Guess who gets to appoint Gonzales's replacement?

[bluestateguy]

You got it.

Don't celebrate too much.

[Xipe Totec]

1. President Cheney? n/t

[bdamomma]

8. ............

:thumbsup:

[oldtime dfl_er]

2. Has to be confirmed, though

by the Senate - yes?

www.scarebaby.com

[FredScuttle]

3. Not if it's a recess appointment

but then, * would be breaking his "gentleman's pact" with Harry Reid not to make any more recess appointments. Of course, that never stopped * before.

Even if * were to make a recess appointment for AG, I believe that a Senator or member of the House could block it by holding a pro-forma session.

[oldtime dfl_er]

4. Thank you for that answer

You're obviously more awake this morning than I am, my friend!! :)

www.scarebaby.com

[FredScuttle]

14. No problem

although I did goof....it has to be a Senator who holds the pro forma session (see post below)

[MonkeyFunk]

7. No

the House has nothing to do with it.

The Senate would need to convene to stop a recess appointment, but I doubt very much that's the path Bush will take.

If he were smart (ha!), he'd convince Orrin Hatch to take the job. There'd be no Senate battle; and easy confirmation. The question is whether Hatch would give up the Senate for 18 months in a lame-duck cabinet.

[FredScuttle]

12. thank you for the clarification

n/t

[Bitwit1234]

5. He is resigning effective September 16th SO

congress will be back in session by then.

[Az]

6. It is very unlikely that he will be able to appoint such a stooge as Gonzo was

No matter who gets appointed they are going to have more respect for the law than has been present in the office for some time now.

[autorank]

9. Guess who gets to approve.

You got it.

Don't celebrate too much.

[RL3AO]

10. I am one to believe the President should be able to have whoever he wants in his cabinet

and the Senate should not deny the Presidents nomination. Of course that would be my very minority opinion on here.

[endarkenment]

11. Luckily the constitution says otherwise.

Although your minority opinion will be widely trumpeted by the 24/7 Bullshit Media System. The only cabinet appointments that should be denied, in this revised version of what Advice and Consent means, are those of Democratic presidents who appoint women with nanny-problems.

[ck4829]

13. That would be fair if the cabinet only served as advisers

They shape decisions and help influence the policies of our nation. As the President serves us, so does the cabinet.

Also, the cabinet in my opinion serves as a way to reach out to the other side of the aisle. With recent Presidents however, it has become a tool to become more partisan and more extremist.

[karlrschneider]

15. And you have the right to hold that opinion...but some of us would like to know -why- you

believe it.

[JerseygirlCT]

16. The senate is given their role in the process for a reason

In this case, Bush has decisively shown he is incapable of making good choices. The senate is well within its power to hold off on approving any nomination that doesn't meet their standards. I'd like to see that start happening, and see a lot less of the "it's his perogative" crap, myself.

The Dem. senators always seem to be afraid of the precedent taking a strong hand with Bush would set for the next president. Since when does our "good behavior" earn us anything but contempt? They will most certainly then go about playing their games when the positions are reversed.

(Another reason we need not just a Dem in the WH, but a solidly Dem Congress and Sentate next time...)

[RL3AO]

17. Well, we all know what will happen.

Bush will nominate someone. The Senate will hold hearings for weeks/months and commercials will be run saying "Call you Congressman, tell them not to support __________". It will be discussed on the cable news channels and then when it comes to the vote, __________ will pass 70/30 and be confirmed. I would bet thats what will happen.

[JerseygirlCT]

18. Yup. A bit of stirring talk from a few, and then... total cave-in, again. nt

[Benhurst]

19. We've got to keep our powder dry!

We are the Powder Puff Democrats, after all.

[JDPriestly]

20. The president should not be able to appoint someone who is

clearly corrupt. There are limits. If Chertoff is the nominee, his performance at Homeland Security should be carefully reviewed to see whether he allowed Rove to make his political presentation on government property, whether he made grants to serve political purposes (or even whether there is an appearance that he made grants for political purposes), and whether sufficient funds for Homeland Security were granted to large urban areas most or sensitive infrastructure most likely to be targeted by terrorists. We deserve an Attorney General who will faithfully uphold the laws and not use this important office for political gain for himself or his party. The AG serves all Americans, not just the president.