Trump47 Cabinet Picks & First 100 Days Agenda

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 45K
  • Politics 

Bessent says he has previously been denied public service posts due to his sexual orientation​



"... Scott Bessent, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for treasury secretary, defended his lack of past public service on Thursday by pointing to the denial of previous attempts due to his sexual orientation.

“Sitting here today is especially meaningful for me because this is my third try at public service,” he told the Senate Finance Committee as part of his confirmation hearing for the top treasury job. “In 1979 when I was 17 years old, I wanted to fight for my country. My father had just experienced extreme financial difficulties. I wanted to attend the US Naval Academy.”

...“So sitting here today is my third attempt at public service, and I sit here knowing that President Trump chose me because he believes I’m the best candidate, not because of my sexual preference, not because treasury secretaries with green eyes do better,” Bessent said. “And I think it is a tribute to President Trump that he looks at people as people.” ..."
 
Cont'd

"...In an exchange with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Oregon on President-elect Donald Trump’s proposed trade policies, Scott Bessent, Trump’s pick to helm the Treasury Department, pointed to the glut of cheap Chinese good flooding the world as an argument for hefty tariffs.

... “Clearly, what has happened is trade has not been fair and that has fallen on the American worker, and we cannot allow that,” Bessent told the Senate Finance Committee as part of his confirmation hearing for the top Treasury post.

“China is the most unbalanced economy in the history of the world. They are in a severe recession-slash-depression. ... They are attempting to export their way out of that,” he added. Bessent said, “We cannot allow a player like this flood our markets.”

For context: China’s economy has indeed slowed in recent years as consumers cut their spending and prices fell, key markers of a recession. But its economy has not technically contracted just yet. The Chinese economy expanded at an annual rate of 4.6% in the third quarter, according to the country’s statistics agency. ... Still, some economists have cast doubt on the accuracy of China’s official economic figures, largely due to local officials falsifying data, which the government has taken steps to address. Former Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke has also pointed to the lack of transparency of China’s statistics agency."
 
HesNotHere97 said:
LOL... again with wanting a "safe space" where the only opinions welcome are the ones that are "left-leaning."

What have I posted or said that has triggered you? Seriously... that is a legit question.

Is this board only for "left-leaning" ideas, thoughts and opinions?
Click to expand...
Wow. It's like you didn't read a word of my post. Said nothing about 'safe spaces' just judicious interaction when you know who the crowd is. You know, common civility. Nothing has me triggered. I gaze in wonder at what primal instinct made you come where you know your opinions would likely be viewed dimly, offer them stridently, and then get defensive when the exact thing you knew would happen.....happens.

What drove you to this site to post what you have, knowing who would be here and how they would inevitably react to you? Are you seeking to educate the community? Correct a perceived abrasion of honor that MAGA has suffered? Bored out of your skull? What exactly? I'm honestly curious.
 
nycfan said:
Cont'd

"...In an exchange with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Oregon on President-elect Donald Trump’s proposed trade policies, Scott Bessent, Trump’s pick to helm the Treasury Department, pointed to the glut of cheap Chinese good flooding the world as an argument for hefty tariffs.

... “Clearly, what has happened is trade has not been fair and that has fallen on the American worker, and we cannot allow that,” Bessent told the Senate Finance Committee as part of his confirmation hearing for the top Treasury post.

“China is the most unbalanced economy in the history of the world. They are in a severe recession-slash-depression. ... They are attempting to export their way out of that,” he added. Bessent said, “We cannot allow a player like this flood our markets.”

For context: China’s economy has indeed slowed in recent years as consumers cut their spending and prices fell, key markers of a recession. But its economy has not technically contracted just yet. The Chinese economy expanded at an annual rate of 4.6% in the third quarter, according to the country’s statistics agency. ... Still, some economists have cast doubt on the accuracy of China’s official economic figures, largely due to local officials falsifying data, which the government has taken steps to address. Former Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke has also pointed to the lack of transparency of China’s statistics agency."
Click to expand...
1. I think it's great Trump nominated Bessent notwithstanding his orientation. I wish all of MAGA were so open-minded.

2. Bessent is right about China. He's also 100% wrong about the ability of tariffs to remedy what's wrong with China.
 
Gmonet said:
Wow. It's like you didn't read a word of my post. Said nothing about 'safe spaces' just judicious interaction when you know who the crowd is. You know, common civility. Nothing has me triggered. I gaze in wonder at what primal instinct made you come where you know your opinions would likely be viewed dimly, offer them stridently, and then get defensive when the exact thing you knew would happen.....happens.

What drove you to this site to post what you have, knowing who would be here and how they would inevitably react to you? Are you seeking to educate the community? Correct a perceived abrasion of honor that MAGA has suffered? Bored out of your skull? What exactly? I'm honestly curious.
Click to expand...
I've been posting on UNC sites since 1998.

