I Call Bull Shit On TSF's Plan To Recess Congress To Make Appointments

[gab13by13]

Yeah, I've seen the part of the Constitution that allows a president to recess Congress. What I don't see is any language that allows him to use the recess to bypass the confirmation process for fucking Secretary of Defense or Attorney General. The founders did not intend that clause of the Constitution to be used so that the president can install pro-Russian people who could never pass a security clearance.

This cannot be allowed to happen without a fight. Where are the Democrats saying what I am saying? Speak out Democrats, if need be take this to the Supreme Court and dare them to violate the Constitution again.

Where the fuck is the fight? All I hear is right wing talking points being bantered about. No it isn't a choice that nominees will be confirmed by the Senate or they will be installed by TSF during a recess session that he calls for the purpose of bypassing the confirmation process.

I am old enough to remember Ted Kennedy, The Lion of the Senate. We need more Nancy Pelosis and less Chuck Schumers.

Hey Congressional Democrats, TSF is planning to make Congress toothless, that's what dictators do, and by allowing him to appoint pro-Russian people into high positions it will enable that.

Fight for fucks sake, get on TV and get on his enemies list.

[Scrivener7]

1. King Charles I did that. It didn't end well for him.

[gab13by13]

3. I don't see enough push back to King Donald I

Our top cop treated him like a jay walker. When he gets "his people" installed it will be a generation or more before we abandon autocracy.

Dictators are removed by revolution or when they die.

[Scrivener7]

4. As you know, I've been watching him since the 80's. This is always how it goes with him.

It's ridiculous. But he has never, never, never been held to account. He shits all over people, and they fawn all over him. He takes away any dignity the people around him ever had, and they take it and pledge loyalty to him.

Those opposing him never think he will get away with what he eventually gets away with. Those opposing him always think there is something in the wings that will take him down. There is never anything in the wings.

I've never understood it and I never will.

But yes. He is fundamentally changing the structure of our government. The military purge is the most disturbing to me because it, too, has historic precedents that don't bode well.

[gab13by13]

7. 90% of white Evangelicals voted for someone

who raped little girls at Epstein's mansion. Lucky for Trump that Epstein hung himself twice.

[Sugarcoated]

39. Twice?

[Tickle]

59. It's a joke

Just like, 4 shots to the head, worst case of suicide I've ever seen

[Magoo48]

17. Yes, political Dems must resist in every way possible. That said,

without support from small business and large movements of individuals grassroots’ resistance we’re static. Many Dem congress critters are doin’ the undead shuffle. Show a little of that energy you muster on the campaign trail and at fundraisers. Come on Congress—Let’s goooooooooo, to the lines, onward………..
Is anyone coming?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

55. "Give me liberty or give me death" (or prison) that is my attitude.

If the colonists had the guts to do it, so should we.

[Tadpole Raisin]

2. He is so good at finding loopholes that make a process open to

malicious intervention. Laws without consequences (no ‘shall be punished by…’), norms which are toothless, and now even laws with consequences because of the immunity ruling.

He is not intelligent but he is crafty. He smells and goes after weakness and Congress critters are ripe for picking.

And unfortunately for us - sociopaths, many of whom are outwardly charming, attract each other and we are being inundated by them now.

[gab13by13]

5. Putin found an ally who is much smarter than Trump.

Musk didn't buy Twitter to make money. Musk and Putin bought Twitter to get Trump elected president, once that happened then Musk will be calling the shots for Putin and Trump will be allowed to play golf and grift.

Michael Cohen said it, Trump wants to be president so he can be the richest person in the world, Trump wants to be on a par with Putin and Musk. Putin and Musk used Trump as a useful idiot.

We unwashed Americans will suffer but the billionaire Americans will prosper as long as they are pro-Russian or Musk/Trump will just take their money.

[Scrivener7]

6. And I suspect he has Russian compromat on everyone he is elevating.

[gab13by13]

8. He must have some nasty shit on Lyndley Graham.

Everything Trump touches dies.

[Scrivener7]

9. And we know exactly when he dropped it on Graham. Graham went into that

golf game in 2017 one of his loudest critics. He came out of the game licking trumps nasty feet.

[Walleye]

10. Our enemies are always looking for loopholes in our democracy so they can defeat us. That's what Trump does.

[Shermann]

11. Republicans only whip out their pocket Constitutions in order to obstruct Democratic agendas. nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

12. Well, there is some precedent for SCOTUS rejection of recess appointments

It happened to Obama, but the rejection was based on not enough time passing before the recess appointments were made (it was just a few days, Trump can adjourn congress, wait a couple of weeks, then make his appointments, and we will see what this SCOTUS will do)

My work aournd for recess appointments requires Dems to threaten Johnson with a motion to vacate the chair if he tries to pass a resolution for adjournment, enabling Trump to invoke the adjournment clause, but it depends on retaining the rule that allows a single member to make a motion to vacate,

[gab13by13]

16. Many presidents have made recess appointments

Yes the SC has ruled that the Senate has to be off for 10 days before a president can make recess appointments.
Also, presidents have never used recess appointments for top level cabinet positions, they were always for lower level positions.

