impossibility due to the need for Senate approval. But the incoming team hasn't exactly shown itself to be the best and brightest... Who would do such a thing? I actually thought they did do something like this at one of the departments. I could be wrong. Link to comment
Recommended Posts