• njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    What’s the difference between appointing somebody and hiring somebody? Isn’t it virtually the same thing?

    • Zier@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The president chose who he wanted & it was rubber stamp approved. Having an individual work their way up in the Agency to finally be promoted to the head is different, and they don’t change every 4 years. Whiskey Pete was a fox newz reader, un-qualified for this job.

      • njm1314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        No that wasn’t my question. I understand the difference between a qualified and unqualified candidate. What am I asking is what’s the difference between hiring and appointing? Who’s doing the promoting? And how is that any different than being appointed?

        • Zier@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Congress has to approve the appointed cabinet. The FBI promotes employees. The FBI has no choice in the person running their entire organization, they were never an employee there.

          • njm1314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yes. Well aware. But the question I asked? You said the head of the FBI should never be appointed and we should only hire qualified individuals. Then I asked what’s the difference between an appointment and a hiring, also who does the hiring? Remember?