You do know there are Dems on the House ethics committee, right? If there was anything in the report beyond what the DOJ found, it would be public knowledge already.

Logos Stick said:

---

You do know there are Dems on the House ethics committee, right? If there was anything in the report beyond what the DOJ found, it would be public knowledge already.

---

So with that logic, there's no harm in making it public, right? It would just confirm his innocence.

To be clear, I'm not anti or pro Gaetz. Don't really have any emotional attachment to this. My bigger interest is seeing Trump and the R's pass great legislation, like extending current tax rates for starters.

Don't really care who's in his cabinet, but I chuckle at the histrionics from some quarters. There's the Trump-is-God camp, which would defend the devil if he was nominated. And then there's the Trump-is-literally-Hitler camp, which would condemn God if he was nominated. And several of us in between.

Awe, now since there is no corruption, he must be innocent? There is either evidence of his behavior or there isn't. This isn't hard. If he is a pedophile, we should know and he should not be able to be an AG. I do not understand the defense of him.

Did you just now start paying attention? Garland investigated this.

rathAG05 said:

---

Awe, now since there is no corruption, he must be innocent? There is either evidence of his behavior or there isn't. This isn't hard. If he is a pedophile, we should know and he should not be able to be an AG. I do not understand the defense of him.

---

The defense of him is not people who like to defend accused pedophiles, it is coming from people who recognize the playbook being run. If there is somebody coming after the swamp, they gin up an accusation so bad that everybody should be disgusted…then repeat the accusation over and over so often and via so many different mouthpieces that everybody just assumes it has to be true, even though no actual evidence beyond the accusation has been put forward.

Then he should want them to present their evidence and bring this whole thing to an end. I think it will take a guy like him to really root out corruption. However, if he's a pedophile, then he should not have that opportunity.

Understood, but you can't just act like this doesn't exist. It's a thing. And since it's a pretty big thing, he should demand that they present evidence and put the pressure on them. So far, he looks like he's kind of running from this.

[There is no need for the vulgarity. You can make your point without it. Continue with the approach and your bans will increase in length -- Staff]

You are wasting your time.

FireAg said:

---

You're missing my point…

If they had something substantive on Gaetz, it would already have leaked to some reporter and subsequently published…

I'm saying release it because there's nothing substantive or definitive in there to begin with.

JHC…not even SCOTUS can keep **** confidential these days…lord know Congress can't…

There's…nothing…there…

---

I will agree 100000% on this.

rathAG05 said:

---

Then he should want them to present their evidence and bring this whole thing to an end. I think it will take a guy like him to really root out corruption. However, if he's a pedophile, then he should not have that opportunity.

---

Thats not what this is about. It's about tying his hands, like they did Dade Phelan and like they did with Trump and Russia and impeachments. We were promised all of those were really real, but they were never anything but fabrications. Still, they tied up the innocents for months/years. That's the play again. Until Americans tel them to knock this **** off, they'll continue to deprive us of the government we duly elected.

It's why I still think we need a national divorce…

txags92 said:

---

rathAG05 said:

---

Awe, now since there is no corruption, he must be innocent? There is either evidence of his behavior or there isn't. This isn't hard. If he is a pedophile, we should know and he should not be able to be an AG. I do not understand the defense of him.

---

The defense of him is not people who like to defend accused pedophiles, it is coming from people who recognize the playbook being run. If there is somebody coming after the swamp, they gin up an accusation so bad that everybody should be disgusted…then repeat the accusation over and over so often and via so many different mouthpieces that everybody just assumes it has to be true, even though no actual evidence beyond the accusation has been put forward.

---

Well said. This is exactly how the left operates.

Those making the claims either need to show the proof or shut the heck up.

Again, those that don't like Gaetz are wish-casting he did some horrible deed…

There still is zero proof of anything…

And of course the "timing" is impeccable. Just ask Kavanaugh.

Breitbart piece on recess appointments/history here is pretty good if not that detailed as to what I think the plan will be per above.

Al Reuters Article notes a likely scenario where the Dems throw fits to slow things down, helping the GOP to align in favor of recessing the Senate:

Quote:

---

WILL REPUBLICANS OPPOSE TRUMP?

Republicans will control the House and the Senate by narrow margins next year, giving them little room for error if they want to go along with Trump's proposal.

In the Senate, Trump allies like Florida Senator Rick Scott quickly signaled support while other Republicans have said they are reluctant to surrender such a significant power.
Incoming Senate Republican Leader John Thune has not ruled it out. "All options are on the table, including recess appointments," he said on Fox News on Nov. 14.

Republicans could warm to the idea if Democrats manage to block or slow down some of Trump's nominees next year. A recess appointment could allow them to avoid having to hold up-or-down votes on a divisive nominee like Kennedy, a former Democrat who has spread misinformation on vaccines and supports abortion rights.

