There is still much discourse about Donald Trump bypassing the Senate confirmation process via recess appointments. And I still don't get it. Neither house can adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other, and the Supreme Court says you need to be adjourned at least ten days for it to count as a recess. So Senate and House would both have to agree to adjourn for three weeks or so.
Or, according to the latest cockamamie theory, they could agree to disagree. Instead of agreeing to adjournment, they'll deliberately disagree and then Trump will use his Article II power to step in and adjourn Congress himself.
This is starting to sound like a conservative version of the trillion-dollar coin. If both Houses are planning to cave to Trump, why would they concoct a weird plan to disagree instead of just adjourning? That doesn't make sense.
Bottom line: This can only happen if both houses agree to adjourn for a considerable time right at the beginning of the session. What are the odds of that?
And anyway, this only matters with a nominee that the Senate doesn't want to confirm. But if they're willing to defy Trump by not confirming, why would they then cave to Trump and go into recess so he can do it himself? And if they aren't willing to do that, would the House really be willing to provoke the Senate by adjourning on its own and causing a constitutional crisis?
And would the Supreme Court allow such an obviously bogus use of the recess appointment power? Even the court's conservatives haven't been very open to that kind of thing.
Unless I hear something that makes sense—even by the loose standards of Donald Trump—I'm sticking to my guns on this. The Senate goes into session on January 3 and the first recess doesn't come until August. End of story.
Article 3, Section II, the President can adjourn Congress
You're thinking about this backwards.
If there are nominees the Senate doesn't want to confirm, but they don't want to take the flak of defying Trump and getting death threats, they can just adjourn for a couple weeks and let him make his recess appointments. This would provide a very convenient shield to a few people who have the 2026 cycle to think about, especially Thom Tillis.
Basically it allows Trump just jam in the full roster for all 1300 positions that Project 2025 claims to have ready to go, and it lets the Senate do that while not needing to take responsibility. No hearings where Matt Gaetz and Tulsi Gabbard come across as crazy nutjobs and are confirmed anyway by supposed moderates, nothing like that. Every Republican can just point to Trump and say "We trust President Trump to make the right decisions" and wash their hands of it.
...and there it is in a nutshell, Murc. You're absolutely right. Not only do those wimps not have to defy Trump, but they also don't have to explain themselves to their constituencies, some of whom are in places like the plains states, where they still take themselves somewhat seriously.
This way, those Senators have "plausible deniability." The "plausible" part is a stretch, but that is what they can claim.
A good portion of their constituents are gullible fools. There's not too much to fear about them. Dollars to donuts their constituents will find a way to blame the Democrats.
Even if the Senate wants to defy Trump. Can't the House then decide to adjourn, and when the Senate doesn't want to, Trump can adjourn both? Or am I missing something?
Yes. That's the point.
Yeah, no hearings no time taken to vote for recess appointments.
So basically you're saying our Consitution has holes anyone could drive a truck through. That can't be good.
It’s the holes that attract quality people like Trump, Gaetz, Hegreth, Gabbard.
We've seen nothing yet. Wait till he appoints his horse consul.
I think Trump is holding the horse out for the Supreme Court.
It wasn't until a rank opportunist and unethical con man got elected... again.
I think you mean Article 2, Section III (Article 3 is all about the judicial branch).
But even so, Art.2 Sec.III doesn't grant the president the power to adjourn Congress; here's the relevant language:
"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" (emphasis added)
It's only if the House and the Senate disagree on the very specific question of when to adjourn that the president can adjourn them. That's not at all likely to occur (esp. with the same party controlling both houses) (and double esp. as a strategy by the president again of the same party to force recess appointments).
Look, this whole thing is spun up out of Trump tweeting something stupid about recess apointments. He doesn't know what recess appointments are, and doesn't seem to realize that Congress will be in session when he takes office. It's vanishingly unlikely that Trump (a) had some secret strategy to force recess appointments despite what the Senate might say, and (b) nonetheless decided to reveal that secret strategy in a tweet.
Trump's razor should be our guide: the stupidest explanation (i.e., Trump just said some nonsese because he's an idiot and doesn't know wtf he's talking about) is probably correct, and we shouldn't be getting in a tizzy about recess appointments and should instead be focusing on how goddamn awful his actual non-recess appointees are, and convincing our Senators to block them.
I'm not worried about Trump. He's a moron. But the people whispering in his ear, those I fear. They aren't morons, and they are as unethical and immoral as he is if not worse. They will convince him he can do whatever they tell him he can do. He would even disregard the Constitution if the moron whisperers convince him its not only necessary but proper. He will only get away with what the GOP allows him to. The question is will they exercise their right and duty as a separate branch of government and act as a check on a reckless executive? Or will they roll over and make Trump a defacto dictator? My gut tells me the latter.
Though this might give them the chance to do what they refused to do in his first term. Impeach and convict him. They'll have a more compliant POTUS in Vance than was ever possible wirh Trump. But that's a whole other can of worms ain't it?
I doubt that Vance would be more compliant.
And whereas Trump blusters and his ADD causes him to become bored and head for the golf course, Vance will be vicious, ruthless, and single-minded in consolidating his power.
