this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
180 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2343 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

The Senate confirmed President Biden’s David Huitema as head of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) in a 50-46 vote, securing his five-year term before the Republican-led administration of President-elect Donald Trump begins.

The OGE has been without a director for over a year, and Huitema’s appointment ensures the office is staffed to oversee the critical presidential transition process.

However, concerns remain, as Trump could fire Huitema or bypass ethics protocols for key appointees.

Ethics groups applauded the confirmation but warned of significant challenges ahead under Trump’s leadership.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rozz@lemmy.sdf.org 75 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Great.

Is there anything realistically stopping him from being fired?

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 76 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

And this little piggy built his home with straw...

"That'll stop the fascist dictatorship" said the pig.

The pig was killed and eaten. The end.

[–] JerkyChew@lemmy.one 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

He doesn't need to be fired, he'll just be ignored and marginalized.

[–] billiam0202@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

Trump won't ignore him, but he will fire him.

Trump has a pathological need to tell everyone what a big boy he is and he makes his own decisions, because he needs external affirmation. Firing Huitema will get him applause from the shit-flingers so of course he'll do it.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 49 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

So... What's his job exactly? To tell Trump "that's not ethical" and be promptly ignored?

[–] Botzo@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

The executive branch ethics program works to prevent financial conflicts of interest to help ensure government decisions are made free from personal financial bias.

https://www.oge.gov/web/oge.nsf/about_what-we-do

Since it went so well last time Trump was president, it's just another virtue signal for him to wipe some more shit on.

[–] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Kinda weird to instate this as an advisory body instead of just making self-management of investments for anyone in Congress illegal. Everyone in finance has to do that because of the clear conflict of interest. The people making the laws and financial regulations seemingly do not because their above it (even tho their very clearly enriching themselves).

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Why stop at financial? Matt Gaetz is a predator in charge of the AG office. There are more things than profits that bad people seek.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 44 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I will never stop despising everyone who refers to any American official as a "Tsar"

It's a word that means things, un-American and anti-democratic things, shut the hell up "journalists."

[–] ZombieMantis@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Tbf that was always kinda the point. It was a coined to mock the creation of White House office positions that had no legislation justifying it's existence, as opposed to the Federal Departments.

If the office was created, and position filled undemocratically, then calling that office holder a tsar makes some sense, if clearly hyperbolic.

Obviously, this one is a Senate approved appointment, so the point is diluted.

[–] BMTea@lemmy.world 41 points 1 week ago

Good news: Man standing in direct path of avalanche puts on snow shoes

Problem: the Americans have an actual czar now, and an "ethics czar" will not stop him

[–] Bieren@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I think we need to stop using czar for everything. Gotten a bit out of hand.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

The should slam that word.

[–] homesnatch@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago

There should be an Anti-Czar Czar

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

This guy is either going to be busy as hell or just sitting back because he won't be able to stop it. Aught to be interesting where he falls.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

How cute.....Warren thinks this guy will have a job 30 seconds after Trump's coronation.

[–] M600@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

They should have named it department of government ethics.