Here we go. Jeff Sessions resigns as AG

[Madmick]

I was using my acquired knowledge as well in my initial post that you quoted on the bottom here... then looked up most specific examples after and your response to this post doesn't change the fact that 3.7% is clearly over employment by any metric and is not historically good.

You guffawed at a range that indicates otherwise. You're literally Googling for reasons to hate on Trump, and that's why you didn't recognize the 4% nadir range historically associated with the very concept you were touting. This has to be one of the most surreal arguments I've ever seen forwarded.

"We're 0.3% better than we should be! There are too many jobs! It's a catastrophe!"

Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate remains well off the peaks during the decades liberals love to highlight when Clinton was working hard to mobilize more female workers, when it ranged from 66%-67%, not the 62.9% today. So unemployment could likely benefit from more people wading out, and looking for jobs. What's next? Am I going to hear that's too high? Okay, we can go back to when women weren't in the work force. That's actually when inflation-adjusted minimum wage figures peaked (sub-60% levels) even this figure's relation to purchasing power diminished:

The unemployment figures are fantastic. It's unbelievable what you guys will try to use against him. Not the way to skin this cat.

To trope Carville: "It's the debt, stupid."

 

[Rational Poster]

You guffawed at a range that indicates otherwise. You're literally Googling for reasons to hate on Trump, and that's why you didn't recognize the 4% nadir range historically associated with the very concept you were touting. This has to be one of the most surreal arguments I've ever seen forwarded.

"We're 0.3% better than we should be! There are too many jobs! It's a catastrophe!"

Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate remains well off the peaks during the decades liberals love to highlight when Clinton was working hard to mobilize more female workers, when it ranged from 66%-67%, not the 62.9% today. So unemployment could likely benefit from more people wading out, and looking for jobs. What's next? Am I going to hear that's too high? Okay, we can go back to when women weren't in the work force. That's actually when inflation-adjusted minimum wage figures peaked (sub-60% levels) even this figure's relation to purchasing power diminished:

The unemployment figures are fantastic. It's unbelievable what you guys will try to use against him. Not the way to skin this cat.

To trope Carville: "It's the debt, stupid."

I never said it was a catastrophe.

You claimed 3.7% is historically good... I just said it wasn't historically good.

It could be an indicator of a stressed labor market and more inflation to come.

You're trying to give Trump credit for a status quo that existed before he took office. I'm saying Trump had no major impact positive or negative.

Long term however Republican deficit spending is going to be bad especially without the accompanying GDP growth.

 

[KantoTerror]

orange lardass in full retard, panic mode.

 

[Zankou]

I highly doubt it. Acting by definition doesn’t mean actual. It’s completely normal for an agency to be run by an acting head for awhile when the appointed head suddenly leaves.

There’s a time limit on how long you can be ‘acting’ head though.

 

[Madmick]

I never said it was a catastrophe.

You claimed 3.7% is historically good... I just said it wasn't historically good.

It could be an indicator of a stressed labor market and more inflation to come.

You're trying to give Trump credit for a status quo that existed before he took office. I'm saying Trump had no major impact positive or negative.

Long term however Republican deficit spending is going to be bad especially without the accompanying GDP growth.

It's historically good, and what a bizarre prediction. 3.7% is a wonderful place to be; especially when all the talking heads are talking about the need to incentivize a latent labor force to mobilize; talking heads on both the left and the right (for different reasons, and with different recommendations, but agreed on that point). I'm pretty sure inflation will be just fine:

Spoiler

Unemployment rate (1948-today)
https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Inflation rate as measured by the CPI (1957-today)
https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Finally (notice the year-of-year growth percentage as it relates to unemployment, not just the raw growth):

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

I highly doubt it. Acting by definition doesn’t mean actual. It’s completely normal for an agency to be run by an acting head for awhile when the appointed head suddenly leaves.

There’s a time limit on how long you can be ‘acting’ head though.

So Trump will appoint this guy then delay an actual hearing essentially?

 

[Strychnine]

Judge Napolitano of Fox "news" says that this appointment is illegal.

“Under the law, the person running the Department of Justice must have been approved by the United States Senate for some previous position. Even on an interim post,” Napolitano said.

Napolitano continued saying that next in line for the position is Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

“[Whitaker] was not confirmed by the United States Senate for a leadership position at the Justice Department. The White House will have to work this out. Who has been confirmed and who’s next in line? Deputy attorney general Rosenstein,” he said.

Even if you disagree with Napolitano and feel that as a recess appointment Whitaker can at least serve until the beginning of the new Congress in January, he would still have a problem under the Presidential Vacancies Act to serve up to 210 days because now former AG Sessions specifically stated that he didn’t resign, he was asked to resign which means he was fired and the PVA doesn’t apply.

On top of this there is the issue that Mr. Whitaker has also repeatedly criticized the Mueller investigation indicating that his taking over control of that investigation from Rod Rosenstein — which has just occurred — may be a direct ethics violation under DOJ rules."


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...aker-as-Acting-AG-is-illegal?detail=emaildkre

 

[Zankou]

So Trump will appoint this guy then delay an actual hearing essentially?