In the House, Johnson, a close Trump ally, has not yet publicly said what he thinks of the idea. If he were to pursue it, he would have to keep nearly all of his fellow Republicans on board as he will likely start next year with a majority of fewer than three votes in the 435-seat chamber.

---

Thune says recess appointments are on the table. Excellent. Obama made 32 recess appointments, so we really don’t want to hear whatever democrats have to say about it. pic.twitter.com/Qo32OPE4x2

— T.J. Moe (@TJMoe28) November 15, 2024

WAR: @SpeakerJohnson has agreed to help Trump adjourn Congress to make his recess appointments. pic.twitter.com/YGW79NlS22

— @amuse (@amuse) November 18, 2024

Here is why @SpeakerJohnson is so confident in @mattgaetz's appointment: https://t.co/qsNU8eU71U

— @amuse (@amuse) November 17, 2024

Interestingly, that Breitbart piece does not mention the concurrence in the Canning case.

I'm still not convinced he doesn't get confirmed through the normal process…

Everything about the alleged "crime" seems to be dying down, without any leaks showing a smoking gun, lending more and more credence to the idea that this was just another convenient hit job by the establishment to try to marginalize someone who threatened their way of doing business in DC…

It's looking more and more similar to a "Steele Dossier" type scenario…

The Clinton Steele dossier of lies was exceptionally effective as a tool in particular in the Senate and House, though.

He could conceivably get to around 48 or 49 votes, imho, but that depends on the Dems really beclowning themselves questioning him (a plausible scenario to be sure), and then somehow he'd need to flip Cornyn and probably one or two more swamp intelligence committee types to vote for him to get to 50.

So yeah, you could be right, just tough for me to see it happening. What I don't want to see happen is for the DoJ to be rudderless/leaderless for 6+ months while the senate prevaricates about stuff as usual.

I am of the opinion that they have something concrete on a couple of Rs that they need for confirmation to be successful, and they will use that to leverage the votes…

FireAg said:

---

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 confirmation hearings will be must see TV. Anyone on the committee willing to call him a sex trafficker will have all their stock trades listed publicly. The committee chair will be banging his gavel as senators lose their minds. All the while MAGA will be burning up the phone lines and protesting in the Senators home towns.

lb3 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

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 confirmation hearings will be must see TV. Anyone on the committee willing to call him a sex trafficker will have all their stock trades listed publicly. The committee chair will be banging his gavel as senators lose their minds. All the while MAGA will be burning up the phone lines and protesting in the Senators home towns.

---

We've seen this one already with the Kavanaugh hearings.

rathAG05 said:

---

Understood, but you can't just act like this doesn't exist. It's a thing. And since it's a pretty big thing, he should demand that they present evidence and put the pressure on them. So far, he looks like he's kind of running from this.

---

Reminds me of the Anita Hill testimony. Which Joe Biden orchestrated. Bottom line is that these liberals lie.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Interestingly, that Breitbart piece does not mention the concurrence in the Canning case.

---

You're just yelling into the ether here sir. No one cares. But they should.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Interestingly, that Breitbart piece does not mention the concurrence in the Canning case.

---

OK, make it 8-1 against the concurrence then.

Logos Stick said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Interestingly, that Breitbart piece does not mention the concurrence in the Canning case.

---

OK, make it 8-1 against the concurrence then.

---

not quite.

ok, 5-4 against. my bad

so you believe it will be challenged if he does typical recess and SCOTUS will rule against?

It's a near certainty.

Logos Stick said:

---

ok, 5-4 against. my bad

---

do you even know what the Canning concurrence was? It appears you don't. nothing wrong with that, but you are just throwing up numbers without any basis.

Quote:

---

so you believe it will be challenged if he does typical recess and SCOTUS will rule against?

---

Absolutely.

In the Canning case, Scalia wrote in the concurrence that to be a recess appointment the vacancy must "happen during the Recess," ie, offices that become vacant during that intermission. He was joined by Alito, Roberts and Thomas.

So unless those 3 have a complete 180 change of opinion, thats 3 votes against.

Gorsuch, Kavanagh and Barrett are all Scalia fans, so you only need 2 of them to make 5.

But then consider the 3 liberals. You only need 2 of them to find any reason to go against Trump. Its a safe bet that happens.

But the kicker is, and what Trump knows, is that that probably doesn't matter.


Take his hypo:

Trump does a recess appointment of Gaetz.

SCOTUS says that the appointment violates the constitution.


What happens in the interim? Gaetz is still going to be essentially the attorney general. the lower courts are not going to issue an injunction saying he can't be in office.

Is it worth all this headache to the GOP? I say no.

Thats why I think Gaetz gets confirmed the traditional way. The threat of the whole thing blowing up only hurts republicans in thelong run.

This. People are always looking for shortcuts. It's rarely a good idea. Bring the nomination to the floor and vote up or down.