President Trump's Cabinet

IMO, an excellent choice, but he'll never be approved.

 

These are people with a proven track record of getting things done. Not people whose qualifications are based on race or gender identity.

 

Not so sure about that. Repubs can point to the highly partisan and biased Garland as a precedence set by the Dems

peace to you

 

...the shadow government is cornered and going to 'fight for it's life' to keep him from that job.

I'd luv to see him get it.

[add]

Besides, I question if Senate repubs have the will or the guts to fight for his confirmation.

[add]

Gaetz Could Get Confirmed Without the Senate: How Recess Appointments Work

 

"Rubio is harmless because Trump is his own Secretary of State."

"Secretary of State under a Trump presidency is at best a ceremonial role."

 

Nope… not impressed

 

SOS runs the state dept and implements the POTUS agenda.

The rank and file will attempt to undermine every policy every chance. The SOD needs to be ready to fire everyone who “resists” DT agenda.

peace to you

 

"Your president may easily become king. Your Senate is so imperfectly constructed that your dearest rights may be sacrificed to what may be a small minority; and a very small minority may continue for ever unchangeably this government, altho horridly defective. Where are your checks in this government? Your strongholds will be in the hands of your enemies. It is on a supposition that your American governors shall be honest that all the good qualities of this government are founded; but its defective and imperfect construction puts it in their power to perpetrate the worst of mischiefs should they be bad men; and, sir, would not all the world, blame our distracted folly in resting our rights upon the contingency of our rulers being good or bad? Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men without a consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt.

If your American chief be a man of ambition and abilities, how easy is it for him to render himself absolute! The army is in his hands, and if he be a man of address, it will be attached to him, and it will be the subject of long meditation with him to seize the first auspicious moment to accomplish his design, and, sir, will the American spirit solely relieve you when this happens? I would rather infinitely–and I am sure most of this Convention are of the same opinion–have a king, lords, and commons, than a government so replete with such insupportable evils. If we make a king we may prescribe the rules by which he shall rule his people, and interpose such checks as shall prevent him from infringing them; but the president, in the field, at the head of his army, can prescribe the terms on which he shall reign master, so far that it will puzzle any American ever to get his neck from under the galling yoke. I can not with patience think of this idea. If ever he violate the laws, one of two things will happen: he will come at the head of the army to carry everything before him, or he will give bail, or do what Mr. Chief Justice will order him. If he be guilty, will not the recollection of his crimes teach him to make one bold push for the American throne? Will not the immense difference between being master of everything and being ignominiously tried and punished powerfully excite him to make this bold push? But, sir, where is the existing force to punish him? Can he not, at the head of his army, beat down every opposition? Away with your president! we shall have a king: the army will salute him monarch; your militia will leave you, and assist in making him king, and fight against you: and what have you to oppose this force? What will then become of you and your rights? Will not absolute despotism ensue?"

- excerpt from Patrick Henry's speech on June 5, 1788, to the Virginia Ratifying Convention

Rest at Liberty or Empire? - Patrick Henry's Red Hill

 

"Your president may easily become king. Your Senate is so imperfectly constructed that your dearest rights may be sacrificed to what may be a small minority; and a very small minority may continue for ever unchangeably this government, altho horridly defective. Where are your checks in this government? Your strongholds will be in the hands of your enemies. It is on a supposition that your American governors shall be honest that all the good qualities of this government are founded; but its defective and imperfect construction puts it in their power to perpetrate the worst of mischiefs should they be bad men; and, sir, would not all the world, blame our distracted folly in resting our rights upon the contingency of our rulers being good or bad? Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men without a consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt." - Patrick Henry

 

No, sir.

The American people - both MAGA and Progressives - are like ancient Israel when they rejected the rule of God and demanded a strong man - a king - to rule over them.

Both MAGA and Progressives have rejected the rule of the U.S. Constitution(as flawed as it was compared to the Articles of Confederation of 1781) and demanded a strong man - an overriding national government whose size, reach, scope, goes into every nook and cranny of American life - with a de facto king to oversee it.

And the blame belongs to all those folks who voted to reject the Articles of Confederation of 1781 and accept the Constitution.

One would have expected those folks to have reasoned through what would become of the Constitution and where it would eventually end up; but they failed to do so, and the United States has been and will continue to pay the price for their failure.