Pickering won't draw a salary

At least that's the way I read this law.

Small comfort, maybe, but it's something.

to make a living.

for "personal services" or something, the same to be deposited into Pickering's brand-new bank account in the Cayman Islands.

Berating the unfairness of Pickering working without pay.

The hypocrisy of this appointment right before MLK day is astonishing. I'm glad to know that taxpayer money will be denied to this stain on the American judiciary.

PS: Excellent find.

even if it's for a short time.. Look at all the fun he's gonna have :eyes:

and who's to say, that the next time he comes up for confirmation, they won't just rubber stamp him , since he's already on the job :(

we won't be paying for it if he runs roughshod over the constitution. Somehow that doesn't make me feel better, but perhaps the "small government conservatives" can use it to argue for a tax cut now that the government will have all that extra money.

Best stop for the whole story.

>>This subsection does not apply -

(2)

if, at the end of the session, a nomination for the office, other than the nomination of an individual appointed during the preceding recess of the Senate, was pending before the Senate for its advice and consent;<<

----------------------------------

I believe Pickering was nominated just prior to the Congressional recess, which would mean this subsection does not apply.

Keep in mind, it wouldn't matter that he had gone through confirmation and been turned down before. Each new nomination wipes the slate clean.

And, he had not been appointed during the proceeding recess, so that part has no bearing on him. So, you can take that part out and it's less confusing. In other words:

"This subsection does not apply if, at the end of the session, a nomination for the office, ..., was pending before the Senate for its advice and consent;"


Is anyone else reading it this way?

he can retire and will be able to retire with the pension at his current appointment level. He wins even if he is not confirmed.
I don't know enough about that aspect of this issue to know if that statement is accurate or not.

My guess is that he will not be eligible for a pension at the new level since recess appointments are meant to temporarily fill positions until a permanent replacement is confirmed. I would expect him to have a pension at his old level.

But, this sure appears to me that he will receive compensation as he would if he were confirmed. I don't believe the original poster was correct when they stated that Pickering won't draw a salary based upon their link.

Let's all remember that laws are written by lawyers. Lawyers are part of the lawyers club. They aren't going to write a law to prevent one of their own from getting paid. Besides, recess appointments are fairly common.

it's his f***ing RACIST ASS.