Did Trump's picks prostrate themselves at Trump's Altar?
Trump didn’t recruit his nominees They recruited him.
Every one of his nominees campaigned for these jobs by engaging in conspicuous displays of submission and flattery directed toward Trump.
Elise Stefanik, whom Trump has nominated to be US ambassador to the United Nations, repeatedly boasted that she was the first lawmaker to endorse Trump’s re-election bid.
Before Trump tapped Kristi Noem to head the Department of Homeland Security, she sent him a 4ft replica of Mount Rushmore with Trump’s face next to those of Washington, Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Lincoln.
Mike Waltz, whom Trump has picked for national security adviser, supported a move in Congress to rename Washington Dulles international airport the “Donald J Trump international airport”.
Lee Zeldin, whom Trump has picked for EPA administrator, said publicly that the criminal prosecutions of Trump were akin to Putin’s persecution of the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.
Stephen Miller, who will be a Trump White House adviser, said during a Fox News interview that Trump is the “most stylish president” in our lifetimes. “Donald Trump is a style icon!”
Ten of Trump’s picks so far were Fox News hosts or contributors who repeatedly mouthed Trump’s lies about the 2020 election being stolen, about January 6 being a “peaceful protest” and about Biden being the force behind Trump’s prosecutions.
Some of Trump’s picks showed up at his criminal trial in Manhattan, where they verbally attacked members of the presiding judge’s family on behalf of Trump, who was under a rule of silence.
Some picks appeared at his campaign rallies, expanding on Trump’s lies and lavishing him with praise.
Many made large donations to Trump’s campaign. Five of his picks so far are billionaires.
All knew that Trump wanted people who would do whatever he asked of them. So they prostrated themselves to show their deference to him.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … bert-reichI don't see any use of all these arguments and discussions. Now, he is the President already. It is the Reality.
He was just reminding us of the low character Trump, the criminal and sexual predator, want's to help him run America into the ground.
I think the idea that Trump’s nominees were just sucking up to him misses a bigger point. After his first term, it’s clear Trump learned that a president needs a team who shares their vision and is loyal enough to see it through. In his first go-around, he had a lot of people in his administration who either didn’t align with his goals or outright pushed back, which slowed things down and caused unnecessary drama. By picking people now who are clearly on the same page as him, he’s setting himself up for a smoother path to deliver on his promises.
Sure, some of these folks made flashy gestures to get noticed, but that’s politics—everyone trying to show they’re ready to go to bat for the leader. This isn’t unique to Trump. Every president wants people in their corner who will help push their agenda forward. And let’s not forget, a lot of the people he’s chosen, like Elise Stefanik or Kristi Noem, are seasoned and influential figures who already align with his platform. It’s not just about flattery—it’s about making sure the team is on the same wavelength.
Trump’s focus on loyalty isn’t about surrounding himself with “yes men” but about avoiding the gridlock and infighting he dealt with before. At the end of the day, it makes sense for him to prioritize people who will help him follow through on what he’s promised voters, not hold him back. Critics can spin it how they want, but to me, it seems like a smart move to learn from past mistakes and set himself up for success.
As a MAGA supporter, I’d actually think it was pretty smart of Trump to prioritize listening to the people who voted for him and support the MAGA agenda. I’d be disappointed if he didn’t choose like-minded people for his team—people I can relate to and who genuinely align with the values and goals that matter to us.So as long as they are aligned with Trump's vision, it doesn't matter whether they are qualified to do the job or not?
If you were starting a company, would you hire people who were not qualified to do the job, just because they agreed with your vision of earning a million dollars in the first year?
Politics is a strange animal, because there are no interviews to determine if one can do the job that they are being hired for. It just takes a lot of money and making pledges that have no accountability. This holds true for all positions up to and including the President of The United States. In Trump's case all they need is fealty to him.
Having the same vision as your boss can lead to group think and yes men because people are threatened by the boss. There is no room for novel thought. Without novel thought there is no room for innovation because their is no diversity of ideas. It's all Trump's vision and you better stick to it or else. I don't think Trump has the character to take kindly with those who do not agree with his vision.I guess the first question I should ask is: which candidates do you believe are not qualified for the positions they are seeking?
If I were starting a company, I wouldn't hire people solely based on their agreement with my vision of earning a million dollars in the first year, unless they were also qualified to do the job. While it's definitely a positive to have a strong determination to reach that goal, qualifications and skills are necessary to ensure the success of the company. Having the drive to work toward a goal is important, but without the right expertise or experience, there's a risk that those efforts could be misdirected or ineffective. In my view, it's about balancing passion and vision with the competence needed to execute it successfully. You need both to build a sustainable and effective team.
Some business owners may feel it's up to them to decide how much input they want from employees. Some bosses prefer a "my way or no way" approach, and that’s their prerogative. When I worked as a nurse, I experienced this firsthand. I had no voice in decision-making, and I knew that when I took the job. It was clear that my role was to follow the rules and policies set for me, and we were rarely asked for input.
