Japan Today Get your ticket to GaijinPot Expo 2024
world

U.S. Senate returns to Washington

8 Comments
By David Morgan and Patricia Zengerle

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2020.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

8 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

With Washington still under a stay-at-home order, lawmakers were advised by the congressional physician to wear masks, stay six feet (2 meters) apart and limit the number of staff on Capitol Hill.

Moscow Mitch should be careful. Masks were designed for those with a chin.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

There are three reasons Moscow Mitch reconvened the senate:

(1) To shove more to unqualified conservative judicial nominees down our throats.

(2) To start shoveling more government handouts to huge corporations.

(3) To provide propaganda to right wingers that want to ignore the medical professionals.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

and (4) to make Nancy Pelosi look bad (successfully).

Enjoy the confirmation of John Ratcliffe as permanent DNI.

That position shouldnt be "acting" in this time of crisis. If you decline him, Ric Grenell just gets extended.

Win/win.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

And here is that propoganda I mentioned. Conservatives are painfully predictable.

and (4) to make Nancy Pelosi look bad (successfully).

I thought it was your position that she made herself look bad.

That position shouldnt be "acting" in this time of crisis. 

No position should be “acting” 3.5 years into an administration. This simply is more evidence of Donny’s incompetence.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

yes its terrible when positions arent filled. Its good that the Senate is back in session to continue filling these critical roles before the end of the 1st term.

https://www.propublica.org/article/under-obama-more-appointments-go-unfilled

A greater share of presidentially appointed positions that require Senate confirmation were sitting vacant at the end of Obama’s first term than at the end of Bill Clinton’s or George W. Bush’s first terms.

At least 68 of the positions remain vacant, including 43 that have been vacant for more than a year.

Overall, more than 13 percent of presidentially appointed positions hadn’t been filled at the end of Obama’s first term, compared with around 10 percent for Bush and 11 percent for Clinton.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

yes its terrible when positions arent filled. Its good that the Senate is back in session to continue filling these critical roles before the end of the 1st term.

Agreed, which is why I made my comment.

Donny loses every time:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/01/20/trumps-staffing-struggle-unfilled-jobs-100991

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/

0 ( +2 / -2 )

the previous guy had 68 of these at the end of 4 years. "Donny" still has 6 months to go and is actively filling more tomorrow. (thanks Mitch!)

How incompetent would that make the previous guy to have had 68? Not compared to the Orange dotard, but based on your judging scale? Its not a contest, judge each person against the measurement you set of "no position" compared to 68.

68 is a lot, compared to your standard of zero. kinda incompetent? or a lot incompetent?

No position should be “acting” 3.5 years into an administration. This simply is more evidence of Donny’s incompetence*

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Yet you never mentioned incompetence as being more than Obama had.

You said "zero" is the competence level. 68 is a lot more than zero. As is 170, but not as much when there is 6 months left and some of those positions will be eliminated as unnecessary.

I actually didnt see your Vietnam thing, as it was likely removed as off topic. But congratulations, you showed me (and that idiot Trump by proxy! you owned him too!)

I am sure everyone who died is happy that their deaths directly contributed to you "owning" me on the internet. even though I didnt see it and you had to tell me about it

. I am sure everyone who lost family in Vietnam War is super proud of you as well for using their deaths as a measurement system to talk about other peoples families dying in 2020.

and I demonstrate you as incorrect?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites