Anonymous wrote:Good lord. Trump is setting such a low bar. Even the rationalizations of these last couple of posts, "well, yeah, she stole a dog, but at least she didn't shoot it" and "well yeah, she's in the pocket of foreign interests, but at least she didn't lie about it."
Please, Republicans, just stop this insanity already. I'm sure there are literally hundreds of excellent AG picks and Cabinet picks far better than this parade of misfits that Trump is waltzing out from behind the curtain.
Anonymous wrote:Y’all going to wish it was still Gaetz.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s about time we had a hot AG
I'll just go for one that doesn't weaponize the DOJ.
Garland has been a joke. So glad he did not make it to SCOTUS.
For as many things as I hate The Turdle about, him keeping Garland off the court goes a long ways in his favor.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s about time we had a hot AG
I'll just go for one that doesn't weaponize the DOJ.
Garland has been a joke. So glad he did not make it to SCOTUS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think the qualifications for DOJ nominee need to be:
NOT from Florida
NOT having ever representing Trump in a legal matter. Isn't that as blatant a conflict of interest as it could possibly be? Not only that, it was in one of his impeachment trials (although of course she didn't have to actually do anything.)
NOT have skeletons pertaining to dogs or sex.
NOT have a law degree from the school ranked 98th.
No, that’s just a list of cheap attacks at Pam Bondi. Can you give the name of one Republican you would support or at least tolerate for AG? If not, that puts your attacks on Bondi in context.
Crickets
I knew you couldn’t provide a name. You would lob silly attacks at whomever Trump appoints.
Anonymous wrote:I had no idea that there were legions of people who share Trump’s “values.”
They are, apparently, under every rock.
Anonymous wrote:It’s about time we had a hot AG
Anonymous wrote:I think the qualifications for DOJ nominee need to be:
NOT from Florida
NOT having ever representing Trump in a legal matter. Isn't that as blatant a conflict of interest as it could possibly be? Not only that, it was in one of his impeachment trials (although of course she didn't have to actually do anything.)
NOT have skeletons pertaining to dogs or sex.
NOT have a law degree from the school ranked 98th.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Trump is making a mockery of this position. Two very unserious candidates whose main qualification is loyalty.
I’m not going to get anyone I actually like. But Bondi ran the Justice Department in a large state so she’s definitely qualified, and she hasn’t totally disrupted her workplace or been credibly accused of sexual misconduct with teenagers, so this is going to have to do.
She did a quid pro quo though. I’m not ready to settle.
So who would you like Trump to appoint?
Someone professional, ethical, and apolitical. Someone who isn’t interested in being on tv. Someone calm, thoughtful, and serious who takes public service and law and order seriously.
Anonymous wrote:The other thing besides sexual misconduct allegations that’s bringing so many of Trump’s nominees together: bad stories about dogs.
https://www.businessinsider.com/rnc-speaker-pam-bondi-custody-battle-dog-with-katrina-victims-2020-8