That said, I feel the presidency is different. A president needs people with experience who can offer advice when asked and have the space to do the jobs they are appointed to. Many of these individuals will head up critical agencies, and their expertise can make or break the success of a policy or initiative. While the president sets the overall vision, the execution often requires input from those who are specialists in their fields. It’s about striking a balance—having a team that aligns with the president’s goals but is also empowered to act effectively and bring their expertise to the table while working toward those goals.Shar,
Depending on the place where you had your company the government would require you to hire based on ethnic diversity. Liberals think the color of your skin, your gender or who you have sex with are major considerations during the hiring process.
I would hire based on merit and that would horrify those on the left who believe so strongly in identity politics.
Don't you think it makes sense you would hire based on a shared vision? The last thing President Donald Trump should do is hire people who will go against him and his policies. It's something done by every administration. The problem is that now the democrats have clearly lost this last presidential election big time. The entire party is in disbelief and are acting like they're "Shell-Shocked."
Their power is going to be greatly diminished after January 20th. Rather than working on fixing the vast number of problems with their party, they go back to the old play book of attacking President Donald Trump. I don't care because the more they go down this worn-out old path, the more likely Republicans will be in charge of things for a long time.It's nearly impossible to believe that there aren't more qualified people to fill posts than Kennedy, Hegseth, Gabbard, McMahon, Oz. These people are woefully inexperienced, yet they all possess one very important quality: They are sycophants who put Trump above America....D-list folks from central casting.
"Don't you think it makes sense you would hire based on a shared vision? "
For example, hiring a plumber for heart surgery is obviously a mismatch. But a plumber could get on-the-job training for many other careers.
In Trump's case, his focus has been on improving America, which means it's crucial to hire individuals who share his vision. This should be the top priority when selecting people for positions within his administration. He needs individuals who are committed to addressing the country's challenges and have the passion to work toward these goals. Drive is essential when building his team. From his first term, Trump learned that relying too much on traditional experts and "talking heads" often led to people who were more bound by their credentials than willing to think creatively. This time, his hiring choices should prioritize those with the motivation and flexibility to innovate.
Trump has taken on the monumental task of fixing America’s pressing issues, and he needs people who are just as dedicated to working alongside him—people who won’t hinder progress with outdated approaches. I support his picks entirely. They are all aligned with the MAGA mindset. I am thrilled to witness this form of leadership and am excited for Trump’s swearing-in. Over the past week, I've been pleased to see many world leaders meet with him, and many Democrats seem now willing to collaborate. I truly believe we are on the brink of something great, and many from the other side will want to be a part of it.
PS. I'm also thrilled to see Trump out and about, making the rounds. I was so disappointed with the last president, who always seemed to be hiding. It felt like he rarely engaged in the duties expected of him. I’ve always admired presidents who make me feel like I’m getting to know them a bit better. At times, the Democrats have compared their candidates to being "Kennedy-esque," but Kennedy was much like Trump—always out in public, always around, and I felt like I knew him and his family. Trump is the first president in years who has that same ability to connect with the public in such a visible way. I guess you have guessed--- I am stoked!There is no such thing as Identity Politics, just like there is no such thing as The Deep State or Trump Derangement Syndrome. Those are all figments of the right's imaginations to accuse the left of something derogatory.
How is Trump and company wanting to defund Ukraine sit with you?"There is no such thing as Identity Politics, just like there is no such thing as The Deep State or Trump Derangement Syndrome."
Oh, yes there is. Have you not heard of DEI or Woke? Denial is not a good way to deal with reality.
For the record, President Donald Trump isn't proposing to defund Ukraine but for Europe to pay for more of the costs of the war. That only makes sense. Russia gets past Ukraine, Europe is next.DEI and Woke are also made up by the radical right. Can you define Woke?
It's not Trump, I said Trump and Company. His company includes people like MTG who is constantly harping about defunding Ukraine and now she is appointed as a Watch Dog on DOGE, which doesn't even exist as a an official government department. Here is what she said about her appointment.
“I’m excited to chair this new subcommittee designed to work hand in hand with President Trump, Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, and the entire DOGE team,” Greene said in a statement. Her subcommittee, she added, would lead to the dismissal of government “bureaucrats,” and “provide transparency and truth to the American people through hearings.”
After Greene announced the “BIG NEWS”—surrounded by six red sirens—on X, Ramaswamy retweeted it, saying he’s looking forward to working with the firebrand from Georgia.
"For the record, President Donald Trump isn't proposing to defund Ukraine but for Europe to pay for more of the costs of the war."
I thought Trump said he would end the war in 24 hours after becoming president.!!!He actually said he would end the war BEFORE he takes office
Oh!!!, even better.
Trump's is now reneging on bringing down grocery prices. I'm sure he has never shopped in a grocery store.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … ocialshare
As far as woke goes, there are so many definitions of in on the web...pick one...especially from a representative from the democrat party.
