Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

wtmartinaggie said:

---

Bondi is okay with me.

---

Why? What has Bondi done specifically, other than wearing the title of state AG, that makes you believe she is capable of breaking up and rebuilding the DOJ from the ground up?

The only thing she has proven is that she won't go after Trump, which imo is terrible. Trump is not a saint and neither are those who work for him. The DOJ is there to provide oversight. All evidence says that's not going to happen with Bondi. I don't think it would have happened with Gaetz either, but he would have at least reformed the underbelly of the agency for future.

---

You mean other than holding a similar position at a smaller scale for 8 years in third largest state in the country? And a career as a prosecutor and private attorney surrounding that role? Vs a blowhard congressman with zero experience doing anything except sticking his face in front of the media 24/7? Is that a serious question?

---

It's an elected position. Lots of people hold positions. Completely meaningless. Kamala also held the position of a state AG of an even larger state.

I'll ask again slower. What has she done that makes her capable of reforming the agency?

---

Your question is basically "other than experience, what experience does she have." Kamala is a moron and a liberal, so of course she's terrible.

Can you let us know what experience Gaetz has that makes him capable of reforming an agency like that?

---

Gaetz is not the nom. Bondi is. What did she do during that time that makes you believe she will be able to reform the agency? Getting elected and holding the office is not qualifying experience. If this was just a run of the mill appointment without the context of the last 8 years, that would be enough.

It's ok to say "I can't point to anything".

---

She didn't just "get elected", she held the role for 8 years, managed 1300 employees, and brought numerous cases defending conservative values during her time there. Here's some more reading for you in case you don't know what a state attorney general does:

https://www.myfloridalegal.com/overview/role-and-function-of-the-attorney-general

If your opinion is that no one should be selected to reform the Justice Department who hasn't reformed the Justice Department then I'm not really sure what to tell you because that person doesn't exist. But since it seems like you're just trolling, we can probably all move on.

Ok so nothing relevant to the task ahead. By your logic, any former or current state AG that is an R with a few years in office would suffice.

Also, a strawman is a logical fallacy.

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok so nothing relevant to the task ahead. By your logic, any former or current state AG that is an R with a few years in office would suffice.

Also, a strawman is a logical fallacy.

---

You're right, any state attorney general with a record of protecting conservative values and strong leadership traits would be a logical choice as someone with potential to reform the Justice Department. A career politician who has no organizational management experience and no real accomplishments to speak of outside of being a media ***** would not be a logical choice. Hypothetically of course.

It's similar to the thinking that a minor league baseball player can be a logical choice to get promoted to the majors, but the team's bleacher report reporter wouldn't even if he's great at trolling the other team on twitter.

Trump would have to go out and find a new candidate.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok so nothing relevant to the task ahead. By your logic, any former or current state AG that is an R with a few years in office would suffice.

Also, a strawman is a logical fallacy.

---

You're right, any state attorney general with a record of protecting conservative values and strong leadership traits would be a logical choice as someone with potential to reform the Justice Department. A career politician who has no organizational management experience and no real accomplishments to speak of outside of being a media ***** would not be a logical choice. Hypothetically of course.

It's similar to the thinking that a minor league baseball player can be a logical choice to get promoted to the majors, but the team's bleacher report reporter wouldn't even if he's great at trolling the other team on twitter.

---

Sigh, this is not about Gaetz. He's out.

So like I said, any current or former state Republican AG with a few years of experience would be capable of the task ahead. Your argument is illogical but ok. Again, for the 100th time, this is not about business as usual. If it were, I'd agree, she's adequate. But you can't seem to get that through your head.

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok so nothing relevant to the task ahead. By your logic, any former or current state AG that is an R with a few years in office would suffice.

Also, a strawman is a logical fallacy.

---

You're right, any state attorney general with a record of protecting conservative values and strong leadership traits would be a logical choice as someone with potential to reform the Justice Department. A career politician who has no organizational management experience and no real accomplishments to speak of outside of being a media ***** would not be a logical choice. Hypothetically of course.

