queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,500
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 21, 2024 21:15:23 GMT
Your posts and logic rarely make any sense. This is a prime example Recess appoints are explicitly allowed. Read article II as I referenced. Presidents have routinely used them. Now you are asking if trump does it is it wrong or are we against him doing it. I clearly gave you an answer. I’d prefer he go thru the senate. If he skips the senate process I’d be against that just as I have when all the other presidents do it for no reason. But the law allows it. A proper question you may consider is simply stating something like I am against recess appointments. I know it’s currently allowed. Should they not be allowed. And maybe you’d even give your own opinion. You have no idea how much effort it takes to change my communication style to accommodate you.
That's cuz yer dumb and thinking be hard.
We've been explaining this to you for years now.
Queshank
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Nov 21, 2024 21:20:19 GMT
It's about holding those responsible, accountable. It's about planting seeds, with the expectation of growth in the future. Freon
There was this story from 2017, which noted that the Senate was using the same tactic it did against Obama:
And this one notes that as of November 2019, he had made no recess appointments:
"No other president has gone this deep into an administration without making a recess appointment. In fact, he is poised to become the first president never to get one — save William Henry Harrison, who died just one month into office." ( Source)
He threatened to adjourn Congress in 2020 and make recess appointments, but that never happened.
And so far, it seems like Congress (at least the Senate) plans to not cede its role in the appointment process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ducksfan on Nov 21, 2024 21:59:33 GMT
There is a provision whereby Donald can make appointments without Senate consent. It would require a manufactured disagreement between the House and the Senate on adjournment. The disagreement would not actually exist, it would purely be used to get around Senate consent. Its normal function would be to keep the government functioning in times of legitimate disagreement. My question to you righties is if you would be ok with this misuse of a provision so that Donald can appoint whomever he chooses, thus putting yet more power in the executive. I'm not. Senate approval is to insure the quality and appropriateness of appointees, instead of purely having them chosen based on loyalty alone. Freon It's not a misuse, its Constitutional lol.... Recess appointments have been made by nearly every President, some more some less. So no, this doesn't bother me one bit, the more the merrier |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 21, 2024 22:07:59 GMT
There is a provision whereby Donald can make appointments without Senate consent. It would require a manufactured disagreement between the House and the Senate on adjournment. The disagreement would not actually exist, it would purely be used to get around Senate consent. Its normal function would be to keep the government functioning in times of legitimate disagreement. My question to you righties is if you would be ok with this misuse of a provision so that Donald can appoint whomever he chooses, thus putting yet more power in the executive. I'm not. Senate approval is to insure the quality and appropriateness of appointees, instead of purely having them chosen based on loyalty alone. Freon I'm fine with it.
Reagan appointed like 200 people with recess appointments.
Clinton around 140.
Bush the Younger around 170.
Obama 32.
Trump made none because both houses of Congress headed by establishment hacks machinated to do "pro forma" sessions and block his appointments.
If Congress can coordinate against the president, then I have no problem with Congress coordinating with the president.
Queshank
That last line is what I was looking for. Appreciate your honesty. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 21, 2024 22:08:41 GMT
You have no idea how much effort it takes to change my communication style to accommodate you.
That's cuz yer dumb and thinking be hard.
We've been explaining this to you for years now.
Queshank
I've never disagreed with that. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 21, 2024 22:11:38 GMT
It's about holding those responsible, accountable. It's about planting seeds, with the expectation of growth in the future. Freon
There was this story from 2017, which noted that the Senate was using the same tactic it did against Obama:
And this one notes that as of November 2019, he had made no recess appointments:
"No other president has gone this deep into an administration without making a recess appointment. In fact, he is poised to become the first president never to get one — save William Henry Harrison, who died just one month into office." ( Source)
He threatened to adjourn Congress in 2020 and make recess appointments, but that never happened.
And so far, it seems like Congress (at least the Senate) plans to not cede its role in the appointment process.
You did not understand my meaning. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 21, 2024 22:14:07 GMT
There is a provision whereby Donald can make appointments without Senate consent. It would require a manufactured disagreement between the House and the Senate on adjournment. The disagreement would not actually exist, it would purely be used to get around Senate consent. Its normal function would be to keep the government functioning in times of legitimate disagreement. My question to you righties is if you would be ok with this misuse of a provision so that Donald can appoint whomever he chooses, thus putting yet more power in the executive. I'm not. Senate approval is to insure the quality and appropriateness of appointees, instead of purely having them chosen based on loyalty alone. Freon It's not a misuse, its Constitutional lol.... Recess appointments have been made by nearly every President, some more some less. So no, this doesn't bother me one bit, the more the merrier If the recess is contrived, if it is explicitly a tactic to get around the senate approval process, I consider that an abuse. You do not? Which of those other scenarios was contrived? Freon |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Nov 21, 2024 22:18:11 GMT
You did not understand my meaning. Freon If you think partisans (like stu) are going to hold their candidate accountable on an issue like abusing recess appointments, don't hold your breath.
Guessing if we look back, we'll find people defending Obama's use of them even as Congress and SCOTUS tried to stop it.
