Pages

Friday, November 15, 2024

Matt Gaetz gave a CPAC 2024 speech, a so-what speech at a so-what event. Now, it is on YouTube, to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoMnJKoV_hI

Go for it. It. It is under fourteen minutes long, so viewer fatigue half way through is unlikely. Know who he is. Independent of any ethics report, he has a plan.

There was a CPAC 2024 panel and Trump spoke, but readers can search and find. The Gaetz speech is featured because readers might not have looked for it on their own. Gaetz says all the standard talking points, so he knows a few things that can be questioned. Can he affect them? Will he want to, really, if confirmed as AG?

___________UPDATE__________

I had an interesting phone call from Delano, MN where a gentleman said he was taping the call. I stopped it at that point. Aside from that, DB has a report that Lindsey Graham is saying Gaetz deserves a hearing, which is true unless Trump withdraws the nomination or Gaetz opts out. Of interest a mid-item paragraph:

Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin told CNN: “I completely trust President Trump’s decision-making on this one, but at the same time, he’s got to come to Congress and sell himself. There’s a lot of questions that are going to be out there, he’s got to answer those questions, and hopefully he’s able to answer the questions right.”

It's an acknowledgement that Trump won the election, but that Senate confirmation is a Constitutional requirement. It is the same with Hegseth. Both can be questioned about experience but if Trump is set to put forth new ideas, he might prefer doing it with people not now or previously within the establishment he wants to change.

I worry about Hegseth. At hearing he should be pinned down on the Posse Comatatus Act. That he knows what it is and how it constrains the office of the Secretary of Defense, Wikipedia separately posts of Posse Comatatus,( the Posses of western movies, their history, etc.), and the Posse Comatatus Act, a federal law, where Wikipedia explains:

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878, by President Rutherford B. Hayes that limits the powers of the federal government in the use of federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States. Congress passed the Act as an amendment to an army appropriation bill following the end of Reconstruction and updated it in 1956, 1981 and 2021.

The Act originally applied only to the United States Army, but a subsequent amendment in 1956 expanded its scope to the United States Air Force. In 2021, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 further expanded the scope of the Act to cover the United States Navy, Marine Corps, and Space Force. The Act does not prevent the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. The United States Coast Guard (under the Department of Homeland Security) is not covered by the Act either, primarily because although it is an armed service, it also has a maritime law enforcement mission.

There is more, but the question would touch use of the military at the border, the nuances Hegseth should understand and testify about. Moreover, the worry is greater should there be a Nixon-like "Enemies List," per Trump campaigning of Enemies Within. Speech is speech, and overreaching can happen. Hegseth should be crystal clear in committing to understand he should not misstep should Trump have particular citizens he wants to hurt. Hegseth does not have a law degree and should at hearing delineate who and how he'd rely on counsel.

Beyond that, if the Senate blesses Trump nominees, the deal will be done as proper, and if the Senate balks, then the politicians will need to work it out. It's their job.

There are large budgets Trump's appointees will manage, and at hearings that fact should get due attention. But as to policies, Trump ran on changing things, and he got the vote to serve a second term. We live with the lawful consequences of his having won the election. Or, Vance running things, should Trump not be able to serve a full term. The tensions between Congress and the Executive are expected to be less with Republican majorities in both federal Houses. But they will work it out, and many will be displeased. It will be how it is, and Crabgrass may be displeased, but my one vote's been used, so we wait, we see.

The UPDATE ends up longer than the post, probably because of an interrupting phone call. It is fair to acknowledge Trump has powers, and proper to say he should not exceed their lawful scope. He is not King, nor Emperor. Nobody voted him for that, because he did not run saying he would seek to be either.

Enough.