Plus, the more time Vance is scheming, the less time he has to explain away not sleeping with his wife.
"But the people whispering in his ear, those I fear. They aren't morons"
True, probably, but if the people around him are whispering in his ear "Pick Gaetz for AG! Pick a couple of nobody backbenchers for UN Ambassador and EPA Admin!", then they aren't likely to be furthering some master plan. Just a lot of chaotic and stupid damage.
"The chaos is the point."
-- Adam Serwer's dictum, updated for trump part deux.
"Trump's razor": I'm stealing that.
Josh Marshall over at TPM deserves the ultimate credit for coming up with it, I'm pretty sure, and he'd like seeing people use it
Agreed--I certainly can't claim credit, and am glad that Marshall came up with it!
"It's vanishingly unlikely that Trump (a) had some secret strategy"
Of course trump himself didn't, he's a first-order ignoramous; it's something he was told about in his first term and obviously again now by people who live to find loopholes and misinterpretations that will let him do whatever the hell he wants.
IMO it's either these people's intimidation tactic to get the senate to approve nominees who are very obviously no better suited for these jobs than your average random kindergartener by threatening to use a procedure that's colorably possible, or it's an actual threat to use that procedure if the senate balks. Either way trump means it as dominance, and I think that's a decent trump's razor reading too.
Why it matters to me is that it shows that trump really has thrown away all potential limits on his dominance. The nominations themselves are rubbing everyone's faces in the plates of shit he's serving up; he's the dominant gorilla in the clearing, pounding his chest and roaring and stomping and getting his way. He has Thune in a vise because the recess threat is plausible enough that the court won't do anything to question it-- a big part of the discussion in this thread has been about whether it is in fact plausible and if so how, and really all it takes is a little connivance by Johnson-- and the point of that tweet was to tell the world "I'm King Kong and nothing and nobody stops me," not even people who are on his side. In fact, least of all people who are on his side. That's information we're probably better off knowing sooner rather than later, in my view.
“the Supreme Court says”
Now there’s a house built on shifting sand.
"And anyway, this only matters with a nominee that the Senate doesn't want to confirm."
...or nominees who would rather avoid confirmation hearings altogether.
He can get that without recess appointments. Nothing in the constitution requires the Senate to hold hearings.
Yeah, but they still have to vote. R Senators are in a real quandry. They want to be ballless, supine toadies and let Trump appoint whatever idiot trolls he wants to shit all over their agencies, but don't want to be *too* public about it by having to register a vote. So just adjourn and pretend it didn't happen.
Let's be clear, as long as Republicans run all three branches, there are no checks, no balances, no guardrails. Nothing. We've got more or less a dictator beginning Jan. 20. Buckle your seatbelts.
Media: why was Secretary Shithead allowed to “accidentally” nuke Illinois?
Senator Supine Toady (R-Ballless): I don’t know. I certainly didn’t vote to confirm him. Check the record: he was recess appointed.
Media: ah you’re correct, zero pinocchios and sorry to have wasted your time.
+1
Matt Gaetz on line one.
Right?
Gaetz just took the highly unusual step of resigning his congressional seat before he was even confirmed. Which means the congressional ethics investigation into his pedophilic tendencies is suddenly closed.
So my tinfoil theory is that Gaetz will not be confirmed as AG, and probably never really intended to be. This just gives him cover to shut down the ethics thing without looking like he's just shutting down the ethics thing.
And what's in it for Trump? When he withdraws Goetz's name and then nominates another nutjob, that one probably won't look so bad when compared to Gaetz. The skids will be pre-greased.
But that leaves him without a position from which he can grift and create chaos.
Presumably it means that the report is bad enough that making it public would make his position even worse.
Nah, he runs for Rubio’s seat or for governor, and says, “All those bogus investigations were dropped.”
"And what's in it for Trump? When he withdraws Goetz's name and then nominates another nutjob, that one probably won't look so bad when compared to Gaetz. The skids will be pre-greased."
We need to stop doing this. Just because Trump does a stupid, stupid thing should not get us jumping up and down speculating how this is actually some sort of secret careful strategy to help Trump achieve his real goal. It is never advantageous to nominate a loon to incredibly important government posts; it's even less advantageous to do it multiple times at once. That's the reality: Trump is shooting himself in the foot here.
And it's not just us doing this--the NYtimes ran a banner headline declaring Trump's coocoo-nonsense nominations to be a "power move."
We're not going to get through the next 4 years if we keep ascribing not just competence but strength and strategy to every damn fool thing that Trump does.
He could have just resigned. I don’t think he's so concerned with appearances. Unless he plans on running for public office again. But it seems to me that being AG, having the opportunity of persecuting people who he perceived as having wronged him and Trump would be one he couldn't pass up.
Trump ran to avoid prison. Now that he is elected, he will use his power to punish his enemies.
Gaetz is a problem for any speaker trying to control the House.
Getting him out of the picture helps keep things moving for the Reps.
I can totally see a conversation where Trump tells Johnson that he needs the House to move fast and do what he asks. Johnson says "Get rid of Gaetz and I'm in".
this only matters with a nominee that the Senate doesn't want to confirm. But if they're willing to defy Trump by not confirming, why would they then cave to Trump and go into recess so he can do it himself?