I won't get into details...but President Donald Trump is making a difference in the Ukraine war before he's even taken office.
He has done more for the end of the war than biden has done during his entire administration.That's what I thought about woke, it's in the eye of the beholder.
As far as Trump and Ukraine goes, please give me some examples of what Trump has done as a civilian in the Ukraine that is making a difference compared to Biden during his entire administration.Putin will do exactly what he wants to do. Always has and always will. This is not a man whose ego will allow concessions and to appear to be a loser in any manner. The idea that he will acquiesce to Trump is far fetched. That is unless Trump agrees to give Putin absolutely everything he demands... Trump may very well reward Russian aggression. He admires dictators
Just like it is a very bad idea for the success of a company to surround yourself with like-minded supplicants, the main reason companies have turned to DEI is it increases their bottom line.
To answer your question, here are four of Trump's picks who are the most egregious about spreading lies and misinformation about the positions they are selected for.
As President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to return to Washington, his picks for high-ranking cabinet positions have put into sharp relief his vow to shake up the establishment: Many of his would-be nominees have fiercely criticized the very agencies they are seeking to helm.
But some of the claims they have leveled are faulty to start.
Among the more radical candidates are Pete Hegseth as defense secretary, Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence, Kash Patel as F.B.I. director and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary for health and human services.
Pete Hegseth
Defense secretary
Mr. Hegseth, a former Fox News host and veteran, wrote a book decrying the “cultural chaos and weakness” inflicted by top military brass obsessed with “woke” ideologies.
He has said that women should not serve in combat and suggested that top officials involved in the withdrawal of Afghanistan should be removed.
And he has accused the Biden administration and the news media of inflating extremism in the military.
Fox News, Jan. 5, 2024
“So then they do this study, which confirms what we all know, that they’re actually less racist in the military because you’re taught to focus on merit and your responsibility, and then they bury it and don’t want to talk about it.” “Yeah.”
"Gutfeld!" via Fox News
He was referring to, and imprecisely describing, the findings of a study commissioned by the Pentagon and released in December 2023. The study found “no evidence that the number of violent extremists in the military is disproportionate to the number of violent extremists in the United States as a whole.” But it did find that among veterans, the rate of participation in “extremist ideologies and behaviors” was “slightly higher and may be growing.” It also noted that “racism and sexism continue to be problems in the military.”
In other instances, Mr. Hegseth has singled out what he calls “poisonous ideologies” of climate change and gender parity.
Fox News, June 2, 2024
“Our military is pumping out electric tanks. China is building a military specifically designed to defeat us and our defense industry, because of our generals who've given into ideologues, is focused on climate change.”
The Army does have a goal to incorporate hybrid tactical vehicles by 2035, and fully electric ones by 2050. But those are not tanks. Moreover, the impetus has more to do with concerns about fuel supplies in combat and the tactical advantage of silence that an electric vehicle confers.
Tulsi Gabbard
Director of national intelligence
Ms. Gabbard is known for her outlier positions, especially on foreign policy. Once aligned with the Democratic Party as a congresswoman from Hawaii, she is now a Trump loyalist who has drawn particular scrutiny for embracing talking points that echo disinformation from Russian state media.
If confirmed, Ms. Gabbard would oversee more than a dozen spy agencies and have access to highly sensitive intelligence.
Ms. Gabbard has been critical of the Biden administration’s support for Ukraine in its war against Russia.
Fox News, March 14, 2022
“The danger in the media, lying so blatantly to the American people, these so-called journalists who have a responsibility to the public, is it poses a very direct threat to our democratic republic because they continue to get away with it. They continue to parrot and propagate these lies, and they need to be held accountable. They need to be exposed.”“ And by the way, the U.S. government has said that there are bioweapons in Ukraine. There are Soviet -era bioweapons —”“Over and over.”“ That we’re going to destroy that we haven’t. So they’ve said that.”
Fox News via YouTube
Ms. Gabbard appeared on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” to rebut criticisms that she had repeated an unfounded claim, promoted by Russian state media, that the United States was funding bioweapons laboratories in Ukraine. She argued that she had said “no such thing” but rather that she had merely warned that laboratories conducting biological research could be compromised in a warzone.
Officials had said that the labs in Ukraine may contain pathogens once used for Soviet-era weapons programs, but that the labs did not have the ability to manufacture bioweapons. A United Nations official said the organization was also not aware of any biological weapons program in Ukraine.
A spokeswoman for the Trump transition cited comments that Victoria Nuland, then the under secretary for political affairs at the State Department, had made in congressional testimony in 2022. Ms. Nuland said that Ukraine had biological research facilities and that the government was working with Ukraine on how to prevent materials from falling into Russian hands.
But Mr. Carlson mischaracterized Ms. Nuland’s remarks as an admission of the existence of bioweapons labs — and Ms. Gabbard concurred, despite her earlier precision.
Ms. Gabbard has also accused the “security state” of targeting perceived political enemies.