It's similar to the thinking that a minor league baseball player can be a logical choice to get promoted to the majors, but the team's bleacher report reporter wouldn't even if he's great at trolling the other team on twitter.

---

Sigh, this is not about Gaetz. He's out.

So like I said, any current or former state Republican AG with a few years of experience would he capable of the task ahead. Your argument is illogical but ok. Again, for the 100th time, this is not about business as usual. If it were, I'd agree. But you can't seem to get that through your head.

---

Yes, out of many potential candidate profiles, a former state attorney general who has experience protecting conservative values and the management skills to navigate large bureaucratic organizations would be a logical option.

How about you fill us in on whatever strange vague point you're attempting to make here - what's your preferred experience for the role? If this is not about Gaetz, who would your pick be?

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

wtmartinaggie said:

---

Bondi is okay with me.

---

Why? What has Bondi done specifically, other than wearing the title of state AG, that makes you believe she is capable of breaking up and rebuilding the DOJ from the ground up?

The only thing she has proven is that she won't go after Trump, which imo is terrible. Trump is not a saint and neither are those who work for him. The DOJ is there to provide oversight. All evidence says that's not going to happen with Bondi. I don't think it would have happened with Gaetz either, but he would have at least reformed the underbelly of the agency for future.

---

You mean other than holding a similar position at a smaller scale for 8 years in third largest state in the country? And a career as a prosecutor and private attorney surrounding that role? Vs a blowhard congressman with zero experience doing anything except sticking his face in front of the media 24/7? Is that a serious question?

---

It's an elected position. Lots of people hold positions. Completely meaningless. Kamala also held the position of a state AG of an even larger state.

I'll ask again slower. What has she done that makes her capable of reforming the agency?

---

Your question is basically "other than experience, what experience does she have." Kamala is a moron and a liberal, so of course she's terrible.

Can you let us know what experience Gaetz has that makes him capable of reforming an agency like that?

---

Gaetz does podcasts and does and says things to, "own the libs." For maga, what more qualifications would he need?

I mean, again, "own the libs."

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

wtmartinaggie said:

---

Bondi is okay with me.

---

Why? What has Bondi done specifically, other than wearing the title of state AG, that makes you believe she is capable of breaking up and rebuilding the DOJ from the ground up?

The only thing she has proven is that she won't go after Trump, which imo is terrible. Trump is not a saint and neither are those who work for him. The DOJ is there to provide oversight. All evidence says that's not going to happen with Bondi. I don't think it would have happened with Gaetz either, but he would have at least reformed the underbelly of the agency for future.

---

You mean other than holding a similar position at a smaller scale for 8 years in third largest state in the country? And a career as a prosecutor and private attorney surrounding that role? Vs a blowhard congressman with zero experience doing anything except sticking his face in front of the media 24/7? Is that a serious question?

---

It's an elected position. Lots of people hold positions. Completely meaningless. Kamala also held the position of a state AG of an even larger state.

I'll ask again slower. What has she done that makes her capable of reforming the agency?

---

Your question is basically "other than experience, what experience does she have." Kamala is a moron and a liberal, so of course she's terrible.

Can you let us know what experience Gaetz has that makes him capable of reforming an agency like that?

---

Gaetz is not the nom. Bondi is. What did she do during that time that makes you believe she will be able to reform the agency? Getting elected and holding the office is not qualifying experience. If this was just a run of the mill appointment without the context of the last 8 years, that would be enough.

It's ok to say "I can't point to anything".

---

How about because Trump nominated her? That was good enough for Gaetz. Should be good enough for her.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

wtmartinaggie said:

---

Bondi is okay with me.

---

Why? What has Bondi done specifically, other than wearing the title of state AG, that makes you believe she is capable of breaking up and rebuilding the DOJ from the ground up?

The only thing she has proven is that she won't go after Trump, which imo is terrible. Trump is not a saint and neither are those who work for him. The DOJ is there to provide oversight. All evidence says that's not going to happen with Bondi. I don't think it would have happened with Gaetz either, but he would have at least reformed the underbelly of the agency for future.