This is the part I don't quite get, either: if he can get Congress to do as he wishes with respect to recesses, can't he get the Senate to shotgun formal appointments through without hearings? There is no constitutional requirement for the latter. Wouldn't it make more sense for him to simply send the names to the Senate, and have his GOP lackeys simply rubber stamp them? That way they can serve all four years if need be.
The requirement for committee hearings and approval, and then full senate confirmation, isn't in the constitution but I'm pretty sure it *is* in the senate rules. To confirm without the hearings etc they'd have to explicitly change the rules, which would be every bit as embarrassing a concession to a pack of laughably ridiculous nominees as having hearings and taking two levels of votes on them. As in "We had to change the rules so nobody could see what asshats they all are."
OTOH acceding on recess appointments would let them pass the buck and minimize the embarrassment, as Murc says above-- the senators could all point the finger at Thune if they needed to, and he could pin it all on trump by expressing his full confidence in the Dear Leader's judgment and talking about how urgent it is to get quick confirmation instead of putting the country through some long drawn-out process-- the process that Thune himself would control but never mind that. In fact I'd bet dollars to donuts that I just wrote the press releases for that option.
Serve all four years? Seriously? No trump appointee will do that. I can't think of any who did in the first term, and he's going to be much more impossible to work for this time. I'm willing to bet that many of these people will be 10-Scaramucci wonders.
If Lickspittle Scott was the Senate Magajority leader then I think your rubber stamp idea would work. I don't think Thune goes along with the rubber stamp.
Something tells me that Trump wants these appointments quickly, almost like they are emergencies or something. Normal hearings and such take too long or something.
Simplest explanation: he wants to start terrorising politicians before the 2026 elections.
Being a dictator might have to be delayed if he can't get his horrible choices appointed fast enough. It might start on day 2. And Trump simply can't have that
Have you seen the nut jobs he wants to appoint? Doing it in recess allows him to get what he wants without forcing senators into laughable confirmation votes. Win win (and we lose)
You can't get much worse than Matt Gaetz for A.G.
Sure you can: Tulsi Gabbard as DNI. Trump is putting a Russian asset in control of all of the classified information.
1. Senate adjourns for a day.
2. Trump makes a bunch of recess appointments.
3. Democrats scream he can't do that.
4. New appointees fire anyone in their agencies who questions their authority.
5. Various parties commence legal proceedings which will end up before the Supreme Court in about five years time.
And the news continues to report that Trump has 'no idea' what is in Project 2025, didn't approve of its writing, and it has nothing to do with what he's doing...
Only
1. The adjournment would have to last much longer than a day.
2. Firing agency employees hamstrings the ability of appointees to do things.
3. Legal proceedings can put stays on actions until they're fully adjudicated. Which happened a lot the last time Trump was president.
Apparently you're unfamiliar with Project 2025. Firing thousands of public servants is exactly what is envisaged. Plus firing thousands of employees in departments like HHS and Education might be the only thing appointees want to do.
Trump will be far more inclined this time around to defy court orders that prevent him doing what he wants. Who's going to enforce them, the Matt Gaetz DOJ?
I agree with Murc-- the point of recess appointments, if you're a senator, is to avoid having any of your fingerprints on these appointees' getting through. Secondarily of course it's to avoid as much as possible letting the public see anything potentially negative about these people. Which, considering who they are, would be just about any information at all.
A potential pitfall with the recess-appointment scenario is that the trump cinematic universe plan for big swift action right off the bat requires some of it to be done by congress, I believe. That makes the timing of legislating and recessing pretty tricky, and we might have additional wrinkles in the House if the Rs end up with fewer than at least 221 seats. But the best minds in MAGA-land are working on this problem and I'm sure they'll find a way through (/s).
So making recess appointments is something both the R senate and the trump people would probably be conspiring to make happen. Johnson would likely be happy to oblige, and his agreement would be the cleanest way to make recess appointments happen. But a) he may have two or three stiff-necked members who'd have trouble about that, and/or b) he may face an interval where he's vacated out of the speakership temporarily. So pulling this off isn't a lead-pipe cinch-- anywhere from "decent chance" to highly likely, but not certain.
A big negative of doing it that way is that it could have a dubious look as far as Wall Street is concerned. Ordinarily that would rule it out of bounds for Rs but of course all bets are off where trump is concerned.
The TCU needs ILM to make this look like anything other than a shitshow. But his base won't even notice.
I need to go back and re-read Apostles of Disunion.
Have any idea what Mary Peltola's chances are of holding her seat?
Her campaign texts (that I didn't sign up for but they got my cell number somehow) are saying the chances are good. They have ranked-choice voting, and apparently the late ballots coming in are largely from native areas where she's done well. I hope that's right.
TCU? ILM? Can I ask for a translation?
Trump Cinematic Universe
Industrial Light and Magic
Ah, gotcha. Thanks
I don't think she can win until rank choice comes into play. She would need 97%+ of the outstanding votes. Just not certain how the John Wayne Howe ranked choice voters are going to go. I think I understand late Roman Republic politics better than Alaska politics.