Fox News, Aug. 11, 2022
“You are not allowed to disagree with the F.B.I. That is the new message. The security state will label you an extremist for daring to challenge or disagree with the regime’s weaponization of law enforcement.”
Ms. Gabbard was referring to and mischaracterizing remarks made by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland about the F.B.I.’s court-approved search of Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s Florida estate, earlier that month. She played a clip of Mr. Garland saying: “Let me address recent unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the F.B.I. and Justice Department agents and prosecutors. I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked.”
Ms. Gabbard portrayed the remarks as a “stark warning to anyone who dares to disagree” with the Biden administration and the Washington establishment.
But Mr. Garland was speaking specifically about the search, which occurred in early August 2022 as part of an investigation into whether Mr. Trump had improperly retained classified documents after he left office.
For days, Mr. Garland stayed silent about the search as Mr. Trump advanced numerous false and unsupported claims. Three days later, Mr. Garland announced that the Justice Department would seek to unseal the warrant.
Kash Patel
F.B.I. director
Mr. Patel, a right-wing pugilist, has promised to reshape the F.B.I. by firing its top officials, closing its headquarters in Washington and going after Mr. Trump’s rivals.
His statements reflect a suspicion of the institution he would be in line to run, undermining its work as biased and marginalizing the F.B.I.’s efforts to hold to account members of the pro-Trump mob who threatened the transfer of power.
He has cast the agency as corrupt and its inquiries as politically motivated by mischaracterizing agency procedures and laws.
Shawn Ryan’s podcast, Sept. 2, 2024
President Trump gets his home raided on a bogus WhatsApp warrant, which the F.B.I. leaks to the media. Then they go in there and they stage that photo display and everybody’s like, “Oh my God, look at all this classified materials. ”What they don’t explain to the American public is he’s a president, former president, Presidential Records Act — Bill Clinton did the same thing. Every president before him has done the same thing. They can take what they want. That’s the law. So you can’t be prosecuted for possessing classified documents.
“The Shawn Ryan Show” via YouTube
Mr. Patel was referring to, and mischaracterizing, several elements of the F.B.I.’s search of Mar-a-Lago and the federal case against Mr. Trump for mishandling classified documents.
By “bogus WhatsApp warrant,” Mr. Patel appeared to be referring to the disclosure that an F.B.I. agent had procured the warrant by making a sworn statement before a judge using WhatsApp. The F.B.I. did not “leak” the warrant, as Mr. Patel said; rather, the Justice Department sought to unseal it and a judge approved the request — after Mr. Trump encouraged its release. And it is standard practice for the F.B.I. to take photos of evidence obtained in searches.
The Presidential Records Act of 1978 does not allow departing presidents to “take what they want,” and it is not true that other presidents have done the same thing as Mr. Trump. The law gives the National Archives and Records Administration ownership and control of presidential records. The agency has said that it “assumed physical and legal custody of the presidential records” from every one of Mr. Trump’s predecessors dating to Ronald Reagan.
A spokesman for the Trump transition cited a case in which a conservative legal group sued former President Bill Clinton for access to audiotapes of interviews between Mr. Clinton and a historian. But that case is not particularly relevant to Mr. Trump’s, as a federal judge ruled that the audiotapes were personal records. Mr. Trump was accused of taking classified documents and presidential records.
He has sought to rewrite the history of the Capitol attack, falsely pinning blame on Speaker Nancy Pelosi for the violence.
“War Room,” Oct. 7, 2024
There was no insurrection. They ginned it up. Pelosi was too busy filming her movie on Jan. 6in the halls of the Capitol. That’s how scared she was of everyone outside .And this is what the deep state does: They buried it. Nancy Pelosi on Jan. 6 was recording a movie she as a speaker was making, and in it she said on video, I’m responsible for the security failures of Jan. 6.And the Jan. 6 committee withheld that information for three years, as did she and she lied about it. We’ve got the receipts from Bowser in the book, her own letter, where Mayor Bowser rejects Donald Trump’s authorization of additional National Guard.
Steve Bannon’s “War Room”
This exchange on a podcast by the right-wing strategist Stephen Bannon referred to footage captured for a documentary about Nancy Pelosi, the former House speaker. In multiple clips, released by House Republicans this summer, Ms. Pelosi is seen on the day of the riot huddled with other lawmakers in a secure room, walking briskly down a hallway surrounded by security guards, and sitting in a moving car, all the while expressing frustration about security lapses. She was not actively filming a movie, unbothered by the riot unfolding, as Mr. Patel suggested.
The clips do include Ms. Pelosi saying, in an apparent reference to the Capitol Police’s lack of preparation: “They clearly didn’t know and I take responsibility for not having them just prepare for more because it’s stupid that we should be in a situation like this” and “Oh my god, I can’t believe the stupidity of this. And I take full responsibility.”
But securing the Capitol is the job of the Capitol Police and a three-member governing board that includes the architect of the Capitol, one official appointed by the speaker and one appointed by the Senate leader. Moreover, it is the president who is authorized to deploy the D.C. National Guard, not Ms. Pelosi.
