Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

deminks

(11,014 posts)
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 09:02 AM Jan 2017

Not so fast Trump

Not so fast, Trump. You need Senate approval to appoint Bannon to the National Secutity Council.




(a) Establishment; presiding officer; functions; compositionThere is established a council to be known as the National Security Council (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “Council”).The President of the United States shall preside over meetings of the Council: Provided, That in his absence he may designate a member of the Council to preside in his place.The function of the Council shall be to advise the President with respect to the integration of domestic, foreign, and military policies relating to the national security so as to enable the military services and the other departments and agencies of the Government to cooperate more effectively in matters involving the national security.The Council shall be composed of—
(1) the President;
(2) the Vice President;
(3) the Secretary of State;
(4) the Secretary of Defense;
(5) the Secretary of Energy; and
(6) the Secretaries and Under Secretaries of other executive departments and of the military departments, when appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to serve at his pleasure.

I like the idea of having all of Bannon's Ruskie ties out in the open in the Senate hearings, don't you?
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Kablooie

(18,634 posts)
1. But the Republican Senate has to stand up and claim their right to advise and consent.
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 09:24 AM
Jan 2017

They seem happy to ignore any responsibility to be a check and balance to this man.

OldHippieChick

(2,434 posts)
2. They've been avoiding responsibility for 8 years and blaming
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 09:28 AM
Jan 2017

everything on Obama and have gotten used to it. They'll remain silent and let him become a dictator because they won't have to do anything but their own fundraising and then blame him when it all goes south. Who cares about the Constitution!

rzemanfl

(29,565 posts)
3. He does not meet the requirements of sub. (6) at all. Drumpf didn't even have
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 10:12 AM
Jan 2017

the power to appoint him. Period. Drumpf don't need no stinkin' laws.

Three Republican Senators need to leave the dark side. Will it happen?

Ms. Toad

(34,076 posts)
4. Thank you.
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 10:48 AM
Jan 2017

People talking about needing confirmation seem to be unable to read the first half of the provision - that to even be eligible for appointment you have to be a Secretary or Under secretary.

As much as we complain about the other side's illiteracy, I'm beginning to wonder about ours!

Ms. Toad

(34,076 posts)
6. You are correct about that.
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 11:05 AM
Jan 2017

I'm just amazed how many people on our side are saying all that has to happen is a confirmation hearing, without recognizing he is inelible even with a confirmation hearing.

rzemanfl

(29,565 posts)
7. Even if he was removed, Drumpf would circumvent the United States Code
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 11:09 AM
Jan 2017

and do what he wants to. Can you imagine a bunch of clowns like this running the show in October, 1962?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Not so fast Trump