Her winning should limit the majority to 220. And as I mentioned before, losing some of those to cabaret appointments might allow for some shenanigans.
Katie Porter's very tight district managed to stay blue, and if a headline I glanced at is accurate, apparently an Oregon district was declared today for the D, a flip.
Alaska's system is apparently simple conceptually but kind of complex in practice and IIRC isn't supposed to have a result until next week sometime. Depending how many candidates run, it can go through several rounds of vote re-allocation until one of them gets a majority.
Last I saw, the Undead's plans were to sublimate something like 6 or even 9 appointees from the R House ranks, so there could be a shitshow for the ages there. I'm sure it's spite talking but I really want Jeffries to be merciless.
"...go through several rounds of vote re-allocation until one of them gets a majority."
That would take only few seconds on a modern abacus.
Maybe send one to Alaska Secretary of State, then?
Crazy is a feature, not a bug.
I thought recess appointments have limited lifetimes--that is, they'd have to be confirmed during the next Congressional session or lose their position.
That's right. They will all be temporary until January 3, 2027.
That's still a lot of time to do plenty of damage.
As if any of them will last 2 whole years.
His Temporaries didn't leave even then last time (though few lasted that long)
MEOOOOOW...what do you expect from a elected convicted felon whore monger. All he is, is a con man, you elected him president !!! Now live with your decision!!! KITTIES KNOW.
Based on his first term and his statements in the years after failing to overthrow the US government, we should expect many attempts to bend the will of Congress and the Supreme Court.
The Biden DOJ already bent the knee and current members of congress and the Court have sent a lot of signals that they are eager to show obedience to Great Leader Donald.....so it shouldnt be confusing that Trump is signaling how he wants to legally end Democracy. One small step at a time. It will go better if he can get congress and the court onboard early.
The insurrection was a misstep, it took Congress and other GOP leaders a few weeks to figure out they needed to show deference. Better signaling in advance is important.
I am surprised at all this surprise....This is what the US Citizens voted for!
Tear out the wires, rip off the tires, run this baby on the rims!
This is what Trump is doing, There should be no surprise.
*******
I think I myself have been wrong on the Deportation Issues...I have argued that even a substantial start was impossible....but again, I think I have been wrong, the Trump Administration may actually try this in a big way. Traveller
The MAGA base absolutely wants Trump to be a dictator forever. It's their idea of paradise. I sense, however, that a lot of the voters who crossed over to vote for Trump this time around quite frankly have no idea what they voted for. If you look at exit interviews and focus groups, people are absolutely fucking clueless about everything, from who was responsible for overturning Roe to thinking Trump would somehow save the Palestinians and make eggs and houses cheap again. So I agree Trump will go full bore at deporting undocumented people (including their US citizen spouses and children) and we'll see how many folks sit up and go "hey, we didn't think he was seriously going to do that!" and start pitching a fit. Of course the problem is, by the time you realize you voted for dictatorship, it's usually too late to do anything about it.
People were warned. People didn't care.
That recent discussion with Gen Z voters in TFNYT?
So many morons--I doubt more than two could pass a citizenship test nor naturalization. I doubt they passed high school civics with a D-.
+1
I;m sorry, Kevin, but can you please explain to me why you think it matters whether these appointments are confirmed?
Let's say the Senate votes against all of them, and Trump installs them anyway. What then? The Supreme Court tells him he can't. Unlikely, but let's pretend that happens. Who enforces the Supreme Court ruling? Hegseth's military, purged of anyone not loyal? The Gaetz justice department? Absurd.
And if the Supreme Court does make a nuisance of itself, why does Trump not have them killed or imprisoned? They themselves have made it clear that if he does that in his official capacity, it's perfectly legal.
You, like a lot of people in the media, are writing articles about this process as if we are still a nation governed by laws, with checks and balances, rules and precedent. I have absolutely no idea why you believe this to be the case.
It will take some time to purge the Army and Justice depertment, but obviously Trump will try to do that.
Impeachment is supposed to be the threat that stops presidents from doing that, and it worked until now, including his first trem (mostly). But it seems extermely unlikely now.
Otherwise, his deteriorating health may be the only defence democracy has.
Comforted somewhat by Truman's remark after Eisenhower won. "Poor Ike--he's used to the Army where he gave an order and it happened at once. Here you do that and a month later nothing's happened."
In those massive institutions, for every bombthrower you have a hundred others who have given their lives to it, and who know every trick to maintain themselves in their jobs and the institution itself.
That was true because Truman and Eisenhower were people with integrity and respect to the constitution. It works differently when these attributes are totally missing.
You think Vance would be better?
Much less bad.
Vance doesn't have the hordes of supporters that Trump has, and will never have them. He will have to stay within the constitutional order, while Trump can, and will cetainly try to, destroy it.
+1,000.
No it's not nuts, it's Kevin who is nuts, or at least terribly naive. He keeps thinking (or pretending to think) that the clear provisions of the Constitution and two hundred and fifty years of precedent and tradition matter a damn to Unser Drumpfenführer or his happy band of Nazi lickspittle cultists. Or that the shamelessly corrupt, shamelessly partisan MAGA majority on SCOTUS won't give any procedure they come up with a happy thumbs up regardless of how risible the legal arguments in their opinions are. Hell, once you've ruled that Drumpf (oh, but not Biden, just wait) has virtually blanket immunity from prosecution even though that ruling has zero basis--and a great deal to the contrary--in the Constitution, statutory law, precedent, or history, nothing that Drumpf does is a bridge too far for this "Court." (The closest think to pushback that we are likely to see is a Barrett concurrence arguing for a narrower opinion but signing on for the result.)
