Gaetz withdraws as attorney general nominee

I am as well. I always felt he was a Congressional troll and I was surprised he wasn't primaried out.

I doubt we are lucky enough that he is totally gone.

It will be interesting to see if he tries to return to Congress. After all, he was elected again. Personally, I hope not as I would like the drama to end (at least as much as it can on the GOP side).

Looking at Trump's cabinet nominees, I worry we all may regret a few things in the future. Tulsi Gabbard is probably the only one I like and I feel several of his nominees are out of loyalty and not skill. I do not blame him for being a bit vengeful, as many have abandoned him. I was glad to see his son-in-law will have a part working with Israel.

Yeah Tulsi is a weird choice to me. Her military experience has very little to do with the IC community, and neither did here Congressional assignments. So I'm willing to see what she has to say at the hearings and see if she can competently navigate the hopefully hard questions I want thrown at her.

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin - I don't assume Gaetz is guilty; I just don't like the guy and I don't like his politics. I don't need an assumption of guilt to justify that perspective. IMHO, he's nothing more than a fiery hothead looking for the nearest camera, and he's certainly not there to help improve the lives of everyday Americans. Plus, the House Ethics Committee reauthorized its investigation into Gaetz in May 2023. That means a GOP-led House reauthorized this ethics investigation. That timeline undermines any "lawfare" type of argument you're trying to make against the opposition party. If the GOP thought it was simply a political investigation, they shouldn't have reauthorized it. It's that simple.

You can say what you want about all the other Trump indictments, but the Trump conviction stands on its own merit. The opposition party didn't falsify business records about a payment to a porn star. Trump did that, and the jury saw all the evidence and heard all the testimony. That has nothing to do with the opposition party pushing some meritless political persecution. Yes, members of that party brought the case to court, but none of that evidence was fabricated. Trump broke the law, the State of NY enforced their laws, and NY citizens unanimously found him guilty on all charges. Good for them; they did what was right.

We can disagree on why Trump nominated Gaetz. I still think he did so because he thought Gaetz was the right person for the job (who'd ardently shield him and do his bidding within the DOJ). And, of course he named Bondi quickly. I'm sure every President-elect has backup plans for every nomination.

Never said the investigation into Gaetz was lawfare, I said House led investigations are essentially a waste, especially when directed at a politician (specifically one cleared by the DOJ). That said, there are plenty of GOP members who don't like Gaetz. I don't like Gaetz.

You have your opinion about Trump and whether he broke a law, and I have my own. Right now yours is tied to what could be potentially an indefinite postponement of sentencing. However, I recently read it may get dismissed all together, which will in fact end this stupidity and negate the conviction. Same goes for Gaetz as AG. But we'll never know for sure will we?

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin - Trump did break the law; that has already been confirmed. It may be thrown out on novel legal grounds or by a compliant judiciary, but until it gets thrown out, it still stands as a conviction (and even if it does get thrown out, the evidence and the jury's verdict will never change).

If that makes you feel better. You'll believe what you want to believe, and I will believe what I want to believe. However, a conviction is not complete until the Judge, not the jury, not only declares it, but also issues the sentencing. So, let's not ignore that. There is also the possibility that if the conviction were to be reversed on appeal down the road, Jed Rubenfeld (a noted Yale Constitutional law professor) suggested that Bragg and Judge Juan Merchan would have "“unlawfully interfered with the election and decided the outcome of the next election through unconstitutional means.”" This makes for a pretty good motivation to not allow this case to end with a sentence on the judge's part. Either way, this is all moot. You can insist a NYC jury was convinced to go with guilty and I can still say the charges were bogus to begin with. In the end, the President-elect is still going to be the President again, I and really don't care if you think he's a felon (and I'd say roughly half of the country feels the same as me), and according to the procedures within the law, that felon status has not been concluded without the sentence.