The Trump transition spokesman also cited a letter Mayor Muriel Bowser wrote to Trump administration officials. But that letter was dated and posted on Jan. 5, 2021, a day before the riot, stating that the city had not asked for additional law enforcement for planned protests and requesting that federal agencies coordinate with the city police for further deployments. The letter does not contain evidence that Ms. Bowser turned down Mr. Trump’s authorization of additional National Guard troops.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Health and human services secretary
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination before endorsing Mr. Trump and joining his transition team, is a leading vaccine skeptic whose views on medicine and health swerve far outside the mainstream.
Like the president-elect, Mr. Kennedy is prone to sharing baseless theories based on little evidence.
In voicing skepticism of vaccines, he has promoted misinformation.
Testimony to Louisiana House, Dec. 6, 2021
“It confirms that this is the deadliest vaccine ever made.”
Mr. Kennedy, in testifying before state lawmakers during the coronavirus pandemic, pointed to a chart that purported to show “19,000 deaths reported from Covid vaccines, more than from all other vaccines combined in 30 years,” citing data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
But the database allows anyone to post a report, and is not verified. A disclaimer on the vaccine reporting website cautions that “no proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report.”
At the time of Mr. Kennedy’s comments, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had confirmed that six deaths had been caused by the vaccine, out of more than 450 million doses and a far cry from the 19,000 figure, PolitiFact reported.
Mr. Kennedy has advanced a groundless theory that elicited accusations of antisemitism and racism.
Video published by The New York Post, June 15, 2023
Covid-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.
New York Post via YouTube
On social media, Mr. Kennedy defended his remarks by citing a 2020 study that he said showed the structure of the virus was “most compatible with Blacks and Caucasians and least compatible with ethnic Chinese, Finns and Ashkenazi Jews.”
But scientists dismissed his claims about the study, which did not say that Chinese people were less susceptible to the virus. The study did say that one receptor for the virus did not appear to be present in Amish or Ashkenazi Jewish populations.As of now, there are no reports or credible sources indicating that Donald Trump has specifically asked for any of his nominees to have recess. I find this a good thing, he is letting Congress do their job. However, most presidents use the privilege of using recess for a few candidates. President Barack Obama made 32 recess appointments during his two terms in office.
I’ve looked into the concerns you raised about the candidates and, after doing my own research, I haven’t found anything to support the negative claims being made by the media. I trust Congress to do their due diligence, conduct their own research, and either confirm or provide solid reasons for not confirming any given nominee. Doesn’t that seem fair? Given that Congress may have information I don’t, I feel it’s not my place to pass judgment on these candidates without all the facts.I don't know about your research, but I didn't have to look very far to find out about Trump asking the senate for recess to push through his nominees.
https://www.axios.com/2024/11/14/trump- … et-senate.
The media you are talking about in my post is mainly Fox News.
Here is the list of nominees that require senate confirmation and those that have just been announced. How long do you think it will take the senate to confirm all these people using normal vetting procedures?.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 … ntees.htmlPlease consider the context of my statement. As of now, there are no credible reports or sources suggesting that Donald Trump has specifically asked for any of his nominees to have recess. I have not come across any information supporting this claim. He has mentioned using recess if necessary to secure key figures he believes are important and to prevent Congress from delaying the process.
I’d like to ask—why do you feel he should not have the same privilege as previous presidents when it comes to using recess? As I mentioned, this is a common practice, and Obama used it 32 times during his two terms.
I believe your perspective might be leaning toward bias. I think it would be more prudent to adopt a wait-and-see approach regarding whether Trump will request certain candidates to benefit from the recess privilege.
If I were to guess, I feel he might if he sees Congress-bucking candidates he strongly wants on his team. It's a gimmie that Trump will fight to bring his choices with him to Washington.
I believe there will be plenty of time to critique Trump once he's sworn in. I’m confident he will do a good job, just like he did during his first term. I know you don’t share my view of his first term, and I’m not looking to argue about our differing opinions on that.All you have to do is put yourself in the place of the Senate and think about how controversial these picks are. Look at RFK Jr., he wants to ban polio vaccines. McConnel had polio and was vaccinated and cured. How do you think that is going to go down?
It will take a long time to get them confirmed, if at all. I don't think other presidents who used recess had nominees that were as controversial as Trump's picks. I don't think P-2025 was thought through. I think their game plan was to have everybody in place on day one of Trump taking office.
As far as context goes, in this country, we have one president at a time. Trumps is still a civilian and he is already acting as if he has been elected and so do his picks. There is no such office as DOGE and Border Czar and yet they are talking about what they are going to do to "eliminate bureaucracy and implement mass deportation.
