One of most critical positions Trump must fill in new admin is his AG. Two name on short list are Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Bloomberg is reporting. I hope he uses Gen Mike Flynn and possibly Mark Levin in roles as well.

same "report" had Kevin McCarthy as chief of staff.

RINO back in fashion it would seem.

I don't think Cruz has any desire to be AG. Only see that if he is shocked in the senate race. (And I don't see how Trump wins Texas while Cruz loses, so that presents impossible scenario)

Maybe put her in there too;

This is Stephanie Lambert, an election integrity attorney who is representing Patrick Byrne in a defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion.

It is because of that lawsuit that she has access to internal company emails from Dominion which prove that the voting machines were in fact… pic.twitter.com/5La3NZNLh2

— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) March 19, 2024

Meanwhile, back in Joe's White House...

Politics are weird, but if I were Cruz I couldn't work with Trump after the things he said about my wife. But, hey, that's me.

bookmarking this

for when Biden is appointing Nancy Pelosi Secretary of Education in January 2025.

The Collective said:

---

Politics are weird, but if I were Cruz I couldn't work with Trump after the things he said about my wife. But, hey, that's me.

---

Or how he treated his previous AG's

Trump's staff choices were probably my biggest beef with him last time. However, I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that. I think he was as surprised as anyone to find out just how entrenched nearly everyone in Washington is in the swamp. It's hard to find people who know the system who also support cleaning up to system.

BQRyno said:

---

I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that.

---

Man, that's wild that you think Trump is capable of that sort of self reflection.

Or even admitting that he was wrong about something.

Quote:

---

I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that.

---

if the reports on mccarthy are true, I think its clear this is not the case

The Collective said:

---

Politics are weird, but if I were Cruz I couldn't work with Trump after the things he said about my wife. But, hey, that's me.

---

I respect that concern. Further, I don't Think Cruz aspires to that job at all. In fact, I think I have heard him say as much on his own podcast. But the flip side to the argument is that this is now such a politically important role, after Holder/russiagate (Barr)/Garland, that it might warrant consideration, since during any second Trump term the lawfare will be critical as the communists absolutely flip out at every syllable uttered, and Trump will have the ability to push perhaps for his chosen heir, which if he selects someone like Gabbard as VP (hypothetical) probably won't be his VP choice.

Just food for thought as the Obama-DoJ era has really changed the role (corrupted it) of the department and law enforcement into a political Brownshirt legal arm of the president, and I would hope Trump plays their game right back. He'll need someone both smart, and politically savvy in the job, for sure.

Old Army Metal said:

---

BQRyno said:

---

I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that.

---

Man, that's wild that you think Trump is capable of that sort of self reflection.

Or even admitting that he was wrong about something.

---

I think the change will be out of spite, not out of some serious introspection. More like "f those guys I put in place last time - they screwed me and I won't let that happen again."

You have to walk a fine line between people who know people and know how things get done, and people who are willing to go in and upset that with outside or nonconformist ideas.

Not everyone who has been there is "swamp" or "rino". Everyone who has been there he had to operate in that environment, and it has tremendous power and inertia. You can't just blow it up or take mastery of it on a whim. It has to be badgered, bartered, cajoled, and manipulated in the direction you want it to go, and your opposition is working against you all the time.

You need some people who can interface with it, that understand it and know how to manipulate it, and that very much makes them appear to be a part of it, and in some ways they probably are. But, given that it exists, it must be dealt with, even if the goal is to weaken it or pick it apart. Some of the accused "RINo" types would rather not have to do what they do, but it takes a lot of bargaining and haggling to work that process, and because of Your opposition doing the same, you don't get everything you want. You have to get what strategically matters most.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

You have to walk a fine line between people who know people and know how things get done, and people who are willing to go in and upset that with outside or nonconformist ideas.

Not everyone who has been there is "swamp" or "rino". Everyone who has been there he had to operate in that environment, and it has tremendous power and inertia. You can't just blow it up or take mastery of it on a whim. It has to be badgered, bartered, cajoled, and manipulated in the direction you want it to go, and your opposition is working against you all the time.

You need some people who can interface with it, that understand it and know how to manipulate it, and that very much makes them appear to be a part of it, and in some ways they probably are. But, given that it exists, it must be dealt with, even if the goal is to weaken it or pick it apart. Some of the accused "RINo" types would rather not have to do what they do, but it takes a lot of bargaining and haggling to work that process, and because of Your opposition doing the same, you don't get everything you want. You have to get what strategically matters most.

---

Agreed. Like you said, it's a fine line. As an example, Mitch is one of those guys that's 100% part of the game. He knows how to play it and manipulate it to his advantage. As much as people may hate on him, he paved the way for so much that Trump did as president. The court would look insanely different if it weren't for him. The only way forward is to have guys in place who will use the system toward your goals. What you have to avoid is pure sabotage.

We need Cruz in the SCOTUS.

MGS said:

---

We need Cruz in the SCOTUS.