Trump wants to use the Constitution to adjourn both chambers of Congress. Trump wants to adjourn Congress for the express purpose of bypassing security clearance for high ranking cabinet positions.

The language in the Constitution that allows this states that the president can adjourn both chambers of Congress on extraordinary occasions and when there is a disagreement between the House and Senate on adjourning. I don't see this language allowing the president to be the one who adjourns or recesses Congress for the purpose of making appointments. Trump is deliberately creating the delay.

[Shrek]

66. He doesn't have to declare a purpose

The language allows him to adjourn the congressional session if the two houses can't agree on timing.

Obviously no one ever meant for Congress to manufacture a timing dispute for the express purpose of letting the President declare an adjournment, but I can see why they missed it. I get the sense that they expected common sense to prevail most of the time.

[Tadpole Raisin]

37. And who is going to suspend the action of the adjournment or TSF's appointments during

The adjournment pending SCOTUS or any other judicial body taking on a filing against his action?

Typical tRump - create the extraordinary circumstances that would then cause you to say we have to adjourn the House and Senate due to extraordinary circumstances.

It’s like the political version of perceptual illusions.

And I guess that means my question is rhetorical and also a perceptual illusion.

[JustAnotherGen]

13. Last i heard

Schumer is talking about election fraud being put to bed, and Jeffries is talking about working across the aisle. Basically, they are using Tip O'Neill's playbook. I guess they can't reach across the aisle and back in time to grab Thaddeus Steven's playbook.

[bottomofthehill]

14. Speaker ONeill had a 60 vote majority when he was working across the aisle

And way less radical House republicans.

[JustAnotherGen]

54. And Thaddeus Stevens

Stayed the course through one of the worst times in American history with far less. That's the point.

This is not the time to play kissy face. Tip had that advantage.

Stevens - none. He just knew the difference between good and evil, knew America could be better than evil - and proceeded from that point.

He'd be buddies with Corey Booker and Kamala Harris today.

[bottomofthehill]

56. Thaddeus Steven's ..... He had over 100 vote majority

As a committee chair as the southern states had left the union. There was a massive Republican Majority in the 1860’s as many of rhe slave holding states had left the union. Also, he was never the Speaker.

[JustAnotherGen]

60. It is values and backbone

You aren't getting this. As I suspect a lot of Democratic Party members aren't. As far as circles of black folks are concerned - we are being betrayed.

I'm 51 - after Harris? There won't be a Stevens in my lifetime in the Democratic Party. How quickly folks caved.

I will vote Democratic - but that's it.

Good luck getting white supremacists to vote for the party. if you hide us and pretend we don't matter -

You should be pretty successful!

[bottomofthehill]

15. It is clearly in the constitution, you can't use the I can't find it excuse, it is there.

Please read article section 2 clause 3 of the Constitution.

We have to deal with reality, the reality exists, how do we fight it? Maybe by reaching across the aisle to work with the republicans who control both Houses to bring the bodies back when the President Recesses them……

Clause 3 Senate Recess
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

[gab13by13]

19. What trump is doing is different language in the Constitution.

The language is a presidential power in the Constitution to adjourn both chambers of Congress on “extraordinary occasions” and when there is a disagreement between the House and Senate on adjourning.

Trump wants to use that language to create the delay. Congress would not be in recess otherwise, Trump wants to put Congress in adjournment to bypass the confirmation of top level cabinet positions.

Past presidents have appointed many people during recesses but no president has ever used a recess to bypass the confirmation process for top level cabinet positions.

Trump wants to put Congress into adjournment because of what extraordinary occasion?

[bottomofthehill]

25. This is the actual language from Article 2

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

[gab13by13]

28. Trump is settling a dispute about the time of adjournment,

Trump is creating the dispute by telling Congress to adjourn otherwise it would be in session. For crying out loud how obvious does it have to be? A new Congress is seated and off the bat Trump wants them to adjourn? Where is the disagreement that Trump is settling?

Trump is creating the delay and then using that delay to claim he needs to appoint his cabinet.

Many presidents have used recess appointments to staff various departments but never has a president used a recess appointment to appoint a high ranking cabinet official to bypass the confirmation process. It was never done.

How many times has a president adjourned Congress for an extraordinary reason and what is extraordinary about confirming his cabinet?

[onenote]

50. The disagreement will be manufactured by the House voting to adjourn and the Senate disagreeing.

That opens the door for the president to step in per Article II, Section 3.