---

You mean other than holding a similar position at a smaller scale for 8 years in third largest state in the country? And a career as a prosecutor and private attorney surrounding that role? Vs a blowhard congressman with zero experience doing anything except sticking his face in front of the media 24/7? Is that a serious question?

---

It's an elected position. Lots of people hold positions. Completely meaningless. Kamala also held the position of a state AG of an even larger state.

I'll ask again slower. What has she done that makes her capable of reforming the agency?

---

Your question is basically "other than experience, what experience does she have." Kamala is a moron and a liberal, so of course she's terrible.

Can you let us know what experience Gaetz has that makes him capable of reforming an agency like that?

---

Gaetz is not the nom. Bondi is. What did she do during that time that makes you believe she will be able to reform the agency? Getting elected and holding the office is not qualifying experience. If this was just a run of the mill appointment without the context of the last 8 years, that would be enough.

It's ok to say "I can't point to anything".

---

How about because Trump nominated her? That was good enough for Gaetz. Should be good enough for her.

---

Trump's number 1 concern is himself. I agree that Bondi will not investigate any impropriety concerning Trump or his admin during her tenure. I'm not sure that is a good thing, but whatever.

So what I have been stating the last few days

most worrisome is when 'conservatives' throw away actual conservative beliefs to troll the other side

there is nothing elite about Gaetz-

as i mentioned he took daddy's money to party at Florida State, and was given a safe seat in Congress where he stabbed GOP leadership in the back as often as he could to grandstand for himself with no real plan.

we have MILLIONS of Republicans who are successful and intelligent without scandal- why don't we support them instead of the guys who pay coeds for orgies?

Someone needs to make sure they stop focusing on infiltrating the catholic church, going after people who pray baby killing clinics, people who took a selfie in a certain building four years ago, states like Texas for trying to secure the border because the feds refuse to do it, states like Virginia for trying to secure their elections, etc. and go after real criminals who have intentionally caused real harm to Americans, like Fauci and Mayorkas. Gaetz would have done that if he could get confirmed. Bondi better do that.

Logos Stick said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Gaetz is not the nom. Bondi is. What did she do during that time that makes you believe she will be able to reform the agency? Getting elected and holding the office is not qualifying experience. If this was just a run of the mill appointment without the context of the last 8 years, that would be enough.

It's ok to say "I can't point to anything".

---

How about because Trump nominated her? That was good enough for Gaetz. Should be good enough for her.

---

Trump's number 1 concern is himself. I agree that Bondi will not investigate any impropriety concerning Trump or his admin during her tenure. I'm not sure that is a good thing, but whatever.

---

Trump was investigated ad nauseum by the Dems for 8 years -- with lots of made up BS accusations -- so it's hard to believe there's something else still waiting to be revealed about evil Trump.

I simply want the rule of laws and facts to carry the day, but I'll admit I'm ready for serious investigations on Dems who clearly abused their government positions in a personal vendetta against Trump. And I don't really like Trump that much (I voted for him), but I can see foul play when it occurs, and the Dems are guilty as hell of it. They need to be held accountable.

Quote:

---

Gaetz would have done that if he could get confirmed.

---

All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok so nothing relevant to the task ahead. By your logic, any former or current state AG that is an R with a few years in office would suffice.

Also, a strawman is a logical fallacy.

---

You're right, any state attorney general with a record of protecting conservative values and strong leadership traits would be a logical choice as someone with potential to reform the Justice Department. A career politician who has no organizational management experience and no real accomplishments to speak of outside of being a media ***** would not be a logical choice. Hypothetically of course.

It's similar to the thinking that a minor league baseball player can be a logical choice to get promoted to the majors, but the team's bleacher report reporter wouldn't even if he's great at trolling the other team on twitter.

---

Sigh, this is not about Gaetz. He's out.

So like I said, any current or former state Republican AG with a few years of experience would he capable of the task ahead. Your argument is illogical but ok. Again, for the 100th time, this is not about business as usual. If it were, I'd agree. But you can't seem to get that through your head.

---

Yes, out of many potential candidate profiles, a former state attorney general who has experience protecting conservative values and the management skills to navigate large bureaucratic organizations would be a logical option.