Kevin needs to understand that right now the US is the Weimar Republic between January 30, 1933, when Hitler was appointed chancellor, and March 23, when the Reichstag passed the Enabling Act "democratically" locking in his absolute dictatorship. The Fourth Reich looms and, like the iceberg in the Titanic's path, it is unavoidable, the watertight compartments thought to make sinking impossible will be overwhelmed, and there are not nearly enough lifeboats.
I think what we need to be asking ourselves right now is what Trump's Reichstag fire will be. All he needs is one major terror attack, a natural disaster, a massive protest that goes pear-shaped and gets violent or someting to suspend habeas corpus or declare martial law. He's chomping at the bit to do this, which is why he's going to purge the military and make sure when the time comes, there's no-one left to balk that the orders coming from the WH are illegal.
Purging the army to that level is difficult and takes time. I am guessing he will try to create a loyal militia (e.g. a "immigrants deporting force") for actually suppressing opposition, and just make sure the army is neutral.
A guy like Hegseth might also want to set up a hand-picked elite "emergency" corps of politically reliable troops and officers that he can move around to back up the private militias and local/state police. There may be fewer of that type than he thinks, but even a small corps with full weapons suite would be pretty intimidating and also able to put on the kind of show trump likes to see, would also give Hegseth the chance to get himself on video leading them in parades and stuff like that. Maybe a corps like that could even be chosen based on tattoos and size, just the way the Russians do.
Wouldn't be surprised if this is how things unfold. I would also recommend Hegseth look up "Ernst Roehm" and see how things ended for him.
"On the night that Ernst Roehm died voices rang out
In the rolling Bavarian hills
And swept through the cities and danced in the gutters
Grown strong like the joining of wills
Oh echoed away like a roar in the distance
In moonlight carved out of steel
Singing "All the lonely, so long and so long
You don't know how I long, how I long
You can't hold me, I'm strong now I'm strong
Stronger than your law"
--Al Stewart, The Last Day of June 1934
This is from Past, Present and Future, a suite of historical songs for each decade of the 20th Century up to its release in 1973. IMO it's Stewart's best album (with Roads to Moscow, his best song) two albums before Year of the Cat.
Yeah, creating a brownshirt militia to go around terrorizing critics would be right on brand.
I believe that's position the German military command was in. They rarely participated or had an active role in the Holocaust. Thats if my memory is correct. Trump will have his own version of the SS to do the real dirty work.
No, the German military was very much involved in the Holocaust. The whole "it was the SS who did it, not us" was the postwar fantasy the officers cultivated so that they could be accepted back into polite Cold War society.
Can recruit from the New York FBI office, which saved us from Socialism in 2016 …
1. Commander-in-Chief of the Army Werner Freiherr von Fritsch and Minister of War von Blomberg object to Hitler's plans for war
2. Blomberg and von Fritsch are suddenly accused of unsavory sexual scandals. They resign in disgrace.
3. Hitler has no further problems with the army.
That happens in 1938, after Hitler had a complete control of Germany, and they were also antagonistic to the SS. The US is still some distance from this situation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blomberg%E2%80%93Fritsch_affair
Somebody (my money would be on Stephen Miller) is probably grooming a patsy like Marinus van der Lubbe to torch the Capitol even as we type. A female Hispanic Muslim Communist would tick about all the bases. Maybe with an autographed photo of AOC in her pocket.
Barrett concurring in part and dissenting in part, while Susan Collins wrinkles her brow and expresses concern …
This is all about optics - legislators not wanting to affirmatively vote for nitwits, and Trump wanting to show his singular power over everyone. In that context, it makes sense that Trump will adjourn Congress so he can appoint who he wants. What the court does is irrelevant, since they have no way to enforce anything, and Congress will stay mum.
There is a small chance that Trump destroys everything so fast that even Republican legislators can't take it any more. But the only way we get impeachment is with an anonymous vote.
Maine, New Hampshire, Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona have Senate elections of consequence in 2026. Suzy Collins, a "moderate" Republican in Maine will be the person on the spot for Senate confirmations. Thom Tillis and Jon Ossof will be up for re-election, both winning by < 2%. Chuck Grassley in Iowa will be 93 and stepping down, creating an open seat, and a ton of other Republican-held agricultural basin seats will be up to election.
Why does that matter? Last time Georgia went hard on immigration, the agricultural field hands, almost all undocumented immigrants, left the state. Georgia tried to use African-American prisoners as a replacement but the optics were as bad as you'd expect. So, "rounding up the illegals" might result in crops rotting in the fields as the first symptom. China's retaliation to The Convicted Felon's tariffs in 2019 targeted agriculture as well. TCF had to use a Franklin Roosevelt law to hand out almost $40 billion to US farmers to make up for the lost revenue.