For that matter, why do folks assume the Senate won't adjourn for a period to allow recess appointments? Hell, it seems a lot of DUers assume that the repub congress will go along with everything Trump proposes, so why not that?

[tritsofme]

57. The motion to adjourn is subject to filibuster.

[bottomofthehill]

63. Not in the House, which will set up the disagreement for POTUS to step in.

[onenote]

64. Yep. And motions to adjourn the Senate are not debatable nor may they be filibustered.

https://www.legislativeprocedure.com/blog/2020/5/21/a-primer-on-adjournment

I'm not saying it necessarily will play out this way, but the House can set the table and either force the Senate to go along or to disagree and put Trump in a position where he could try to invoke Article II, Section 3.

[Blappy]

27. Does anyone know if Senate rules

allow for filibustering (physically standing and speaking) if a motion to adjourn comes up? I'm thinking that, in the event an adjournment is proposed for this purpose, the Dem senators refuse to yield. If the fascists physically force them off the floor, maybe people would wake the fuck up about these thugs. Presuming, of course, that the news is allowed to report such circumstances. Can a filibuster prevent an adjournment, or is a simple motion to 'suspend the rules' sufficient? We'll see how long the filibuster rules apply, probably not for long...

[bottomofthehill]

31. A motion to adjourn once called can not be filibustered.

It is a privileged resolution. It would have to be filibustered prior to its request

[FBaggins]

45. That doesn't apply here

A motion to adjourn is just for one chamber… this has to be a joint resolution between the two chambers - and is subject to filibuster

[bottomofthehill]

48. Under Senate rules, I believe it does make a difference.

When the senate adjourns, it adjourns to a date certain, if the chair were to say, the senate adjourns until noon tomorrow Jan 21 2025, vrs the senate adjourns until 12 noon on Feb 1 2025 there is a lot of difference. It would give the president under a previous supreme court decision, the ability to recess appointment….. it would be really ugly, but Trump cares less about ugly. He cares about results. Many are too stupid to care about results ( I am pointing at Dearborn and the Teamsters as 2 that helped make this bed) and this is how we end up sleeping in shit.

[FBaggins]

49. This all presumes a conflict between Trump and senate republicans

That he can get around them with a recess appt…


… the problem with that theory is that they hold the trump card (pun intended). They can just vote down the nominees they don’t like.

[TheKentuckian]

53. We know it is bullshit. That does not mean it cannot be done within the law.

The check is Congress not going along with the plan because all this crap is a bunch of "Gentleman's Agreements" otherwise.

The courts even when just have little choice but to rule it either an internal Congressional matter or a dispute that the Executive and Legislative branch have to at least try to resolve any differences on.
When they are also in the tank too, they are a hail mary at best and won't buck a right wing Unitary Executive when the authority is clear no matter how utterly bogus and of clear malicious intent.

[Raven123]

23. So it sounds like the answer is don't recess.

[Takket]

18. I don't think a fight is needed

From the sounds of it the rethugs are already doing straw polls on how they will vote for nominees which indicates to me they don’t plan on going along with the recess.

[gab13by13]

20. I am saying that Trump hasn't the proper reason for his adjournment of Congress.

a presidential power in the Constitution to adjourn both chambers of Congress on “extraordinary occasions” and when there is a disagreement between the House and Senate on adjourning. That is what it says about a president adjourning Congress.

That should not allow Trump to be the one adjourning Congress. If Congress votes to adjourn or recess then fine, wait 10 days and Trump can try to bypass the confirmation process.

[speak easy]

30. Speaker Johnson will adjourn the House.

Done deal.

[bottomofthehill]

32. Thank you, my point which is why it was bolded.

[speak easy]

35. "which is why it was bolded"

Exactly right. The wording could not be more clear.

[gab13by13]

38. Your bolded sentence

has nothing to do with Congress adjourning or going on recess, it has to do with why the president can adjourn Congress, which is what I disagree with.

[speak easy]

44. The House votes to adjourn for X days. ; The Senate does not.

"in Case of Disagreement between [the House and the Senate] with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, [the President] may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper"

QED

[CincyDem]

21. Senate doesn't have to do anything if the house adjourns.

[bottomofthehill]

42. It actually does under the Constitution, both Houses have to agree

Article I, Section 5, Clause 4:

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

[womanofthehills]

67. Wow!!! Matt Gaetz going after R's who aren't in line

Gaetz picked for a reason. Hit list of Republicans who disagree. Walking halls - pointing to doors & releasing info on those who disagree. Amazing!!!!!

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

[oldmanlynn]

22. Trump can't make any appointments until he's president which would be like January 20 so there's nothing he can do until

[Emile]

24. Exactly

[Hugin]

26. "Where the fuck is the fight?"