I suspect when other presidents used the recess gambit, they were already in office. They had picks that were suited for the positions they were going to hold, not just fealty to the elected president."All you have to do is put yourself in the place of the Senate and think about how controversial these picks are. Look at RFK Jr., he wants to ban polio vaccines. McConnel had polio and was vaccinated and cured. How do you think that is going to go down?" People Power
Just this morning Trump had a press conference, and he was asked tons of questions for over an hour. He was asked about banning polio vaccines and said he would not consider it. This is a rumor media is promoting as a possibility due to RFKs thoughts on vaccines.
Why should it take any longer to confirm Trump's candidates? They should either be confirmed or not. I believe Trump made strong choices that align with his agenda. It seems illogical to think he would select anyone not on board with the vision he ran on. I agree, Trump wants everyone in place and ready to work from day one, and I believe most appointments will go smoothly.
Yes, he acts as though he's already in office, engaging with world leaders and working on business deals. Just today, at Mar-a-Lago, he spoke after meeting with Masa and announced a $100 billion Softbank investment to create 100,000 American jobs, calling it a monumental show of confidence in the country’s future.
Meanwhile, DOGE continues its daily projects, and Tom Homen, the Border Czar, is speaking with mayors and governors about Trump's immigration plans. I don't understand why this would disturb anyone—Trump has always been clear about his stance on deporting migrants and saving taxpayer money.
The country remains divided, and not everyone is on board with Trump's agenda, but I personally think it's a good one that could help move the country forward.
I agree that Trump is currently a civilian. However, he is not a typical politician or an ordinary individual, as his actions have consistently demonstrated. Personally, I don't believe he has overstepped any boundaries thus far. His approach remains distinct from traditional political figures, and while he's not in office, his influence and actions continue to shape discussions.
I appreciate seeing Trump actively addressing problems, and I value that he shares his progress during press conferences. Over the past four years, I’ve felt somewhat in the dark, just experiencing the consequences of what I view as repeated mistakes, all while being told everything is going well. I think it's hard for many Americans not to have some similar sentiments.Shar,
"McConnel had polio and was vaccinated and cured."
You're a nurse. Isn't the purpose of the polio vaccine to prevent a person from getting polio? I believe once you have polio, it is too late for the vaccine to do anything.
Am I right?You are correct—the main goal of the polio vaccine is to build immunity before exposure to the virus, preventing the person from contracting polio. If someone does get infected after vaccination, the vaccine can reduce the severity of the symptoms or potentially prevent the disease altogether. It appears that this was the case with Mitch McConnell. While vaccination doesn't guarantee that someone won't contract polio, it significantly improves their chances of recovery, making the symptoms less severe.
People Power seems fearful that RFK will work to ban the polio vaccine.Here is the whole story:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s personal attorney previously lobbied the Food and Drug Administration to revoke its approval of the polio vaccine, highlighting an influential Kennedy ally who, sources tell ABC News, has been helping interview candidates for top health jobs in the incoming Trump administration.
The matter could be something RFK Jr. gets questioned about when he goes to Capitol Hill next week to meet with senators considering whether to confirm him as health and human services secretary..
Aaron Siri, a partner at the law firm Siri & Glimstad, has long fought against the prevalence of vaccines. He has also filed petitions seeking to pause the distribution of other vaccines, including Hepatitis B, and to revoke the emergency-use authorization of COVID-19 vaccines.
The 2022 polio petition was made on behalf of one of Siri's clients, the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), a group founded by Del Bigtree, another close Kennedy ally also involved in health-related transition matters, according to sources.
"Petitioner requests that the FDA withdraw or suspend the approval for [the polio vaccine] for infants, toddlers, and children until a properly controlled and properly powered double-blind trial of sufficient duration is conducted to assess the safety of this product," Siri wrote.
When asked for comment, Siri referenced posts he made on the social site X, where he reiterated his belief that the FDA ignored safety concerns with the vaccine. It’s an allegation strongly refuted by medical experts who say the benefits far outweigh the risk of contracting a disease that can cause paralysis.
Kennedy, meanwhile, did not respond to written questions about whether he agrees with revoking approval of the polio vaccine, or if, as health and human services secretary, he would intervene in an FDA review of Siri's petitions.
The polio vaccine available in the United States is recommended for children and three doses offer at least 99% protection against severe disease, including paralysis, according to the CDC. Side effects are usually mild and go away on their own, the agency notes, and the vaccine has not been known to cause serious problems.
Since the late 1980s, global polio cases have decreased by more than 99% alongside increased vaccination efforts to eradicate the disease, from an estimated 350,000 cases to just six reported in 2021, according to the World Health Organization. The efforts have allowed an estimated 20 million people to walk today who would have otherwise been paralyzed and saved more than 1.5 million lives, according to the CDC.Mike is just listening to what RFK says he will do.
Good to read your posts Scott. Welcome aboard.
Thanks, Mike.
It is going to be interesting to watch the grilling these, by and large, sycophants and supplicants will receive at the hands of the Democrats. I say "by and large" because he does have a couple or three qualified picks in the bunch. But mostly they are the same kind of lackies that Putin surrounds himself with.