So, a lot of Republican Senators will have their voters in the of fire from TCF's actions between now and re-election. To the extent that there are votes in the Senate, most would prefer they be quiet, uncontroversial, and bipartisan. Recess appointments would be the only way.
Even if you weren't undocumented, having to play twenty questions to rent a place to live wasn't worth minimum wage.
An unfettered and unencumbered Trump will do a lot of damage. That's why I'm hopeful about the midterms. I think he will do so much damage that putting the Democrats back in power will be seen as not only the right thing but the only thing to do. The Republicans will have no one to blame but themselves.
Why wouldn't a GOP Senate confirm Marco Rubio? None of this makes any sense
Probably because they think he's not qualified or they'd prefer someone not completely beholden to Trump. Rubio is as spineless as most any other Trump enabler in government.
I'm feeling like this is becoming disaster porn now. Most of us knew it would be this bad even though we tried to tell ourselves otherwise.
What I believe is needed now are strategies to help mitigate this slow motion disaster. I live in a blue city ina purple state and feel relatively safe as long as our governor and legislature remains blue. But what about liberals and progressives in red states? Do they need to be prepared to move to ensure their rights and safety? Do they need to begin forming militias? I'm not joking...what is/are the plan(s)?
I am still stuck on Mr Drum's idea that the Senate can't adjourn itself, or even be considered "adjourned" unless the House adjourns, too.
Also, the House is not involved in confirming appointments, so why insist on them "adjourning" to enable the Senate to .. not make appointments?
Finally, in the previous Trump Regime, there was some talk that "unconfirmed" cabinet secretaries did not have the full powers of those who actually passed Senate confirmation. Could that be true?
Anyway, it's time to get started preparing for the 2026 mid terms. Working the media seems like a good first step.
Basically it's like this: neither house can adjourn for more than three days unless the other one approves (I. 5.). That means the long recesses we see around Easter, in August, and in October of election years, have to be scheduled and voted on by both houses.
When the senate's in recess presidents can appoint people to positions that require senate confirmation, but the commissions "expire at the end of the next session" (II. 2.). ("Session" actually should mean "year," imo, because every year is always the first or second "session of the Nth congress" in the Cong Record, but never mind that for now.)
So what's a recess, and what's not? Normally the senate has held "pro forma" sessions every few days where they gavel in and gavel out and don't do anything much besides, exactly so presidents won't make recess appointments. Obama got frustrated with this obstruction and made test appointments anyway, on the grounds that pro forma sessions aren't real ones but just gaming the system. Scotus ruled on this in 2014 and said sorry, Obama, pro forma's good enough and they have to be doing no real business for at least 14 days in order to be in recess for real (NLRB v Canning, aka Scotus's "rules for D presidents and R senates" if you ask me). So for appointment purposes a real recess according to Canning means both houses have to agree on a pretty lengthy break.
That kind of real recess lets trump get his appointments according to Hoyle and precedent, which matters to a lot of the people who are scheming this out because their entire lives are built around gaming the constitution and laws to get what they want regardless of precedent and practice. But you don't want a long break when the grand plan is to come charging in there and legislate up a storm, imposing the New Order with a bang.
The constitution has a potential way out of this tricky situation, which is a president's authority to order congress to adjourn if the houses don't agree on one of those lengthy breaks (II. 3.). In that scenario Johnson crosses his fingers behind his back and says "no, John, no can do." Then trump steps in, orders them adjourned for, say, four days or a week, and issues all the commissions. Then congress comes back and tries to ram through whatever legal changes trump wants them to make.
Obviously the pure dominance display means trump would love doing it that way. Would the court go along with it? Relevant, because somebody's bound to sue. My guess, despite Canning, is absolutely yes because after all this is an R president and different rules automatically apply-- the Rs on the court all come out of prior administrations and are 100% on the side of completely unfettered powers for R presidents.
So that's the picture in a big nutshell as I understand it. Recess appointments would feed trump's ego, avoid bad publicity about the nominees, and give senators a case for evading any responsibility for approving them, so this approach looks good to them from several angles.
By past practice I think there are some limitations on how much authority "acting" appointees have and there might be some small ones on recess appointees, but in a trump administration none of that would matter. They'd be expected to create maximum chaos no matter how they got in.
+1
+1.
Wow! Thank you. This is a really excellent discussion of the issue.
I doubt that the Republican-controlled Congress, either house, would object much to lengthy forced recesses, even if they're frequent. Less work, same pay, and no responsibility!
Trump wants to prove his manly bona fides by filling all executive-branch positions without having to ask permission from the Senate.
In the current timeline we live in, in which Little Sisters of the Poor (or whatever the fuck their name was) convinced the Supreme Court that they felt complicit in abortion by having to fill out a form to notify the government that they didn’t want their health plan to cover contraception…
Yeah, the Senate will totally allow Trump to recess appoint all the horrible people that the senators don’t want to have to go on record voting for or against (which would piss off Trump)… and the Supremes will allow it to happen too because Legal Reasons Common People Can’t Possibly Comprehend. Allowing something evil to happen without actually touching it yourself gives them the fig leaf of innocence they need with the media when everything goes to shit. “Well I didn’t vote to confirm Secretary Asshat who went on to order the military to gun down protestors in Chicago.”