How about you fill us in on whatever strange vague point you're attempting to make here - what's your preferred experience for the role? If this is not about Gaetz, who would your pick be?

---

Notice that Logos Stick ignored this. Clearly just trying to troll

BowSowy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok so nothing relevant to the task ahead. By your logic, any former or current state AG that is an R with a few years in office would suffice.

Also, a strawman is a logical fallacy.

---

You're right, any state attorney general with a record of protecting conservative values and strong leadership traits would be a logical choice as someone with potential to reform the Justice Department. A career politician who has no organizational management experience and no real accomplishments to speak of outside of being a media ***** would not be a logical choice. Hypothetically of course.

It's similar to the thinking that a minor league baseball player can be a logical choice to get promoted to the majors, but the team's bleacher report reporter wouldn't even if he's great at trolling the other team on twitter.

---

Sigh, this is not about Gaetz. He's out.

So like I said, any current or former state Republican AG with a few years of experience would he capable of the task ahead. Your argument is illogical but ok. Again, for the 100th time, this is not about business as usual. If it were, I'd agree. But you can't seem to get that through your head.

---

Yes, out of many potential candidate profiles, a former state attorney general who has experience protecting conservative values and the management skills to navigate large bureaucratic organizations would be a logical option.

How about you fill us in on whatever strange vague point you're attempting to make here - what's your preferred experience for the role? If this is not about Gaetz, who would your pick be?

---

Notice that Logos Stick ignored this. Clearly just trying to troll

---

No, I chose to not respond because I'm tired of beating my head against the wall. Walter would be willing to put Barr back in charge it seems. My pick was Gaetz but he's out. I don't have another pick. My guy lost. Your girl looks like she will win.

Do you have anything substantive to add or just a drive by ad hom?

Logos Stick said:

---

BowSowy said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ok so nothing relevant to the task ahead. By your logic, any former or current state AG that is an R with a few years in office would suffice.

Also, a strawman is a logical fallacy.

---

You're right, any state attorney general with a record of protecting conservative values and strong leadership traits would be a logical choice as someone with potential to reform the Justice Department. A career politician who has no organizational management experience and no real accomplishments to speak of outside of being a media ***** would not be a logical choice. Hypothetically of course.

It's similar to the thinking that a minor league baseball player can be a logical choice to get promoted to the majors, but the team's bleacher report reporter wouldn't even if he's great at trolling the other team on twitter.

---

Sigh, this is not about Gaetz. He's out.

So like I said, any current or former state Republican AG with a few years of experience would he capable of the task ahead. Your argument is illogical but ok. Again, for the 100th time, this is not about business as usual. If it were, I'd agree. But you can't seem to get that through your head.

---

Yes, out of many potential candidate profiles, a former state attorney general who has experience protecting conservative values and the management skills to navigate large bureaucratic organizations would be a logical option.

How about you fill us in on whatever strange vague point you're attempting to make here - what's your preferred experience for the role? If this is not about Gaetz, who would your pick be?

---

Notice that Logos Stick ignored this. Clearly just trying to troll

---

No, I chose to not respond because I'm tired of beating my head against the wall. Walter would be willing to put Barr back in charge it seems. My pick was Gaetz but he's out. I don't have another pick. My guy lost. Your girl looks like she will win.

Do you have anything substantive to add or just a drive by ad hom?

---

Ok so you wanted Gaetz, which we all already knew. What's your preferred experience for the role?

twk said:

---

I'm not terribly interested in the sex scandal angle that seems to be the focus of all the talk concerning Gaetz. What I am concerned about is his lack of experience. It's hard to find any real reporting on his experience, but this article from PolitiFact (a biased source, for sure), does seem to have the most complete run down. And what I see doesn't indicate to me that Gaetz is some kind of legal whiz kid. Here's the rundown:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/nov/15/is-matt-gaetz-accomplished-attorney-digging/

Quote:

---

He earned a law degree from the College of William & Mary in 2007 and was admitted into the Florida Bar in 2008. He worked for the law firm AnchorsGordon (previously known as Keefe, Anchors & Gordon) in Fort Walton Beach, Florida, which is part of the congressional district Gaetz represented.