Nothing drove me to this site other than always have followed, posted and been a contributor to UNC boards.

Opinions vary and I see you are not looking for any that do not align with yours.

Good job.
 
nycfan said:
Cont'd

"...In an exchange with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Oregon on President-elect Donald Trump’s proposed trade policies, Scott Bessent, Trump’s pick to helm the Treasury Department, pointed to the glut of cheap Chinese good flooding the world as an argument for hefty tariffs.

... “Clearly, what has happened is trade has not been fair and that has fallen on the American worker, and we cannot allow that,” Bessent told the Senate Finance Committee as part of his confirmation hearing for the top Treasury post.

“China is the most unbalanced economy in the history of the world. They are in a severe recession-slash-depression. ... They are attempting to export their way out of that,” he added. Bessent said, “We cannot allow a player like this flood our markets.”

For context: China’s economy has indeed slowed in recent years as consumers cut their spending and prices fell, key markers of a recession. But its economy has not technically contracted just yet. The Chinese economy expanded at an annual rate of 4.6% in the third quarter, according to the country’s statistics agency. ... Still, some economists have cast doubt on the accuracy of China’s official economic figures, largely due to local officials falsifying data, which the government has taken steps to address. Former Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke has also pointed to the lack of transparency of China’s statistics agency."
Click to expand...
Still waiting for one Republican to actually acknowledge that you can't (1) use protectionist tariffs to force cheap foreign goods out of the market in favor of more expensive domestic goods, and (2) lower consumer prices at the same time.
 
lawtig02 said:
1. I think it's great Trump nominated Bessent notwithstanding his orientation. I wish all of MAGA were so open-minded.

2. Bessent is right about China. He's also 100% wrong about the ability of tariffs to remedy what's wrong with China.
Click to expand...
1. Should trump use tariffs at all with respect to china?
2. I know your opinion of Hegseth, Gabbard, and Patel. what about Bondi, Rubio?
3. Did Hegseth's hearing surprise you in any way?
 
Callatoroy said:
1. Should trump use tariffs at all with respect to china?
2. I know your opinion of Hegseth, Gabbard, and Patel. what about Bondi, Rubio?
3. Did Hegseth's hearing surprise you in any way?
Click to expand...
1. Sure, but in moderation, and only for very specific products. This article is a pretty good summary of my views on the issue -- https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/can-tariffs-be-good-thing

2. I said this on another thread but I'm fine with Rubio and Bondi. I know people who are close with Rubio. I question his backbone, but he's a very smart guy who wants to do the right thing, and he's qualified for the position. Bondi is also qualified. I am highly skeptical that Trump does not, in fact, have an enemies list, but she deserves the job. Hegseth is a joke. Gabbard is a Russian asset. Patel is a neo-Nazi. None of those are remotely exaggerated.

3. Yes. I was stunned at how unprepared Hegseth was on the facts relevant to the job. I honestly have no idea what, if anything, he did to prepare for that hearing.
 
lawtig02 said:
1. Sure, but in moderation, and only for very specific products. This article is a pretty good summary of my views on the issue -- https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/can-tariffs-be-good-thing

2. I said this on another thread but I'm fine with Rubio and Bondi. I know people who are close with Rubio. I question his backbone, but he's a very smart guy who wants to do the right thing, and he's qualified for the position. Bondi is also qualified. I am highly skeptical that Trump does not, in fact, have an enemies list, but she deserves the job. Hegseth is a joke. Gabbard is a Russian asset. Patel is a neo-Nazi. None of those are remotely exaggerated.

3. Yes. I was stunned at how unprepared Hegseth was on the facts relevant to the job. I honestly have no idea what, if anything, he did to prepare for that hearing.
Click to expand...
I will read the article. I have my own reservations about Hegseth but likely not the same as you.
 
lawtig02 said:
1. Sure, but in moderation, and only for very specific products. This article is a pretty good summary of my views on the issue -- https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/can-tariffs-be-good-thing

2. I said this on another thread but I'm fine with Rubio and Bondi. I know people who are close with Rubio. I question his backbone, but he's a very smart guy who wants to do the right thing, and he's qualified for the position. Bondi is also qualified. I am highly skeptical that Trump does not, in fact, have an enemies list, but she deserves the job. Hegseth is a joke. Gabbard is a Russian asset. Patel is a neo-Nazi. None of those are remotely exaggerated.

3. Yes. I was stunned at how unprepared Hegseth was on the facts relevant to the job. I honestly have no idea what, if anything, he did to prepare for that hearing.
Click to expand...
"I question his backbone" is an awfully big caveat on Rubio though. That's my big concern as well. I think it's important for SOS in particular that he have both a conscience and spine, both of which he has repeatedly demonstrated he lacks.