I was reading elsewhere that the real plan is the re-industrialization of America. Bring all the jobs we offshored back so that the middle and working classes once again have stability and mobility.
The idea is that the transition to a knowledge economy has left large swaths of America without a future and increasingly dependent on the government for handouts (whether this is true or not is your call). In order to rectify this problem, the meritocracy of education must be broken.
The way to do that is by forcing manufacturing back to the US through tariffs. As one might guess, this is not going to be popular at first and the way to mitigate that problem is a combination of tax cuts and reduction in housing costs so that paying more for consumer goods hurts less. Tax cuts are easy when you've got the trifecta. Housing is challenging, but by deporting massive numbers of people taking up valuable living space, it will drop rents and home prices (this is the theory, anyway).
Another piece of the grand plan is the gutting of the federal government to reduce waste and administration costs, to accomplish this they need a leadership that has nothing invested in areas - hence the nomination of cabinet positions for people with limited to no knowledge in the field. Trump learned a lot of lessons from 1.0 and he won't be letting a bunch of career administrators get in the way.
Shorter: this is a full scale reorganization of the "business" of the United States. Top to bottom.
Since re-industrialization is not a fast process (worker training, plants have to be built) and they have about two years to get this done before the voters are pissed enough to throw sand in the gears at the 2026 mid terms. Hence the need to charge fast out of the gate, recess appointments, whatever it takes to get as far along in the process as possible before the midterms.
It's a done deal at this point, they have all the branches of government sewn up, they have the GOP living in terror of their supporters, and two years of unlimited immunity.
Buckle up, this is what's headed our way.
I think it's actually worse than that. The oligarchs are intent on tanking the current economy so they can do two things: 1) end the welfare state/safety net because "we can't afford it.", and 2) buy up all the real property and businesses that Americans can no longer afford it. They will then be able to employ workers for peanuts compared to years ago
+1
It is possble that somebody thinks about "re-industrialization" and stuff. But Trump himself just wants to be a dictator.
Apparently the autarky stuff is coming from Vance, who will be taking over as soon as Trump can be effectively removed via any means possible. Trump was just the safe conduct.
At the moment, Trump is calling the shots, and he will continue to do that as long as he is healthy enough to do it.
In principle there is a possibility of impeachment, but that very very low probability.
We have a knowledge economy in no small part because the last generation of our old industrialized economy told their kids to go to college and get a desk job. My grandma was so keen on this she told not just her kids. but her grandkids, too. I guess the night shift at the canning factory wasn't one of her happier memories. And that was a generation who benefitted from mass unionization and pensions.
The "re-industrialization" of America is a sop to the feelings of America's working class, who feel left behind. But it can't be done. Well, it can't be done if we want to maintain current standards of living. We can't compete with Asia's ability to export cheap goods. We likely can't compete with Germany's exports of precision goods, especially not quickly. Our agricultural economy is based on massive exports, which will dry up with a trade war.
This idea that we will be a rich country that has closed its borders is nuts. Medieval China backed away from the world, and it is only now starting to become globally important again. Anyone else live in a closed economy? Only small tribes in the Amazon and North Koreans.
No-one is talking of juche or closing borders!
The idea is to go back to the US economy around, say, 1980.
It is precisely this sort of hysteria, crazy over-exaggeration, that lost you people the election! Do you still not get it??? Lying to support your pet cause doesn't work when 60% of the electorate is onto your lies...
This sounds like a plausible galaxy-brain scenario, but I don't quite see how it meshes with reality. They can gut the federal government and I'm sure they'll try, at least as far as doing anything for ordinary people.
But the underlying fallacy in the industrialization part of this is the entire history of mass production and automation, by which fewer and fewer people produce the same or much greater output because of capital investment in production equipment. The days of gang labor in primary production are long gone, plus a lot of the plutocrats backing trump make their money by producing and selling that kind of equipment, or just by moving electrons without hiring many people.
Unless the plan is to have everybody harvesting vegetables or working in a meat-packing plant? Not impossible as a galaxy-brain concept in the South African mold.
Among the many flies in that ointment is that tax cuts, even if not skewed toward the wealthy, as of course they will be, do not help the working class who are already in the lower brackets. Working peoples’ wages have not kept pace with productivity for several decades (coincident with the decline in private-sector union membership) — that, not taxes, is the reason workers feel that they are losing ground, economically.
Oh, there are so many flies in that ointment. I don't see a plan for who is going to work the fields and meat processing plants, or clean the hotel rooms. My guess is anyone on unemployment and/or welfare.
The ability to quash rebellion will get ugly fast.
None of that is possible.
The cost and time of building a factory is immense. And who will want to work in a sweatshop, anyhow? They may not know their rights but they do know what's least effort.
Most of those hollowed out Republican towns are mostly old people. They literally can't go back to what they were doing. The town I grew up in had three mills, a fishing port, and 120 students at every grade level. Now they have zero mills, the port is silted up, the ocean has dead zones and when there is fishing, factory ships come to poach. And the farms have all been eliminated by the Walmarts of the world, although they're lucky enough that's not completely true.
