The Biden Presidency

[Peter B]

I see that Senate Republicans are making dissatisfied noises about some of Biden's cabinet choices.

What power do they have regarding the confirmation hearings for those cabinet members?

For example, if they vote against a nomination does that mean Biden has to choose someone else?

Or, more disruptively, can they just decide not to bother with hearings, as they did with Obama's judicial nominations?

[Dalhousie]

I can see the harm that investigating Trump might have on the Divided States of America, but they need to (at the very least) fully investigate everything he did even if they don't punish him. Otherwise it sends the message to all future Presidents that they can be as corrupt as they want with no consequences.

My impression is that divisions are so deep that any attempt as prosecutions will just make matters worse.  Something along the lines of a truth and reconciliation commission might be better

[JayUtah]

I see that Senate Republicans are making dissatisfied noises about some of Biden's cabinet choices.

Yeah, the joke is that he hasn't yet chosen a single member of his family.  What's up with that?

What power do they have regarding the confirmation hearings for those cabinet members?

Quite a lot, if the Republican Party maintains its majority.  This is why the outstanding Senate races are so important.

For example, if they vote against a nomination does that mean Biden has to choose someone else?

Yes.

Or, more disruptively, can they just decide not to bother with hearings, as they did with Obama's judicial nominations?

Yes.

However, to remedy both these cases the positions can be filled with acting secretaries, administrators, and so forth.  In fact, this is what Pres. Trump has preferred to do in some cases.  If an appointee is voted down, he can no longer serve in the acting role.  If he's never submitted for confirmation, he's safe in his acting role.  While the confirmation vote determines whether the appointee will take office, the minority party in Senate confirmation hearings has the right to invoke Congressional investigative powers to discover things about the candidate and ask him or her questions that the President may not want heard in public.  Even if the appointee is eventually confirmed, pointed questions from the minority committee members can do political damage.  So if you want to appoint an unscrupulous person to a Cabinet position, you accept the limitations of the acting Secretary role and never submit the name for confirmation.

At the Cabinet level, acting Secretaries don't have discretionary authority.  In many cases they can only be caretakers of existing policies, rules, and functions.  If you want a successful administration, it pays to have a strong Cabinet position, which can only come from Senate confirmation.  But the answer to your partially-stated question is yes, Sen. McConnell and a hostile Senate can do much to hobble the Biden Administration by denying him the service of an effective Cabinet.

[raven]

Which I have little doubt they'll do. The days of 'OK, we disagree on exact methods, but we are working for the common good of the nation' are long gone. Bipartisanship was never strong, but it was there to varying degrees. Now it's 'Neener neener, we're gonna block ya!"

[Obviousman]

"Whatever they fer, I'm a'gin it!"

[smartcooky]

Th New York Southern District AG is out to get him anyway.

That may be so, but what you talking about (SDNY) is a Federal jurisdiction - if Trump wrangles a pardon (resigns and has Pence pardon him) there is pretty much nothing the feds can do

However, if the New York State AG, Letetia James, or the New York County DA, Cyrus Vance, go after him, his pardon will count for nothing - presidential pardons only apply Federally, not to the individual states

[raven]

"Whatever they fer, I'm a'gin it!"

Not sure if what you are referencing, but you definitely brought it to mind.

[Zakalwe]

Th New York Southern District AG is out to get him anyway.

That may be so, but what you talking about (SDNY) is a Federal jurisdiction - if Trump wrangles a pardon (resigns and has Pence pardon him) there is pretty much nothing the feds can do

However, if the New York State AG, Letetia James, or the New York County DA, Cyrus Vance, go after him, his pardon will count for nothing - presidential pardons only apply Federally, not to the individual states

Indeed.

In a predictable fit of childish pique, it seems that Trump is at least considering announcing his run for 2024 at the same time as Biden's inauguration.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/527817-trump-considering-kicking-off-2024-run-during-bidens-inauguration-report

The man has no other plan than to ferment division, hatred and anger. He really has no worthy qualities, does he?

[Glom]

Th New York Southern District AG is out to get him anyway.