With that being said, he's more qualified for the job than pretty much anyone else Trump might pick. And Trump isn't going to pick anyone who will challenge Trump on anything, so it's not really possible to get someone with a backbone right now. There's a good chance Rubio is better than whoever Trump will replace him with when he gets annoyed with Rubio and fires him a year from now.

Bondi is, at least, qualified by experience to do the job to which she's being appointed. She's a MAGA loyalist scumbag who pushed "election fraud" BS and will do little if anything to rein in Trump's worst impulses. but again, there's no world in which anyone Trump picks for DOJ won't check those boxes.
 
What these confirmation hearings are demonstrating is that:

1. The overwhelming majority of Trump's selections - Burgum, Bessent, Zeldon, Rubio, Ratcliffe, Duffy, Bondi, etc. - are unquestionably competent selections that could have been made by any Republican President elect. Yet, many can't help but view them through the lens of Orangemanbad.

2. The only "outside-the-box" picks are Hegseth, RFKJr, Gabbard and Patel.
 
Ramrouser said:
What these confirmation hearings are demonstrating is that:

1. The overwhelming majority of Trump's selections - Burgum, Bessent, Zeldon, Rubio, Ratcliffe, Duffy, Bondi, etc. - are unquestionably competent selections that could have been made by any Republican President elect. Yet, many can't help but view them through the lens of Orangemanbad.

2. The only "outside-the-box" picks are Hegseth, RFKJr, Gabbard and Patel.
Click to expand...
1. I have heard zero liberals complain about Burgum, Bessent, Rubio or Bondi, except for policy disagreements.
2. Oh, so he's only nominated bozos to arguably the three most important cabinet positions? Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play? I guess technically that's only two of the most important cabinet positions, and then two cabinet positions that can be greatly abused, and the people nominated are almost certain to abuse them -- but hey, it's only the defense department, FBI, national intelligence agency, and the administrator of Medicare and Medicaid. No biggie.
 
Ramrouser said:
What these confirmation hearings are demonstrating is that:

1. The overwhelming majority of Trump's selections - Burgum, Bessent, Zeldon, Rubio, Ratcliffe, Duffy, Bondi, etc. - are unquestionably competent selections that could have been made by any Republican President elect. Yet, many can't help but view them through the lens of Orangemanbad.

2. The only "outside-the-box" picks are Hegseth, RFKJr, Gabbard and Patel.
Click to expand...
I don't think this is too far off (though it notably omits that Gaetz, laughably, was Trump's first choice for DOJ). I don't anticipate any of that first group to have much trouble being confirmed; Bondi might be the closest due to her attachment to the 2020 election denialism.

But we'll just have to see (1) how long they actually last in their posts, and (2) if any of them are going to be willing to stand up to Trump. trump's last original cabinet had a really high turnover rate. Personally I think Bessent and Rubio are not likely to last long. Bessent because Trump's economic policy ideas are idiotic and implementing even a fraction of them is likely to hurt the economy, which will leave Trump needing a scapegoat; Rubio because Trump has never liked or respected him anyway and Trump's approach to foreign policy is also really dumb, and likely to lead to friction unless Rubio just rolls over, abandons whatever shred of conscience he has left, and lets Trump humiliate him on the world stage for the next few years.
 
Callatoroy said:
1. Should trump use tariffs at all with respect to china?
2. I know your opinion of Hegseth, Gabbard, and Patel. what about Bondi, Rubio?
3. Did Hegseth's hearing surprise you in any way?
Click to expand...
1. Not tariffs on all goods. Strategically important ones, perhaps, but there are better ways of doing it than with tariffs. Tariffs are, generally speaking, stupid in almost all cases.
3. Hegseth's hearing did not surprise me, except for the way the GOP Senators just rolled over for him. The guy has no business at all being nominated to that position or any other. The idea that anyone might think it a good idea to promote the host of a JV version of a banal morning talk show and put him in charge of the world' largest organization is mind-boggling. Especially when that person also has a drinking problem, a record of abuse, and was dismissed from his only management job for financial improprieties.

Hegseth is a good choice, how? I've not actually seen anyone defend the appointment. It's been nothing but "anonymous smears," as if NOT being a rapist is a useful qualification.
 
heelwithnoname said:
More likely, the utter ridiculousness of picks like Hegseth etc make the others "seem" normal by comparison. And the public and likely congresspeople are already suffering from buffoon fatigue.
Click to expand...
Eh, most of Trump's other picks are the standard issue "rich and influential people who supported/gave a lot of money to Trump's campaign." That's what you would expect from any Republican president. Do some of them probably have some dangerously regressive political ideas? Sure, but again, that's what you're gonna get from the current Republican party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top