Musk will be most interesting to watch. I didn't realize how far right his politics were until I read Musk supports the German AfD Party. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't count David Dukes as a supporter like Trump does.I think Musk is like a loose cannon and a high spirted race horse at the gate. He keeps jumping the gate before the start signal has been given. It appears he is so hopped up, he even acts as if he is president elect right before Trump's eyes. I don't know if it is a symptom of his Asperger Syndrome or he is just super energized.
What a crew, Musk with Asperger syndrome and RFK Jr. with a brain worm and a neurological speech impediment called spasmodic dysphonia.
Here is what Pew Research says about the ADF. It supporters are much like Trump's MAGA supporters. It looks like they want to tear the existing government down, just like Trump and his supporters want to do.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … afd-party/That is probably a good comparison. I was going to refer to them as neo-Nazis but in doing a little research they aren't that - yet. Clearly, like MAGA, they are sympathetic to organizations like the White Supremacists or the NDF neo-Nazi party of Germany.
MizBejjabers suggested I start a forum on Musk, so I did - :"Will Elon Musk Survive Donald Trump?"
And he rests his very well put together case.
Ask yourself, why did they push back. Was it for their own personal gratification or to save America from Trump's self-centered stupidity?
Elon Musk, who some say will be the real president, is at WAR with MAGA. He is now calling them "contemptable fools" (basket of deplorables sound nicer) and has "debadged" them from X, lol.
I wonder if Musk will "debadge" Trump when Trump fires him?
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/27/tech/mag … index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/27/politics … digvid-srcI knew it was just a matter of time before Trump and company and Musk clashed horns, but I didn't think it would be this soon. Their values and belief systems are at cross purposes. You don't take a genius scientist with Asperger's syndrome and put him behind a desk to work with a narcissistic master con-artist like Trump and all the MAGA's.
What a soup sandwich this is going to be. Stephen Miller says America is for Americans only, what a dumb a** statement that is. This whole Project 2025 is going to blow up in their faces. I believe it will just be a matter of time, almost everyone of his nominees have no qualifications for the positions they are going to hold.Wouldn't the American Native Americans want to make the same claim and deport all those European invaders?
Have you noticed that on the first go around, none of his nominees had criminal records and that four years later, many of them did?
Now, he skips that step and nominates criminal or criminal-adjacent people to start with. I wonder what percentage of his nominees will ultimately be indicted for something?
Ultimately, RFK Jr. will do more harm than good. In my opinion, like Trump's Covid response, Jr. will be responsible for many deaths, mainly children. Unfortunately, those won't happen on his watch but years later after he is done screwing with vaccines and things like that.
What is SAD is that many of his ideas are worthwhile, particularly trying to get the health industry out of the oversight role of the health system. It would be so nice if we could only have Mr. Hyde for four years.Dr. Birx is shouting to America that we are setting ourselves up for another pandemic with the Biden administration's poor response to the Bird Flu. To make it worse, the pandemic-denying Trump, a convicted criminal and sexual abuser, is wanting to put in place over HHS fellow pandemic-denying, antivaxxer named RFK Jr.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/27/health/v … irx-digvidMusk is saying he is thinking about suing any news media that makes it seem like his Cybertruck is faulty. It just shows his paranoia because almost all reports I have seen give the truck credit for keeping the damage down.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/musk-hints-m … 0Kd8c8-inp
The Special Forces guy who committed the terrorist act is really confusing a lot of people. At the moment, there is nothing in his background to suggest he had motivation to do this. Hell, he is even a Trump lover. Everything seems to point to him not doing it - YET he did. WHY?
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/02/us/matth … index.htmlMusk is a multibillionaire who thinks he can do and say anything he wants., just like many of the other billionaires who are part of Trump's Team. There are 13 of these guys on Trump's team.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-tapped- … =116872968
I'm going to go out on a limb here. The Las Vegas attack and the Bourbon Street attack were done by two military guys who served at the same time on the same Army base.
It brings to mind the Manchurian Candidate plot of brainwashing by a foreign source. So what if these two guys were not even aware of what they were doing? Maybe they could have been acting under some kind of mind control source...Just saying.
https://www.denver7.com/news/local-news … vestigatesYou are starting to sound like another conspiracy theorists that frequently visits us, LOL.
Fact-checkers, targeted by MAGA loyalists, blast Zuckerberg’s assertion their work was ‘biased’
Zuckerberg, who is joining Musk on the ground in front of Trump's feet, doesn't understand this provable fact - That for every one lie posted by Liberals, the Conservatives post 10 or more.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/08/media/fa … index.htmlTrump always talks about the fake news, but the irony is he and his MAGA cohorts are the real fake news. With Zuckerberg going to other side, this is the start of unfettered propaganda. Welcome to Project 2025. So far, it is going to as planned.
Couldn't agree more. Zuckerberg didn't want to clean up his platforms in any case and now Trump gives him permission to turn them into another version of Russia Today.
