Adam Schiff calls Matt Gaetz a child sex trafficker. Guess you can say anything you want now on TV and get away with it. pic.twitter.com/4QQTjXxgrF

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) November 17, 2024

The deep state will tell you explicitly who they really fear. Just look at who they save their most vicious attacks for.

captkirk said:

---

Adam Schiff calls Matt Gaetz a child sex trafficker. Guess you can say anything you want now on TV and get away with it. pic.twitter.com/4QQTjXxgrF

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) November 17, 2024

---

Takes one to know one.

Anyone who thinks Trump is going to risk letting Collins-murk-Cornyn et al. do a little victory dance over a vote on this one is self-evidently in the Kamala IQ realm, imho.

nortex97 said:

---

Anyone who thinks Trump is going to risk letting Collins-murk-Cornyn et al. do a little victory dance over a vote on this one is self-evidently in the Kamala IQ realm, imho.

---

So what is your prediction on what happens here?

Wait, the woman was a hooker and brought her 17 year old friend to a party she was working? Am I reading that correctly?

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

---

Oh noes! This is horrible.

Im Gipper said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Anyone who thinks Trump is going to risk letting Collins-murk-Cornyn et al. do a little victory dance over a vote on this one is self-evidently in the Kamala IQ realm, imho.

---

So what is your prediction on what happens here?

---

It will be a recess appointment after some squabbles bubble up in January in the senate hearings (not just Gaetz), and Johnson and Thune both adjourn for a couple weeks (fake news piece crying about it). Two consecutive 210 day terms as a recess appointee, as long as the senate is adjourned for 10 days (SCOTUS precedent).

Was this woman interviewed by DOJ who deemed the witness were not credible to press charges against Gaetz?

Ag87H2O said:

---

Player To Be Named Later said:

---

And the next Democrat President will do the same thing.

---

After Holder and Garland, what do Republicans have to lose? It's time to start playing hardball. What are the Democrats going to do, appoint a radical partisan hack AG next time they have the Oval Office? Please.

---

Holder and Garland got confirmed. There are picks out there that would make more centrist Dems squirm. There is always someone worse.

So no up or down vote in senate!??

I could see that.

That's my thought. Make them do it in a year or so when facing the real risk (some of them) of a primary after he's been doing the job for 420 days already.

no do all the sexual harassment settlements that congress paid out

Also, did he drive a girl of a bridge and leave her in the car to drown? That would have been better for sure.

Quote:

---

squabbles bubble up in January in the senate hearings (not just Gaetz), and Johnson and Thune both adjourn for a couple weeks (fake news piece crying about it). Two consecutive 210 day terms as a recess appointee, as long as the senate is adjourned for 10 days (SCOTUS precedent).

---

I believe you're conflicting two things here.

The 210 day terms is under the Vacancies Reform Act for people appointed as "acting". Discussed above why it doesn't apply to Gaetz.

A recess appointment would last until the end of the session. Discussed on other threads why Gaetz may not qualify.


FTR, my guess is that Trump does one of the above and just let it play out in the courts while Gaetz stays in the AG role. (Where he eventually loses)

twk said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Player To Be Named Later said:

---

And the next Democrat President will do the same thing.

---

After Holder and Garland, what do Republicans have to lose? It's time to start playing hardball. What are the Democrats going to do, appoint a radical partisan hack AG next time they have the Oval Office? Please.

---

I agree that worrying about what the Democrats might do in the future is pointless. My objection to Gaetz is that I don't think he's up to the job, regardless of how loyal he's been to Trump. If you want to undo the damage done by Holder and Garland, you need someone competent leading the charge, and there is simply nothing in Gaetz's resume that says he's that guy.

---

Again, I hear you but it's Trump's choice. Unless something irrefutably illegal is proved, I suspect we'll both find out because I don't think Trump backs down from this one. Gaetz either gets confirmed or Trump uses the recess appointment process to buy him 420 days to do the job and prove his detractors wrong.

captkirk said:

---

Adam Schiff calls Matt Gaetz a child sex trafficker. Guess you can say anything you want now on TV and get away with it. pic.twitter.com/4QQTjXxgrF

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) November 17, 2024

---

Quote:

---

Again, I hear you but it's Trump's choice. Unless something irrefutably illegal is proved, I suspect we'll both find out because I don't think Trump backs down from this one. Gaetz either gets confirmed or Trump uses the recess appointment process to buy him 420 days to do the job and prove his detractors wrong.

---

I could be wrong about this, but from what I've read, there are two problems with the recess appointment route. First, the Senate has to vote to recess for 10 days, so there's no guarantee that you get the requisite votes if the issue is putting Gaetz in office. Second, a recess appointment serves until the end of the session OR until his confirmation is voted on; so, even if Gaetz gets a recess appointment, I think the Senate will act on his nomination, up or down, before we get very far down the road.

Although I object to Gaetz, I will be very please if the mere possibility that he might be confirmed gets some of the careerists who have become political activists to jump ship. That's one undoubted benefit from the announcement.

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Player To Be Named Later said:

---

And the next Democrat President will do the same thing.

---

After Holder and Garland, what do Republicans have to lose? It's time to start playing hardball. What are the Democrats going to do, appoint a radical partisan hack AG next time they have the Oval Office? Please.