No he can’t do that. He doesn’t have to be appointed to be acting because that’s not an appointed position. But you can’t be acting forever. As an example, look at the VA, where it was musical chairs in terms of agency heads.

The idea that the senate has to have appointed you to ‘some’ position in an agency to make it legit to be acting head is, so far as I can tell, totally fictitious and made up. Either the senate confirmed you for the position or they didn’t.

 

[Rational Poster]

It's historically good, and what a bizarre prediction. 3.7% is a wonderful place to be; especially when all the talking heads are talking about the need to incentivize a latent labor force to mobilize; talking heads on both the left and the right (for different reasons, and with different recommendations, but agreed on that point). I'm pretty sure inflation will be just fine:

Spoiler

Unemployment rate (1948-today)
https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Inflation rate as measured by the CPI (1957-today)
https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Finally (notice the year-of-year growth percentage as it relates to unemployment, not just the raw growth):

What do you mean it's bizarre? Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment is a thing because of this very concept.

 

[Madmick]

What do you mean it's bizarre? Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment is a thing because of this very concept.

Because the primary problem with our labor force participation rate that we have been facing right now has been an observed decline in the stronger labor demographics (the young and middle-aged, but specifically the 16-24 demographic).

 

[Lord Coke]

Hey guys @Zankou @panamaican @Lord Coke , so appointment of Whitaker is illegal?

“President Trump’s installation of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general of the United States after forcing the resignation of Jeff Sessions is unconstitutional. It’s illegal. And it means that anything Mr. Whitaker does, or tries to do, in that position is invalid,” said Conway in a piece co-written by former acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal K. Katyal.

Conway and Katyal’s central argument is that a principal officer, such as acting attorney general of the United States, must be confirmed by the Senate. By evading such a procedure, Conway argues, it “defies one of the one of the explicit checks and balances set out in the Constitution, a provision designed to protect us all against the centralization of government power.”

The op-ed says the American people “cannot tolerate such an evasion of the Constitution’s very explicit, textually precise design. Senate confirmation exists for a simple, and good, reason.”

“Constitutionally, Matthew Whitaker is a nobody. His job as Mr. Sessions’s chief of staff did not require Senate confirmation,” reads the piece.

Conway goes on to say that for Trump to allow Whitaker to take this position is to “betray the entire structure of our charter document.”

These sentiments were also recently shared by Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst for Fox News, who said on Wednesday that he believed Trump’s appointment of Whitaker was illegal.

“Under the law, the person running the Department of Justice must have been approved by the United States Senate for some previous position. Even on an interim post,” Napolitano told Fox News’ Dana Perino.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/george-conway-slams-trump-op-183931751.html

I haven't studied this issue but at first glance I agree with that the Senate needs to confirm him. That is the plain reading of the Constitution.

 

[Bobby 3 Sticks]

I haven't studied this issue but at first glance I agree with that the Senate needs to confirm him. That is the plain reading of the Constitution.

Seems obvious there's no grounds that appointment is valid. So when Whitaker walks in to fire Mueller does it turn into an ooj interrorgation for Whitaker

 

[7437]

I haven't studied this issue but at first glance I agree with that the Senate needs to confirm him. That is the plain reading of the Constitution.

That doesn't matter to conservatives.

 

[Joe]

What??

During interviews with right-wing radio hosts over the last two years, Whitaker admonished Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for appointing Muller last year, characterizing the probe as a drain on department resources, and suggesting the special counsel’s allies were leaking information designed to make him “look productive and on top of things.”

He expressed sympathy for former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty as part of Mueller’s investigation, and in one interview last year, Whitaker said that “the real Russian ties were with Hillary Clinton.”

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

Meh. Never was a fan of Sessions.

He was originally a darling of the alternative right (the original alternative right before it was hi-jacked by racists), and considered to be a legitimate anti-establishment, anti swamp politician. However, he proved to really push back against Trump and seemed to be a member of the swamp instead. It will be interesting to see what he does and who Trump replaces him with. It seems very person in his administration back stabs him, leaks and tries to get him impeached.

 

[MicroBrew]

That doesn't matter to conservatives.

Well .... how do you argue with a stable genius.

 

[44nutman]

Looks like Trump is one step closer to being a dictator. He admires Putin, Kim, King Abdullah from the House of Saud. He tries to silence the press. Want to get rid of amendments to the Constitution with an EO. Our once great democracy is slowly being destroyed by a man that fantasizes about being a dictator.

 

[LMP]

I dont care that Jeff Sessions is no longer AG, he is a shit bag. I hope the new AG doesnt step in and shut down the investigation just to save Trump or on Trump's orders. If there is something to the investigation it should proceed regardless of who is involved. If they shut it down they should release all of the information they have to the public.

 

[Kaybee]

https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/11/08/politics/chris-christie-pam-bondi-trump-attorney-general/


<[analyzed}>

lol @ either Chris Crisco or Pam Blondi being the next AG. Is it some kind of unwritten rule that the AG has to be a complete assclown?

 

[Diamond Jim]

Just another crazy.