• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump are putting his people in as top officials at state agencies: Today

The President does not need Congressional approval, but the President can only fire them for cause. Humphrey's Executor v. United States. So, no, they won't lose their jobs next week, and I'll bet Biden keeps most of them anyway as one tool to appear to be a peace maker.
You misunderstand the case results. People appointed to independent agencies in govt (SEC, FCC, Federal Reserve) can only be fired with cause. Political appointees can be fired as soon as he gets to them.
 
No grasshopper, they succeeded in getting on the FBI most wanted list. Winning.

OK, but that’s like a bit like saying that a quarterback succeeded in throwing an interception. ;)
 
Is this exceptionally abnormal though? I don't know, I can see that many an out-going President may halt appointments, leaving it to the next guy. But it may be that this is standard tactic when the presidency flips party.
 
OK, but that’s like a bit like saying that a quarterback succeeded in throwing an interception. ;)

OK, how about this...it's like pocketing all the balls and then scratching. lol :p
 
So Trump are putting his people in as top officials at state agencies.

By the way, This Peloski is certainly a fighter, I am impressed, but usually those people (in my experience) gets to pay heavy prices. Well hopefully not in the US.
Are you referring to Nadia Peloski?
 
Doesn't that depend on how the employment contract looks like?
People hired into the civil service can not be fired with out cause even by the president. People appointed by the president serve at his pleasure.
 
People hired into the civil service can not be fired with out cause even by the president. People appointed by the president serve at his pleasure.
That's what I thought.
 
The President does not need Congressional approval, but the President can only fire them for cause.

Exactly.
This is Trump being malicious.

Then the bitch says good luck to Biden in todays speech. Trump is teh biggest piece of shit the country has ever produced.
 
So Trump are putting his people in as top officials at state agencies.



By the way, This Peloski is certainly a fighter, I am impressed, but usually those people (in my experience) gets to pay heavy prices. Well hopefully not in the US.

Remember Madcow for over 2 years push the phony Russian collusion story every night. She lied each and every night.
 
So Trump are putting his people in as top officials at state agencies.



By the way, This Peloski is certainly a fighter, I am impressed, but usually those people (in my experience) gets to pay heavy prices. Well hopefully not in the US.

NSA is not a state agency, it’s part of federal government.
 
Is the State Department a federal or state agency?
What difference does that make? The subject is an appointment to the NSA which is definitely a federal organization.
 
Exactly.
This is Trump being malicious.

Then the bitch says good luck to Biden in todays speech. Trump is teh biggest piece of shit the country has ever produced.
Another good argument against democracy.
 
Doesn't that depend on how the employment contract looks like?
Well if they can;t be fired that can be transferred to Antarctica to oversee something.
 
NSA is not a state agency, it’s part of federal government.
The OP is Swede I think. While I don’t speak Swedish I think state may be a literal translation used in the context of government and not our legal distinction between levels of government
 
No, the republicans wanted an honest election. That will come sooner than later. Whether you agree or not is not really the issue.
Wrong, the republicans wanted insurrection and they will pay the price. Justice will prevail whether you agree or not.
 
Wrong, the republicans wanted insurrection and they will pay the price. Justice will prevail whether you agree or not.


There's been no insurrection. Why do liberals continually mimic DNC narratives? The word insurrection is embarrassing to use now. They've completely screwed up the meaning of the word.
 
There's been no insurrection. Why do liberals continually mimic DNC narratives? The word insurrection is embarrassing to use now. They've completely screwed up the meaning of the word.
I dunno, why are conservatives so obsessed with the DNC?

Perhaps you'd prefer the insurrection be called domestic terrorism and sedition, is that it?
 
I dunno, why are conservatives so obsessed with the DNC?

Perhaps you'd prefer the insurrection be called domestic terrorism and sedition, is that it?
That made no sense. Of course I didn’t expect a sensible response.
 
Back
Top Bottom