---

Holder and Garland got confirmed. There are picks out there that would make more centrist Dems squirm. There is always someone worse.

---

Only because despite how terrible and corrupt a Democrat nominee may be, the establishment Republicans always give the Democrat President deference and confirm his choice - because he won the election.

Republicans should quit wetting their leg and stick together and do the same for their president unless there is irrefutable proof that Gaetz did something illegal.

Again, Trump is a president with a mandate. He get's to choose his cabinet, and the likeability or perceived ability of a nominee should be irrelevant to Republicans. It it ends up being a poor choice, then it's on Trump.

This:

Always reminds me of this:

📺On February 5, 1983, NBC aired the ‘Diff’rent Strokes’ episode, ‘The Bicycle Man,’ in which, Arnold and Dudley become friends with the owner of a local bicycle shop, unaware that he is a pedophile pic.twitter.com/Tx54KxgDoB

— RetroNewsNow (@RetroNewsNow) February 6, 2023

This is the reason why some Republicans despise Matt Gaetz.pic.twitter.com/j4eyMOcZMG

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) November 17, 2024

captkirk said:

---

This is the reason why some Republicans despise Matt Gaetz.pic.twitter.com/j4eyMOcZMG

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) November 17, 2024

---

No no. It's because he shows other congressmen his sexual escapades

captkirk said:

---

This is the reason why some Republicans despise Matt Gaetz.pic.twitter.com/j4eyMOcZMG

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) November 17, 2024

---

This is precisely why I think Gaetz gets through…

He has something on them, and the deal is, you confirm him, or the laundry gets aired…

FireAg said:

---

captkirk said:

---

This is the reason why some Republicans despise Matt Gaetz.pic.twitter.com/j4eyMOcZMG

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) November 17, 2024

---

This is precisely why I think Gaetz gets through…

He has something on them, and the deal is, you confirm him, or the laundry gets aired…

---

In this clip, he's trying to intimidate a member of the ethics committee (you think it's a coincidence that he singled out this guy?). It didn't work.

The only leverage he has is the threat that Trump would support a primary opponent for the Senators. That might be enough to sway some, but I think there will be a handful or more that aren't persuaded.

I think you're wrong, but either way, I don't see Trump backing down or Gatez backing out…

People opposing him will talk big, but when it's time for the rubber to meet the road, will they follow through?

I'm thinking not enough to block him…

The media talking point is that he is a sex trafficker. Great, if you have proof of that let's arrest him and put him in jail for 80 years. Otherwise if this is just a "he's literally Hitler" game then STFU and let the adults get on with fixing this broken system.

That's what I keep coming back to…where's the proof???

We have hearsay from this person or that who would have motivations to tell a story…

But here is the proof?

The receipts? Text messages? Cash withdrawals? Money transactions?

All we have are unsubstantiated claims about a guy who is dangerous to several establishment types…

FireAg said:

---

I think you're wrong, but either way, I don't see Trump backing down or Gatez backing out…

---

And that's fine, that's what the constitution calls for. The president makes his nomination, and the senate votes on it. Nothing wrong with that. I won't lose any sleep if he gets confirmed, I'm just afraid that he's not up to the challenge of this job, and it's too important to let this opportunity go by just because Trump likes the way this guy tweets I've got no problem with the rest of his nominations; this one is just not plausible. Maybe I'm biased as an attorney, but you don't make someone with so little legal experience AG if you are serious about getting the job done.

What is the prerequisite experience?

FireAg said:

---

That's what I keep coming back to…where's the proof???

We have hearsay from this person or that who would have motivations to tell a story…

But here is the proof?

The receipts? Text messages? Cash withdrawals? Money transactions?

All we have are unsubstantiated claims about a guy who is dangerous to several establishment types…

---

Apparently they had at least two eye witnesses to him banging the 17 year old testify to the ethics committee about it this summer. They also testified that he paid them via Venmo which would be traceable.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gaetz-witnesses-sex-allegations-venmo/

I hate all of these getting leaked out though, just release the report so everyone can see the facts. Once that either comes out or gets leaked I'm sure we'll know if there's anything else there.

Quote:

---

Apparently they had at least two eye witnesses

---

Two adult hookers who brought a 17 year old "friend" to a party they were working. And that is coming from their lawyer.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Apparently they had at least two eye witnesses

---

Two adult hookers who brought a 17 year old "friend" to a party they were working. And that is coming from their lawyer.

---

That seems to me like those two individuals were enabling child prostitution. That is morally reprehensible and would cast serious doubt on their testimony. At least to me it would.

Then show us the Venmo transaction…

ETA: they haven't been able to identify the Venmo transaction that links it to Gaetz…

If they had it, DOJ would have pursued…

SwigAg11 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Apparently they had at least two eye witnesses

---

Two adult hookers who brought a 17 year old "friend" to a party they were working. And that is coming from their lawyer.

---

That seems to me like those two individuals were enabling child prostitution. That is morally reprehensible and would cast serious doubt on their testimony. At least to me it would.

---

Shades of Mike Nifong and the Duke lacrosse case. No wonder DOJ backed away from this.