To gauge the scope of Gaetz's legal career, we looked through court records for the Florida Bar; Fort Walton Beach's Okaloosa County and neighboring Walton County; MyFloridaCounty.com; and the legal websites Justia and CourtListener.

Messages left at Gaetz's former House office, Johnson's office, AnchorsGordon, and the Trump campaign and transition press office were not returned.

We found that Gaetz argued at least seven cases in his home county on a variety of matters; that he was 2-0 in appellate cases; that he's been delinquent on his bar dues but is current now; and that he received a critical letter from the bar but was not formally disciplined. He also had more than a dozen traffic-related charges, about half as a teenager and half after he became a lawyer.

Gaetz was the attorney of record in at least seven cases at the trial court level

From 2009 to 2016, Gaetz argued at least seven cases at the trial level in Okaloosa County. (For part of that time, Gaetz was serving in the Florida House, but working as a lawyer is not unusual for a legislator; Florida has a part-time Legislature, so it's common for legislators to keep day jobs.)

The seven cases in court records ranged widely in substance. In 2008, Gaetz represented two separate clients for speeding tickets. In 2009, he represented a local restaurant, the Crab Trap, in a workers' compensation case. That same year, he began representing a local aircraft maintenance company that was pursuing a negligence case.

Starting in 2009, he represented Okaloosa County in a civil case against the city of Valparaiso. In 2010, Gaetz represented a client over a money dispute of less than $15,000. And in 2016, he represented a client involved in a custody case.

We were unable to access a full list of cases in neighboring Walton County, but he also had at least one more case as the attorney of record in that jurisdiction.

Gaetz may also have worked on other cases for more senior lawyers at the firm without being noted as an attorney of record. Not everything a lawyer does ends up in court, so Gaetz was likely working on other clients' legal business outside of court cases during his time with the firm.

"Some junior lawyers do nothing but legal research, so Rep. Gaetz's record at the firm is not unusual," said Dave Aronberg, the state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, and a former Democratic state senator. "I knew Matt in the state legislature, but I never heard anything about his legal career."

Gaetz took two cases to appeal and won both times

In one case, plaintiffs James and Melanie Nipper appealed a trial court ruling barring them from operating a skydiving business on their 290-acre farm in Walton County. With Gaetz as the lead attorney, the appeals court announced that it was overruling the trial court in January 2017, around the time Gaetz was starting in the U.S. House.

In the other appeals case, Gaetz represented Suzanne Harris, who had sued Walton County for hiring an attorney without the public notification required under Florida's "sunshine" transparency law. Harris had won at the trial level and the appeals court upheld the decision. The case sprang from the county's actions during a controversial land purchase.

---

That's an incredibly slim resume for someone seeking to be Attorney General. If Gaetz had executive experience, maybe that would compensate for the lack of legal achievement, but his career as a legislator doesn't do that. I don't think the odds are very good that Gaetz is going to have the experience necessary to run out the problem folks while keeping the department on track to do the job it is required to do, especially considering the fact that one of the chief ways Democrats will try to stop Trump will be through litigation. Do you really want Matt Gaetz in charge of that litigation?

---

He would have been fine.

1) He is an attorney and knows the law.
2) He would not tolerate bs and undermining in the Trump admin
3) He drives the left bat sht crazy
4) He has a proven track record in Congress fighting against not only the Democrats, but also standing up to corruption in his own party.

Stop playing by the left's high credentialed deep state nonsense. Bringing in unexpected outsiders is what is needed - badly.

Trump had ZERO experience in government before being elected in 2016.

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

Gaetz would have done that if he could get confirmed.

---

All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

---

what "evidence" do you have that points to a Gaetz DOJ not going after real criminals like Fauci?

oh no said:

---

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

Gaetz would have done that if he could get confirmed.

---

All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

---

what "evidence" do you have that points to a Gaetz DOJ not going after real criminals like Fauci?

---

Simple: the next thing Gaetz accomplishes wi be the first. He isn't a footnote in the history of the Congresses he took part in.