---

Cruz is the only person in the country who could be picked to the court who I wouldn't worry about making unsound decisions about constitutionality that aren't in line with his perspective shared to date. That said, no way it ever happens. Glad he's our senator at least.

Pam Biondi would be a good choice for AG. Has the appropriate experience, seems to be on the right side of policy.

Unfortunately, the left has forced the issue and Trump's AG is going to have to go after some high-level Dems to see if we can agree to end the lawfare. Hillary needs to serve some time for mishandling classified information. Hunter thumbed his nose at his 1st subpoena and Navarro is in prison right now.

Set Tara Reade up for a lawsuit against Joe and drain his resources.

Etc.

Cruz would of course be great, but we need him in the Senate

BQRyno said:

---

MGS said:

---

We need Cruz in the SCOTUS.

---

Cruz is the only person in the country who could be picked to the court who I wouldn't worry about making unsound decisions about constitutionality that aren't in line with his perspective shared to date. That said, no way it ever happens. Glad he's our senator at least.

---

It's strange to say, but Cruz is getting too old for SCOTUS, given that justices are usually picked to sit for as long as possible.

He looks older than 53, but ACB is 52, so if Cruz is going to be seated, it needs to be soon.

BQRyno said:

---

Old Army Metal said:

---

BQRyno said:

---

I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that.

---

Man, that's wild that you think Trump is capable of that sort of self reflection.

Or even admitting that he was wrong about something.

---

I think the change will be out of spite, not out of some serious introspection. More like "f those guys I put in place last time - they screwed me and I won't let that happen again."

---

And yet, his selection of ****ty lawyers recently for the stupid ass lawfare he's undergoing says otherwise.

To add, with his continual disparagement of any of his choices at the first hint of even straying slightly from absolute genuflection (sp?) to Trump, who in their right minds would submit to a position under him?

TexAgs91 said:

---

Cruz would of course be great, but we need him in the Senate

---

Definitely!

BQRyno said:

---

Trump's staff choices were probably my biggest beef with him last time. However, I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that. I think he was as surprised as anyone to find out just how entrenched nearly everyone in Washington is in the swamp. It's hard to find people who know the system who also support cleaning up to system.

---

The way he treated his cabinet/staff was ridiculous. Every other day someone new was being fired/hired. And he'd go scorched earth on every single one of them. You cant be effective that way.

I seriously doubt he's learned his lesson, but he'd be a lot more productive if he has.

How many cabinet seats are there? How many kids does Trump have? He will appoint his kids to the cabinet and do away with the rest. This is how he builds his kingdom. He wants to follow his idols.

Mike Flynn and Mark Levin?

AgGrad99 said:

---

BQRyno said:

---

Trump's staff choices were probably my biggest beef with him last time. However, I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that. I think he was as surprised as anyone to find out just how entrenched nearly everyone in Washington is in the swamp. It's hard to find people who know the system who also support cleaning up to system.

---

The way he treated his cabinet/staff was ridiculous. Every other day someone new was being fired/hired. And he'd go scorched earth on every single one of them. You cant be effective that way.

I seriously doubt he's learned his lesson, but he'd be a lot more productive if he has.

---

Agreed. It's especially wild in light of his demand for loyalty. He shows no loyalty to anyone, even those who are ardent supporters up until the moment where they disagree with him about anything publicly. I think most with real future political aspirations will avoid filling posts, but there will be people who say yes. A cabinet position in the White House has to be tempting no matter the situation.

They won't let him take office. The cabinet won't exist so there's no need to speculate. If there is anything to speculate about, its what to do about that if anything.

UntoldSpirit said:

---

They won't let him take office. The cabinet won't exist so there's no need to speculate. If there is anything to speculate about, its what to do about that if anything.

---

Yeah, I don't believe that. Even Trump left office after his tantrum. If Trump wins the election, he's taking office. This is not meant to be rude: it's silly to think otherwise.

BQRyno said:

---

UntoldSpirit said:

---

They won't let him take office. The cabinet won't exist so there's no need to speculate. If there is anything to speculate about, its what to do about that if anything.

---

Yeah, I don't believe that. Even Trump left office after his tantrum. If Trump wins the election, he's taking office. This is not meant to be rude: it's silly to think otherwise.

---

No offense, but I don't think you're paying attention. They've already told us that they will object to Trump in the electoral college vote on the basis that he isn't qualified to be president. There is a "legal" process for this. He's not likely to take office.

And that's if he even makes it that far.

If there are enough conservative republicans in Congress to keep that from happening (not too likely in my view), then they'll start up their fall back plans. They've got 'em.

I know it's never going to happen, but the Republican party needs to nominate DeSantis.

UntoldSpirit said:

---

BQRyno said:

---

UntoldSpirit said:

---

They won't let him take office. The cabinet won't exist so there's no need to speculate. If there is anything to speculate about, its what to do about that if anything.

---

Yeah, I don't believe that. Even Trump left office after his tantrum. If Trump wins the election, he's taking office. This is not meant to be rude: it's silly to think otherwise.

