Maybe I don’t understand the context. I do understand the difference between appointing your barber (or large contributor) and appointing a career foreign service professional.
I’m not sure I buy the label “political appointee” only applies to the former.
Trump hasn’t shown one ounce of dignity for the office of the President of the United States from day one of running for president. There is going to be no
“dignity” in the White House for the next 4 years.
Ban everybody. It’ll be a first.
Oh, wait. That’s been done.
It does. It doesn’t apply to career foreign service officers in this context.
What will Trump do on inauguration day? Same as every other day. Make a fool of himself.
Posted earlier in another thread, but ABC had this tweet from Cheato today:
Hum a few bars of “Imagine” with me?
No, they are not. Those are career State Department people. Political appointees are basically friends of President, or big Democratic donors who have no experience in diplomacy and are granted cushy positions in fun/exotic locations for a bit. Thus this “outrage” that US will go “unrepresented” if such people are recalled is silly. USA is represented by the diplomats in the embassies, sometimes they are Ambassadors but often they are deputies. The political appointees are there as a sinecure only.
You’re using a different meaning of words than the words mean. I understand the point trying to be made, but “political appointees” does not mean what you say it does.
I quoted this earlier, and it continues to make sense:
Maybe you mean patronage appointees. Or political favorites. Or corrupt practices. “Political Appointees” is a term that already has a definition, and it includes career professional diplomats appointed by the President to be an Ambassador.
What the various articles are describing is the demand sent to what you call “patronage appointees” to resign immediately and leave. The fact that the news sources are using “political appointees” to describe them doesn’t change the heart of the matter.
There is exactly one source that I found that bothered to clarify that only the patronage “political” ambassadors are asked to resign:
Viewership is going to be yuuuuge, eight or nine billion people. Of course, the dishonest media will lie about it.
To be pedantic that’s actually something he is not doing. All Obama appointees are out unless granted an exemption. Trump has decided to not grant any exemptions.
Considering how few real powers of the office Cheetolini has to himself just yet, the opportunity to disrupt the lives of people he feels didn’t support his run on such a personal level had to give His Flaccidness his greatest thrill of 2017 so far - the chance to publicly enjoy being a petty tyrant. ‘Look Vladi - I’m throwing people out of their homes like I did black people in the 70s! See how powerful I am, just like you? Oh Vladi-daddy, teach me how to be more like you.’
I don’t know what he’ll do, but by god, I wish it didn’t affect us, your neighbours to the north.
I do recall watching Obama’s inauguration with tears and much emotion, wishing so much that my mother was still alive to witness it. I was 45 minutes late for work that day, and it was worth it.
I won’t be watching Trump.
Thanks that explains it a lot more clearly.
“Fellow Americans”? I have a hard time imagining Trump using this turn of phrase for some reason. It’s not self-aggrandizing enough, and it implies that he wasn’t born in space.
And back to things he is actually doing on Inauguration Day: Removing all references to “climate change” from the official White House website.