And the school class has maybe thirty students to graduate. There's only old people, no families to work factories and farms.
I have no idea what they think will happen, but it's not going to be pretty when all the food from Mexico and Chile that used to be processed in China has tariffs on it.
+1
That context makes trumpism kind of like a Ghost Dance religion and vision, but for white people.
There's an even simpler way to look at this.
The current US debt trajectory is probably unsustainable. Yes, yes, we've all heard that before, and like all cry wolf'ing it gets tiresome. But we really are in uncharted territory here, with US debt (as a fraction of GDP) soon to exceed WW2 levels.
Kevin likes to mock suggestions that the budget be shrunk. I don't think that's helpful (there's certainly scope for at least limiting the growth of entitlements to below say the growth in GDP). But that's long term; what do we do in the short term?
The US does have one revenue superpower left at its disposal that most other countries are already exploiting, namely a VAT. A VAT would, of course, increase the cost of everything, be inflationary, blah blah; but anything that raises more revenue would be such.
The next question, then, is a VAT the OPTIMAL solution given all policy goals? It's at THIS point that a tariff becomes an option. A tariff plays out in much the same srt of way as a VAT, but with the side benefit of repatriating some manufacturing to the US, helping with both jobs and security.
(The other big alternative would be some sort of aggressive tax on wealth that kicks in at death, This would be "more fair", in the sense that it takes from the people who benefited the most from the wild debt ride of the US since the 1980s or so, but is probably even more difficult politically [since it only works if you also shut down all the obvious loopholes], AND doesn't help with the non-revenue issues that a tariff achieves.)
Pingback: Recess appointments, post deux | Zingy Skyway Lunch
This is an attempt to escape responsibility by not performing their duty, being a check on a reckless executive branch. They will be a rubber stamp for Trumps worst policies and appointments. This is the first test of their willingness to give up their responsibility to a fucking moron with grudges and the means to act on them.
In a sane world, Democrats and the "Librul Media" would be all over the airwaves, print, and internet with this analysis. It isn't too early to start. The week before the next election in 2026 is far too late.
I agree that this is unlikely but 2 caveats:
1. They would do ot for same reason senate keeps the filibuster, to oppose things without direct blame
2. While dems regularly misconstrue what the Supreme Court is willing to do for GOP, this strikes me as well within the kind of thing the conservative majority would go for. The text is pretty plain in the constitution, and details like motivation are seen as irrelevant when compared to the fundamental principles involved.
Either way I’m not going to lose sleep over it. Because it’s either not going to happen and senate will find plenty of other ways to roll over, or it will happen and we can’t stop it, but perhaps could use this tactic later.
Apologies if someone already mentioned this, but I figured it has more to do with appointments that do not want to go through the appointment process and backgrounding.
Allow me to be an outlier here. I agree with the many comments that consider Kevin's protest against the unreality of this to be naive. But I also think the comments are becoming lost in tehnicalities and missing the point.
Sure, it's all unneeded talk, because Republicans will rubber stamp Trump's people. Historically, it takes a lot not to confirm a president's senior advisors and cabinet postings anyway. But Trump's not trying to accomplish something. Rather, he's doing what he so often does, spewing what's on the top of his head to show off his ego. He's saying to Congress: I don't need you; I am in command; recognize that. In other words, he's already signaling his defiance of democracy, even the pathetic GOP kind.
I think they thought they could
control the first Trump presidency. This time I think they thought they could guide it behind the scenes. They were wrong in 2016 and dead wrong now.
Speaking of really bad appointments, see a distant relative of M.T. Greene.
https://www.thebrighterside.news/discoveries/new-dna-evidence-finds-that-neanderthals-didnt-go-extinct/
Well sure. If you've got European ancestry (aka "WHITE") you're probably got some Neanderthal genes. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
That thing you're worried about (basically whatever is in the news today)? It's not a big deal to Kevin Drum.
OMG, I can't believe I have to go through this again.
Reminder - I don't care about whethr this is good policy or not. I do care about people who don't know about the issue insisting that Trump and his team are idiots who know nothing about how the system works.
Here's a summary from 2020:
https://www.heritage.org/political-process/commentary/can-the-president-adjourn-congress-and-make-appointments-without
The point of the exercise is to avoid this. You're welcome to scream that being a TRUE democracy means that the righteous people can and should give Trump, the winner of the popular vote, zero power whatever; but the facts are what they are, and this time round Trump wants a different outcome.
At least part of what is going on here is that Kevin seems to think this is about what happens in the first two weeks of the TrumpII administration, whereas Trump is concerned about what happens over the entire 4 years.
And if you think this is all unreasonable, look at the comparison (in the article) of how this played out in the Obama vs Trump! administrations.
The precise mechanics hinge on the use of Section 3, Article II, and if you have to look that up, might I suggest that your (no doubt superb) legal skills are perhaps more grounded in Bird Law than in Constitutional Law...
"
Or, according to the latest cockamamie theory, they could agree to disagree. Instead of agreeing to adjournment, they'll deliberately disagree and then Trump will use his Article II power to step in and adjourn Congress himself.
"
BTW that cockamamie theory was agreed to by all nine justices of the Supreme Court. So...