---

No offense, but I don't think you're paying attention. They've already told us that they will object to Trump in the electoral college vote on the basis that he isn't qualified to be president. There is a "legal" process for this. He's not likely to take office.

And that's if he even makes it that far.

If there are enough conservative republicans in Congress to keep that from happening (not too likely in my view), then they'll start up their fall back plans. They've got 'em.

I know it's never going to happen, but the Republican party needs to nominate DeSantis.

---

Elections are "contested" all the time. People acted like Trump wanting to contest the election was a new thing. It's not. They can say whatever they want just like Trump said whatever he wanted. When the rubber meets the road, whoever has the electoral votes is the president.

There's little point in arguing about it. If he wins on election day, one of us will be proven right.

BQRyno said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

BQRyno said:

---

Trump's staff choices were probably my biggest beef with him last time. However, I'm telling myself the silver lining is he has learned from that. I think he was as surprised as anyone to find out just how entrenched nearly everyone in Washington is in the swamp. It's hard to find people who know the system who also support cleaning up to system.

---

The way he treated his cabinet/staff was ridiculous. Every other day someone new was being fired/hired. And he'd go scorched earth on every single one of them. You cant be effective that way.

I seriously doubt he's learned his lesson, but he'd be a lot more productive if he has.

---

Agreed. It's especially wild in light of his demand for loyalty. He shows no loyalty to anyone, even those who are ardent supporters up until the moment where they disagree with him about anything publicly. I think most with real future political aspirations will avoid filling posts, but there will be people who say yes. A cabinet position in the White House has to be tempting no matter the situation.

---

Yep. Just ask Rick Perry.

If Trump wins the election, the highest court in the land, is going to ensure he takes office. That's not debatable…….at least by sane people.

MGS said:

---

We need Cruz in the SCOTUS.

---

I wish he would come home and be Governor, need some fresh blood.

BQRyno said:

---

UntoldSpirit said:

---

BQRyno said:

---

UntoldSpirit said:

---

They won't let him take office. The cabinet won't exist so there's no need to speculate. If there is anything to speculate about, its what to do about that if anything.

---

Yeah, I don't believe that. Even Trump left office after his tantrum. If Trump wins the election, he's taking office. This is not meant to be rude: it's silly to think otherwise.

---

No offense, but I don't think you're paying attention. They've already told us that they will object to Trump in the electoral college vote on the basis that he isn't qualified to be president. There is a "legal" process for this. He's not likely to take office.

And that's if he even makes it that far.

If there are enough conservative republicans in Congress to keep that from happening (not too likely in my view), then they'll start up their fall back plans. They've got 'em.

I know it's never going to happen, but the Republican party needs to nominate DeSantis.

---

Elections are "contested" all the time. People acted like Trump wanting to contest the election was a new thing. It's not. They can say whatever they want just like Trump said whatever he wanted. When the rubber meets the road, whoever has the electoral votes is the president.

There's little point in arguing about it. If he wins on election day, one of us will be proven right.

---

What does it take for people to get their heads out of the sand? They impeach Trump for absurdities, they create evidence to say he's a Russian operative, they literally steal his money, charge him with insurrection for objecting to mail in ballot fraud, they raid his house for holding his Presidential documents, they call him Hitler and say he is a blood thirsty racist Tyrant. They take him off the ballot and black out his speeches. Not to mention a hundred other things they've done. Who would want to be in his cabinet and be loyal to him? They'll get thrown in prison.

You think they won't break new ground (which they do every day practically) and object to his electors in the House of Representatives? Is there even one democrat you could count on NOT to do this? He's an insurrectionist and not qualified to be President. Congress is exactly who gets to decide that. How can we not see this coming? I don't get it. Their lawyers have ALREADY ANNOUNCED THIS to the Supreme Court. They will do it. And it's likely to be considered legal even by the Supremes.

But yeah, I guess we will see. I'd rather have a plan to deal with their tactics, but its like they've drugged everyone to just ignore it and pretend its business as usual. No, they'd never do THAT.

aggiedent said:

---

If Trump wins the election, the highest court in the land, is going to ensure he takes office. That's not debatable…….at least by sane people.

---

The democrats will vote to reject the electors on the basis that Trump is not qualified to take office, as their lawyers have already suggested they will do. Congress has the authority and they may have an opportunity to solidify this even more. I don't know if the Supremes can save Trump on this, but even if they do, its just the beginning.

It seems more like insanity to ignore everything the Democrats have done for 8 years and assume that rationality will prevail as long as we just ignore it. They will break all precedent to deny Trump from taking office. We see them lie, cheat and steal. There really is little they won't do at this point. And don't forget, they have no problem threatening the Supreme Court.

The Republicans will have to have a majority in the House to stop this, and probably by more than a few votes. Jefferies may be the Speaker before the end of the year due to attrition. If that happens, you can expect some serious maneuvering by the Democrats ahead of this event.

Trump isn't picking Cruz or Lee who would be great choices he is going to bring in someone very loyal to him and they will go after his enemies