Panicked by Democrats, Trump installs loyalist to top DoJ spot

Trump is not panicked. He calmly waited for the right time to cut Sessions loose. Two long years, that's way long enough.

Time will tell...

Did you notice the date on the NYT article? A month and a half ago. The President didn't panic, far from it.

Trump has always wanted a Attorney General that will protect his back but now their is some question in the way Trump elevated a right-wing YES MAN to the office without being vested by committee.

It appears that Trump is using a page or two right out of Nixon's play book and you know what happen to Nixon don't you?

It seems like Trump, in the actions he took was not according to constitution in a panic to fill that position. It looks like he is acting out of FEAR.

Sometime try thinking for yourself Ron. You can do it, you don't always need to act like a lemming. Sessions ****ed up. Specifically, he let that freak Al Franken **** him up, with that out-of-order question during the confirmation hearing. Sessions is a *****, and good ridance.

Sessions is a P U S S Y and good ridance.

And Rosenstein is a weasel. No way would the President let him continue in charge. I notice you people have nothing to be happy about with the election. Instead you return to Russia like a dog to its vomit. What a spectacle.

Look at you with all of this name calling. You must be feeling a loss that Trump has taken this, what some people are calling illegal actions with his recent appointment. WOW!!!

It appears that Trump is using a page or two right out of Nixon's play book and you know what happen to Nixon don't you?

No Ron, it appears that Trump and WE continue to WIN, and YOU PEOPLE continue to LOSE.

Trump handed you supporters of his, a loss of the house and those investigative committees. Trump can see the hand writing on the wall and the Trump's supporters can see it too. Can't you?

We won the Senate Ron. Your House, that you won by an ORDINARY margin, can't do a damn thing without the Senate You have achieved nothing, other than your commission of voter fraud in Arizona, Florida and Georgia. You are right now atempting to steal the Republican Senate seats in Florida and Arizona, and you seem to support that. Your moral superiority is nonexistent.

YOUR WORDS: We won the Senate Ron.

MY REPLY:The Republicans kept the Senate

YOUR WORDS: Your House, that you won by an ORDINARY margin, can't do a damn thing without the Senate

MY REPLY: Now you should know damn well that the Senate can't make a move on Medicare, Medicaid or ACA without the house. You did graduate eighth grade didn't you? Because you are talking like you don't understand a thing about The Constitution of The United States of America. You heard of CHECKS AND BALENCES have you Steve?

The American people has spoken to end the Republican's one party rule and that is a FACT, live with it Steve.

YOUR WORDS: You have achieved nothing,

MY REPLY: THE AMERICAN on the other hand, have achieved volumes in power to put a check on TRUMP. That sounds like a lot to me.

YOUR WORDS: You are right now atempting to steal the Republican Senate seats in Florida and Arizona, and you seem to support that.

MY REPLY: The American people vote is being recounted as per State LAW in Florida and Arizona and we will soon learn the out come. I know that you don't want that to happen. What a Maroon.

Which was the more DECISIVE end to one party rule Ron, 2018 OR 2010? What does THAT tell you?

MY REPLY: The Voice of The People was heard loud and clear in The 2018 elections Stevie.

The voice of the people was MUCH LOUDER in 2010.

But Obama held on for 8 years. Remember that Ron.

This is a new day, The blue wave is energized, Thank You Trump and thanks to The Republicans.

There was no blue wave. The Democrats all said so.

News Flash Steve, Republican controlled Arizona just flipped BLUE today. Democrats had not been in control of Arizona since 1988. This is the results of Trump and the blue wave.

Now do you want to get back on this topic of Trump pick to subvert congress with he's pick for the AG spot?

While you people were still in shock you admitted the truth, no blue wave. I heard it with my own ears, just like I heard Gillum's consession speech.

Then you also heard said that he was holding on, let the voice of the people be heard too, didn't you?

Meanwhile, what do you think about Trump's pick for acting AG?

I like Trump's pick for ACTING AG.

WHY?

Because he'll have the balls to NOT RECUSE himself.

Recuse himself from what Steve?

You are just full of questions aren't you Ron? Is the appointment of an Acting U.S. Attorney General constitutional, according to Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution?

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

YOUR QUESTION STEVE: Is the appointment of an Acting U.S. Attorney General constitutional, according to Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution?


MY REPLY: YES. I like to highlight this section for your review: "He (THE PRESIDENT) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;

With that said Steve, let us drop down to this: he THE PRESIDENT) shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers,

I like to highlight this par of "but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers,"

Steve, was Matthew Whitaker ever vetted, screened, assess, evaluate, appraise, weigh up, examine, look over or looked at, reviewed considered, been scrutinize, looked at or inspect, investigate, check out, check up on or probed, researched, looked into or delve into or given the once-over by anyone in The Congress?

No Ron, Whittaker has not been advised on or consented to by the Senate. Nor is it required that he be.

Then why do Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution exist as a law?

Whitaker is ACTING AG. The Senate will do its prescribed duty when the President nominates a new AG.

The law was followed Ron.

Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Va...