Congress and the Courts are acting as a check on it; that's all that needs to happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ducksfan on Nov 21, 2024 22:21:39 GMT
It's not a misuse, its Constitutional lol.... Recess appointments have been made by nearly every President, some more some less. So no, this doesn't bother me one bit, the more the merrier If the recess is contrived, if it is explicitly a tactic to get around the senate approval process, I consider that an abuse. You do not? Which of those other scenarios was contrived? Freon Thats because the Supreme court changed it in 2014, ruling the Senate would have to adjourn for 10 days before such appointments can be made. Recess appointments have been done by both parties for a whole host of reasons. So no, I do not |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 21, 2024 22:30:41 GMT
You did not understand my meaning. Freon If you think partisans (like stu) are going to hold their candidate accountable on an issue like abusing recess appointments, don't hold your breath.
Guessing if we look back, we'll find people defending Obama's use of them even as Congress and SCOTUS tried to stop it.
Congress and the Courts are acting as a check on it; that's all that needs to happen.
Nope, still not getting my meaning. But at this point, my guess is you will think I'm lying. Freon |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,957
|
Post by petep on Nov 21, 2024 22:32:34 GMT
If you think partisans (like stu) are going to hold their candidate accountable on an issue like abusing recess appointments, don't hold your breath.
Guessing if we look back, we'll find people defending Obama's use of them even as Congress and SCOTUS tried to stop it.
Congress and the Courts are acting as a check on it; that's all that needs to happen.
Nope, still not getting my meaning. But at this point, my guess is you will think I'm lying. Freon Do you ever get the feeling your the guy driving the wrong way on the 5, and not the thousand people heading towards you. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Nov 21, 2024 22:33:14 GMT
Nope, still not getting my meaning. But at this point, my guess is you will think I'm lying. Freon So what's your meaning?
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 21, 2024 22:34:36 GMT
If the recess is contrived, if it is explicitly a tactic to get around the senate approval process, I consider that an abuse. You do not? Which of those other scenarios was contrived? Freon Thats because the Supreme court changed it in 2014, ruling the Senate would have to adjourn for 10 days before such appointments can be made. Recess appointments have been done by both parties for a whole host of reasons. So no, I do not That's what I wanted to know. You didn't answer the other question, though. When was the recess contrived PURELY to get around the senate consent in the past? That's what has changed, here. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Ducksfan on Nov 21, 2024 23:16:59 GMT
Thats because the Supreme court changed it in 2014, ruling the Senate would have to adjourn for 10 days before such appointments can be made. Recess appointments have been done by both parties for a whole host of reasons. So no, I do not That's what I wanted to know. You didn't answer the other question, though. When was the recess contrived PURELY to get around the senate consent in the past? That's what has changed, here. Freon There was no need to, it matters not how or why they were done, they were done and the whole point is basically to get around a Senate consent |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 22, 2024 1:59:08 GMT
That's what I wanted to know. You didn't answer the other question, though. When was the recess contrived PURELY to get around the senate consent in the past? That's what has changed, here. Freon There was no need to, it matters not how or why they were done, they were done and the whole point is basically to get around a Senate consent Then you are not understanding the point of my question. So far as I can tell, it has NOT been used as a technique to get around Senate approvals. That's what would be different this time. Would you still be ok with it? Freon |
|
RWB
Legend
Posts: 12,761
|
Post by RWB on Nov 22, 2024 2:43:49 GMT
Nope, still not getting my meaning. But at this point, my guess is you will think I'm lying. Freon Do you ever get the feeling your the guy driving the wrong way on the 5, and not the thousand people heading towards you. ROFLMAO that's the perfect example of Freon |
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,579
Member is Online
|
Post by bama beau on Nov 22, 2024 2:57:57 GMT
There is a provision whereby Donald can make appointments without Senate consent. It would require a manufactured disagreement between the House and the Senate on adjournment. The disagreement would not actually exist, it would purely be used to get around Senate consent. Its normal function would be to keep the government functioning in times of legitimate disagreement. My question to you righties is if you would be ok with this misuse of a provision so that Donald can appoint whomever he chooses, thus putting yet more power in the executive. I'm not. Senate approval is to insure the quality and appropriateness of appointees, instead of purely having them chosen based on loyalty alone. Freon You concede far too much ground. Next time, start with something like "Get Off My Lawn!", and go from there. It works for them. |
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,579
Member is Online
|
Post by bama beau on Nov 22, 2024 3:03:00 GMT
You have no idea how much effort it takes to change my communication style to accommodate you.
That's cuz yer dumb and thinking be hard.
We've been explaining this to you for years now.
Queshank
Sense of the forum. Is Que's logic more: 1) Stoic 2) Socratic 3) Sophomoric 4) Schizophrenic Your thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by Ducksfan on Nov 22, 2024 3:21:23 GMT
There was no need to, it matters not how or why they were done, they were done and the whole point is basically to get around a Senate consent Then you are not understanding the point of my question. So far as I can tell, it has NOT been used as a technique to get around Senate approvals. That's what would be different this time. Would you still be ok with it? Freon I fully understand the point of your question It is a fact recess appointments have been made in the past, recess appoints by their very nature are done to bypass senate approval so unless you know the heart of each appointment, I would think you can't really say it has never been done. But just in case your still confused over what a recess appointment is let me be clear.. Yes, I would be and have been fine with it. The President gets to choose his cabinet. |
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,500
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 22, 2024 3:59:38 GMT
That's cuz yer dumb and thinking be hard.
We've been explaining this to you for years now.
Queshank
Sense of the forum. Is Que's logic more: 1) Stoic 2) Socratic 3) Sophomoric 4) Schizophrenic Your thoughts.It's all man. We've been over this.
Queshank
|
|