Bondi says she will end the weaponization of DOJ, ROFL. First, she is a bit late, Biden did that already, and second, isn't that Trump's mandate to her - weaponize DOJ again?
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ … index.htmlCritics often point to several examples they believe demonstrate the Biden administration weaponizing the DOJ. These include the investigations into Donald Trump, such as the Mar-a-Lago search and the timing of legal actions, which some view as politically motivated. The handling of Hunter Biden’s legal issues, including a criticized plea deal and alleged investigative delays, has also drawn accusations of double standards. Other concerns include the DOJ’s response to parent protests at school board meetings, prosecutions of pro-life activists under the FACE Act following the Dobbs decision, and what some see as selective enforcement in January 6th cases compared to 2020 protests. These actions have fueled claims of political bias within the DOJ, though opinions vary widely depending on political perspectives.
Currently The DOJ chose not to proceed with certain cases from Jack Smith's investigations due to insufficient evidence to secure a conviction, with much of it reportedly based on hearsay or lacking concrete support. Prosecuting a former president poses unique challenges, as weak cases risk public backlash and erode trust in the justice system. Additionally, the DOJ must prioritize resources and ensure cases can withstand judicial scrutiny. This decision reflects the balance between pursuing justice and maintaining the integrity of the legal process.
Seem great timing for them to drop all. I wonder if Garland feels a bit afraid that the new AG will look into all his doings...Currently The DOJ chose not to proceed with certain cases from Jack Smith's investigations due to insufficient evidence to secure a conviction
That statement is completely false.
The case against Trump ended after US Special Prosecutor Jack Smith requested that it be dismissed on the basis of a US Department of Justice policy that prohibits prosecuting a president while in office.
In a six-page submission to the court on Monday, Smith’s statement read: “It has long been the position of the Department of Justice that the United States Constitution forbids the federal indictment and subsequent criminal prosecution of a sitting President.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/ … inst-trumpThe Department of Justice (DOJ) did choose not to pursue certain parts of Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation, mainly due to the legal complexities involved and the lack of sufficient evidence to support charges. While Smith's investigation was extensive, the DOJ ultimately decided not to proceed with certain aspects, such as conspiracy charges or other more serious accusations, because they found the evidence to be insufficient or challenging to prove in court.
For instance, when it came to the January 6th investigation, the DOJ opted not to pursue some of the more serious charges related to Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, despite the large volume of testimony and evidence. The DOJ's decision reflects a broader prosecutorial discretion where they assess the strength of the evidence and whether it would stand up in court.
In short, while Smith's investigation led to some charges, the DOJ determined that certain elements, while significant, didn't meet the legal threshold to move forward with prosecution. Therefore, those parts of the case were effectively not pursued.On what is this based? Where did the information come from?
I have given you the exact words from Jack Smith on why the case was dismissed...
The Department of Justice (DOJ) did choose not to pursue certain parts of Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation, mainly due to the legal complexities involved and the lack of sufficient evidence to support charges.
Where is the statement from the Department stating such?
Related Discussions
- 26
President Donald Trump is Time's Person of the Year
by Readmikenow 4 weeks ago
Nobody deserves being made Time's Person of the Year more than President Donald Trump."For those who believe this is all for the better, Trump’s victory represents a long-overdue rebuke to an entrenched and arrogant governing class; for those who see it as for the worse, the destruction...
- 225
Presidential Debate. What do you think will happen?
by Readmikenow 4 months ago
I think harris lacks a lot in debate skills. She avoids questions from the press. Interviews she has done are very few. With the one national press interview done by her she was accompanied by her VP. It was taped. harris will have a difficult time answering questions...
- 2
Why Do People Like Elon Musk Love Donald Trump
by IslandBites 3 months ago
This was an interesting read.Why Do People Like Elon Musk Love Donald Trump? It’s Not Just About Money.By Chris HughesChris Hughes is the chair of the Economic Security Project and the author of the forthcoming book “Marketcrafters: The 100-Year Struggle to Shape the American Economy.” He is a...
- 115
Mueller's List Of 10 Acts That Infer Obstruction Of Justice,
by Sharlee 5 years ago
Although the special counsel' Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference does not come to any concrete conclusion as to whether President Trump sought to obstructed justice, Robert Mueller's team did find and examine 10 "discrete acts" in which Mueller infers President Trump may have...
- 29
President Donald Trump as Presidential Candidate or President ...
by Kathryn L Hill 5 months ago
If Trump had a crystal ball which showed he might (somehow) start a civil war here in the good ol' USA, would/should he decide not to run? - wondering.
- 27
Do you think the Intelligence Briefing Committee told Donald Trump-that Obama is
by Shyron E Shenko 8 years ago
Do you think the Intelligence Briefing Committee told Donald Trump-that Obama is not doing his job?Trump said the Intelligence Briefing Committee indicated to him via 'body language' that President Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry do not follow their advice and they are doing a terrible job.Do...