Mark My Words: Merrick Garland will be the first to be replaced

Garland, DeJoy... get the fuck on with it!

As he should be.

Stupidity coming ashore.. every cabinet member offers resignation after an election, or it is requested, after each election.

No one, but no one, except the idiot Op, would ever expect Garland to be AG past Noon on Jan 20, 2025.

You can return to mamma’s basement laundry room.

[quote]She is more aggressive, more assertive, more confident than Biden.

It remains to be seen what she's like as president. Campaign is one thing, but her actual administration might be quite different.

Dr. Rachel Levine needs to go too.

Yeah, the new POTUS gets to pick his / her own cabinet and makes appointments how they want to. I'm sure there have been carry-over appointments.

However, Alan Greenspan (appointed by Reagan) did serve under a few POTUSes.

[quote]r5 = Dr. Rachel Levine needs to go too.

Why?

Duh.

Fed Chairs have a term of office.

The bigger question I have is Pete. Will he jump to yet another new job or try to stick it out as Sec or Transportation? Knowing Pete, his lake wide, puddle deep resume, he'll jump ship.

R3: You have the manners of one raised in a barnyard, fouling every thread you participate in.

If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen

Modern internet: if you can’t bother to learn the basics of federal appointments, go fuck yourself before you post.

duh is not an answer. Why does Levine need to go? She doesn't do her job? She has been benefitting too much? She's doing stuff that is illegal?

She is part of the group that needs to be discriminated against? and if this is the answer just how is she harming you?

No shit.

I hope you're right. He's not doing anything about Elon Musk interfering in our election.

Garland was a colossal disappointment.

One possible problem, OP:

Senate confirmation.

If GOP controls the Senate then I doubt anyone gets “fired” since she won’t be able to officially replace them.

I personally believe she is enough of an institutionalist to attempt to govern with acting appointments.

I know this post is from September but how fucking stupid is the OP.

The entire Biden Administration is expected to be replaced. This is widely expected. All appointments will tender their resignation - as is protocol when a new President is elected - and Harris will appoint new people.

[quote]Mark My Words

I asked and Muriel told me I don't have to if I don't want to.

“To NOT attempt” that should say.

She needs to replace him with Sally Yates, STAT

She needs to replace him with Jack Smith.

She needs to win first, which is starting to look unlikely.

She needs to replace him with Tish James.

Clearly there are much better candidates already mentioned above than Merrick Garland. I know why Joe put him there, but what a disappointment.

I believe Pete B. will continue to have a role in the Harris Administration - just might not be Transportation Secretary. He needs to expand his experience.

[quote]She needs to win first, which is starting to look unlikely.

So the fake polls are working!

Regarding Pete and

[quote]his lake wide, puddle deep resume

I'd like to know what's "lake wide" and "puddle deep" about being Secretary of Transportation for almost 4 years and overseeing the largest infrastructure bill in the modern era? Or about serving in the Navy Reserves (for 8 years) and deploying to Afghanistan? Or about being Mayor of South Bend for 8 years?

Or perhaps you, R10, can post your resume... for comparison purposes.

[quote]She needs to win first, which is starting to look unlikely.

The fuck?? The polls remain largely unchanged, aside from Nate Silver's bullshit ones. Nothing is "starting to look unlikely." Sadly, I'd say the same thing about Trump: barring another October surprise, the race is a legitimate toss-up.

I'm admittedly confused: how the fuck do you bitches not know that these are nearly all political-appointee positions? (I know it's been 35 years since the same party won back-to-back elections with two different candidates (Reagan then Bush), but still.) It's up to Harris, not Pete, if he stays at the DOT, but I'm also not seeing any possible reason for him to leave, unless he's opting out of politics entirely. Even if he's running for office, that couldn't happen until 2026 at the earliest, plus there'd need to be a race he could actually *win*. (Safe to say he won't be winning an Indiana Senate seat anytime soon.)

Agreed that Garland has nearly zero chance of remaining AG, but even Biden's confessed – at least to unnamed sources – that he's been a constant thorn in his ass. Also, given the extent to which Trump has incessantly claimed a Harris administration would be tantamount to Biden 2.0, that only gives her *more* incentive to clean house among most of Biden's appointees. She both wants & needs to start with a clean slate. I'm not even sure she'd keep Blinken at this point, and he's the MOST likely to be asked to stay on, if only because of his extremely detailed knowledge about goings-on in Israel.

We’re looking at a repeat of 2016 so you might as well start coming up with Trump’s appointees.

Blinken will certainly be replaced. Secretary of State will go to a prominent backer.

Merrick Garland has been as feckless and weak an the US AG as Bill Barr was bold and unethical.

[quote]We’re looking at a repeat of 2016 so you might as well start coming up with Trump’s appointees.

Are you trolling or just ignorant? The race is a legitimate toss-up – unlike 2016, when almost every pollster gave Hillary a huge lead for nearly the entire race – and the mere fact that Kamala has a uterus doesn't mean she's doomed to lose.