That may be so, but what you talking about (SDNY) is a Federal jurisdiction - if Trump wrangles a pardon (resigns and has Pence pardon him) there is pretty much nothing the feds can do

However, if the New York State AG, Letetia James, or the New York County DA, Cyrus Vance, go after him, his pardon will count for nothing - presidential pardons only apply Federally, not to the individual states

Indeed.

In a predictable fit of childish pique, it seems that Trump is at least considering announcing his run for 2024 at the same time as Biden's inauguration.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/527817-trump-considering-kicking-off-2024-run-during-bidens-inauguration-report

The man has no other plan than to ferment division, hatred and anger. He really has no worthy qualities, does he?

I'd like the think there'll be less cultish voters who'll look very unfavourably on such behaviour and it'll end up costing him support, but somehow I doubt it.

[molesworth]

It will be nice to have people with a sense of humour (and souls) back in the White House 

[JayUtah]

It will be nice to have people with a sense of humour (and souls) back in the White House 

Indeed.  It's not that the outgoing administration lacks a sense of humor.  It's just that not everyone is amused by a President mocking a reporter who has a disability.

[molesworth]

It will be nice to have people with a sense of humour (and souls) back in the White House 

Indeed.  It's not that the outgoing administration lacks a sense of humor.  It's just that not everyone is amused by a President mocking a reporter who has a disability.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there.  The current incumbent has, as far as I'm aware, never shown any spontaneous humour or made a real joke, especially a self-deprecating one, in any situation I've seen him in, even before he was elected.  I think he lacks the empathy required to truly relate to others in a humorous way, and he sees everything as a transaction, where there must be a winner and a loser.  That's why, I think, that his attempts at humour always descend into cruelty and diminishing others.

And as for his claims that some of his more outrageous statements were just "sarcasm", I have to say that he wouldn't recognise sarcasm if it came up and bit him on his not-insubstantial behind! 

[jfb]

It will be nice to have people with a sense of humour (and souls) back in the White House 

Where did you find that?  My google-fu is weak today.

[raven]

It will be nice to have people with a sense of humour (and souls) back in the White House 

Indeed.  It's not that the outgoing administration lacks a sense of humor.  It's just that not everyone is amused by a President mocking a reporter who has a disability.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there.  The current incumbent has, as far as I'm aware, never shown any spontaneous humour or made a real joke, especially a self-deprecating one, in any situation I've seen him in, even before he was elected.  I think he lacks the empathy required to truly relate to others in a humorous way, and he sees everything as a transaction, where there must be a winner and a loser.  That's why, I think, that his attempts at humour always descend into cruelty and diminishing others.

And as for his claims that some of his more outrageous statements were just "sarcasm", I have to say that he wouldn't recognise sarcasm if it came up and bit him on his not-insubstantial behind! 

I grew up with a narcissist and, let me tell you, they don't have senses of humour about themselves. They can't look at themselves from the outside and go, "Yeah, that was funny! Teeny tiny little gloves for my teeny tiny hands!" "Oh god! We booked a landscaping place for a major news conference instead of a famed hotel by the same name! Can you believe it? I couldn't, but, hey, the show must go on! I've performed in worse joints"
No, their sense of humour is a tool to belittle others, to raise themselves up. Any seeming humility is just a facade to that end, their self put downs will only be in situations they can control.

[Jason Thompson]

It will be nice to have people with a sense of humour (and souls) back in the White House 

Indeed.  It's not that the outgoing administration lacks a sense of humor.  It's just that not everyone is amused by a President mocking a reporter who has a disability.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there.  The current incumbent has, as far as I'm aware, never shown any spontaneous humour or made a real joke, especially a self-deprecating one, in any situation I've seen him in, even before he was elected.  I think he lacks the empathy required to truly relate to others in a humorous way, and he sees everything as a transaction, where there must be a winner and a loser.  That's why, I think, that his attempts at humour always descend into cruelty and diminishing others.

This was picked up on back in 2016 when a British writer penned a piece explaining why we were so concerned about Trump. His total inability to find humour in anything but mocking those 'lower' than him is a huge red flag to a nation that has practically made it their national identity to laugh at themselves sometimes. Trump's humour is cruel, not affectionate or light-hearted.