I’ve been asking myself that for years.

[bluestarone]

29. Extreme EVIL has taken over this country (world?) As i've stated before, what's going on is very comparable to

The Left Behind movie! Check that out. I swear that's where we are at.

[jaxexpat]

33. You got it right there, old boy. But you don't expect lame ducks and "live to fight another day" folks to act in time...

do you? Folks with full bellies and warm feet will never inconvenience themselves or place their comfort in jeopardy for something so vague as justice under the law or their own representative government.

No matter the criticality of the situation or the urgency of the moment, they will sit and tut-tut or pooh-pooh (maybe even fume or get all teared up). They'd happily have their attorney sue somebody. But too actually say or do something meaningful and see it to its end? Nope. Not the stuff for logic challenged and myopic arm-chair warriors sat in their snuggly throw. Besides, what judge would sign the warrants?

[kirby]

34. The inability to perform recess appointments is by agreement...

Under Democratic and Republican presidents, there has been bipartisan agreement that the Senate would not officially recess for more than a set number of days, thereby blocking the president from making unilateral “recess appointments.”

In 2014, the Supreme Court, in its decision National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, invalidated three of President Barack Obama’s recess appointments and set a standard that future recess appointments could not happen during a recess less than 10 days in duration. This led to a bipartisan process of regular “pro forma” sessions, following the specifics of Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution, which says that “Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.”

[gab13by13]

40. The Supreme Court said that presidents can't do recess appointments

until after the Senate has been adjourned for 10 days. Magats will not do "pro forma" sessions to keep Congress open.

My gripe is that Trump cannot adjourn Congress.

[kirby]

47. Does not appear to be true...

"My gripe is that Trump cannot adjourn Congress."

If the House and Senate disagree on adjournment, the President can adjourn Congress.

[mwooldri]

36. Can a minority party keep Congress out of recess?

My understanding is now the Senate gavels in and out every few days so they are technically never in recess. Can a minority party do this? Or could DJT whip things up so that the House says it's in recess but Senate say no and DJT just says "y'all in recess, go home"?

[gab13by13]

41. If the president is a Democrat

and the Senate is controlled by Republicans, then Republicans do "pro forma" sessions where one member comes in and gavels the session open but nothing else is done. Keeping the Senate in session prevents the Democratic president from making recess appointments.

[BumRushDaShow]

46. They have been doing "Pro-Forma" sessions since 2005

after Shrub recess-appointed Bolton to be U.N. Ambassador, pissing them off royally. And this has happened ever since, regardless of who was "President".

Name me one "recess appointment" done under 45 between 2017 - 2020.

[patphil]

43. I don't know why the Senate would be willing to give away it's power.

Confirming appointments is one of the Senate's primary functions. If the Republican leadership in the Senate is unwilling to do it's job in this respect, then it's time to replace those Senators with one's who will.
What other powers of the Legislative Branch will Trump attempt to seize from a compliant Congress?
The more power they cede to the President, the less they are able to effectively use as an "equal" branch of the government. Eventually the Legislative Branch could become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Executive Branch.

[Voltaire2]

51. I'm not convinced the courts will stand in his way.

In fact the opposite is more likely.

[JustAnotherGen]

61. ITA

The wheels fell off the bus.

[in2herbs]

52. IMO the recess appt discussion is moot. Come January there will be no need for

recess appointments because the Rs will rubber stamp tfg's nominations and they have the majority to do it. Everything tfg wants will be in place by Jan.20.

If you believe that there are some Rs who will vote against tfg's wishes and deny him his nominations you need to up your medications.

[ForgedCrank]

58. I think

I'm going to disagree on this one. Of all the BS doom predictions flying around, this is one thing that I believe he will actually try to pull off. This has been used plenty of times in the past by others, but I have to admit that I don't know the rules surrounding the process.

[John Shaft]

62. If every American who doesn't support this calls the FBI to register as an "internal enemy"

that might get media attention. But it'd have to be 10 of millions doing it in a short period of time.

At my age, the only defenses I have is to stay away from mixed company and keep a shotgun near me in case they ever bring it to my door. I'm prepared to die. No one is ever ready. But I am cool with it.

I've been outside the mainstream my whole life. This ain't my circus, these ain't my monkeys. Welcome to the rest of "US" other folk, America, you're one of us now.

But to answer your question: NO. They will do whatever they please with the consent of the Extreme Court. It's over. But I get it. There is nothing that can prepare MOST people for what is about to happen.

We are in abuser territory where all the words are rape words and everything is "WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT."

[Jit423]

65. Get on FOX and Rogan and fight! Otherwise half the country will not know what is actually happening.

We also need a few bots on X to tell the story of what is going on.

And for god's sake, Dems get those court vacancies filled NOW!!