• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

McMaster could leave WH after months of tension with Trump - CNN today

A consistent "rumor".

What's not rumor is Trump crapping on members of his own administration in public on Twitter. Yep, having your own boss berate you in public must make for the most morale-boosting workplace environment on earth. I know if my boss demeaned me in public I would feel great about getting out of bed every day to go to work.
 
Is the Clinton email investigation over? News to me. Here are two different investigations going on right now, about the emails. Here's one that is for the Clinton Foundation. Yep, again, DOJ.

Did I say the investigation was over? I said if you had unicorn scat, nympho cars and pots of gold for every 'report' of Hillary just moments away from indictment since 2016, you couldn't leave the house, from both sexual exhaustion and a blocked driveway... ;)

Now what maybe news to you is only after intense browbeating from Trump to Jefferson Sessions for some cover for all the Russian revelations is there some sort of RE-OPENING of the investigation...

Yep Trump throwing poop to try and distract... :peace
 
Trump hires and fires people as needed...as any good executive does.

Of course, Dear Leader is never wrong, he can only be wronged, etc. But if you tell me a company that has 33% turnover in the executive ranks per year, that's a company with serious problems at the top. If I was a betting man, I'd short that stock.
 
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/22/politics/hr-mcmaster-future-trump-white-house/index.html

Washington (CNN) With tensions flaring between President Donald Trump and national security adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the Pentagon is considering options that would allow the President to potentially move the three-star general out of his current role and back into the military, according to half a dozen defense and administration officials.

A search is quietly being conducted by the Pentagon to see if there is a four-star military job suited for McMaster, these officials said.

=================================================================
As we've seen in dozens of other cases, this is what happens to you if you diss The Donald.

same thing happened under obama.
 
Those who work there, however, say that such just isn't so--that the atmosphere in the west wing is pleasant and cheerful and optimistic and folks are just coming to work every day and doing their jobs. It is the leftwing media who so desperately want us to believe it is nothing but chaos because they so despise the President they will go to any lengths, however dishonest, to destroy him. But staff turnover in the Trump administration is not all that remarkable when compared to Obama and Bush 43 or Bill Clinton and/or others. So they exaggerate Trump's staff turnovers as chaos and a huge deal while simply calmly reporting those in previous administrations:
n a newspaper piece about a White House in turmoil, a prominent paper described an atmosphere of beleaguered aides confused by their unscripted boss, a man who needed a "rudder on what many believed was a loose and listing ship."

This is not from a recent piece about President Donald Trump's White House. The Washington Post, in 1997, wrote this about President Bill Clinton and the state of his presidency in mid-1994. The White House staff, wrote the Post, "was suffering from what increasingly looked to be callowness and naivete." Enter veteran congressman and new chief of staff Leon Panetta, who learned, as he put it, that "no one had an organizational chart." He added, "As far as I know, anybody who walked down the hall walked in (to the Oval Office)." Clinton, whose approval ratings were at one time about as bad as Trump's, went on to an easy re-election.

As to Trump's changing of White House personnel, President Barack Obama, over his two terms, had five chiefs of staff. One "interim" chief of staff lasted less time than did Reince Priebus. Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan, two-term presidents, had four each.

Obama had four secretaries of Defense, more than Clinton and Reagan. In the case of Obama's first three, upon departure, they had significant policy differences with the boss.

Leon Panetta, Obama's second secretary of Defense, complained about what he considered Obama's poor leadership, one that "avoids the battle, complains and misses opportunities." On Iraq, Panetta felt that Obama "kind of lost his way" when he pulled out all the troops over Panetta's objection. . .
https://townhall.com/columnists/lar...the-chaos-in-the-clinton-white-house-n2363649


Also see
How does Trump White House turnover compare to Bush, Obama? | PolitiFact

It is unfortunate how so many clueless Americans take their marching orders and talking points from a corrupt and dishonest media.

TDS doesn't allow you to actually see facts it in fact is the direct opposite of that.
If it is anti-trump it must be true.
 
Trump hires and fires people as needed...as any good executive does.

That is one thing about trump. he expects people to do their job.
if they are not going to do their job then he will find a replacement.
 
What's not rumor is Trump crapping on members of his own administration in public on Twitter. Yep, having your own boss berate you in public must make for the most morale-boosting workplace environment on earth. I know if my boss demeaned me in public I would feel great about getting out of bed every day to go to work.

And McMaster is a genuinely accomplished and very serious guy, and by all accounts I've seen has impeccable integrity. Having an ignoramus, no integrity, serial lying asshole as a boss demean you in public has to be especially hard to take for someone like him.

I know our resident Trump apologists have to dismiss the story, but it would seem shocking to me to find out McMaster was NOT looking for a graceful exit. I hope he doesn't because goodness knows we need a lot more men like him in the Trump administration, serving the country with actual expertise and integrity, but who could blame him at this point for leaving?
 
And McMaster is a genuinely accomplished and very serious guy, and by all accounts I've seen has impeccable integrity. Having an ignoramus, no integrity, serial lying asshole as a boss demean you in public has to be especially hard to take for someone like him.

I know our resident Trump apologists have to dismiss the story, but it would seem shocking to me to find out McMaster was NOT looking for a graceful exit. I hope he doesn't because goodness knows we need a lot more men like him in the Trump administration, serving the country with actual expertise and integrity, but who could blame him at this point for leaving?

I could be naive for holding on to this belief, but there's still a part of me that thinks he's staying in his role to protect the nation from Trump. But it's also true that Trump corrupts everything around him so it's hard to say how valid this belief is anymore.
 
Of course, Dear Leader is never wrong, he can only be wronged, etc. But if you tell me a company that has 33% turnover in the executive ranks per year, that's a company with serious problems at the top. If I was a betting man, I'd short that stock.

shrug...

That's up to the board of directors to deal with.
 
shrug...

That's up to the board of directors to deal with.

Yes, it is their duty to address serious problems at that top that might cause 1/3 of senior management hired by the current CEO to last less than a year on the job.

In this analogy, we're a BOD (or shareholders if you prefer) that unfortunately only meets every 4 years.
 
Yes, it is their duty to address serious problems at that top that might cause 1/3 of senior management hired by the current CEO to last less than a year on the job.

In this analogy, we're a BOD (or shareholders if you prefer) that unfortunately only meets every 4 years.

And in just under 3 years you can say your piece (with your vote).
 
Did I say the investigation was over? I said if you had unicorn scat, nympho cars and pots of gold for every 'report' of Hillary just moments away from indictment since 2016, you couldn't leave the house, from both sexual exhaustion and a blocked driveway... ;)

Now what maybe news to you is only after intense browbeating from Trump to Jefferson Sessions for some cover for all the Russian revelations is there some sort of RE-OPENING of the investigation...

Yep Trump throwing poop to try and distract... :peace

You are talking about the investigation that the FBI did on the emails? The same one that Strzok said they needed to take it easy on Hillary because she might be the new president? You should google Horowitz, DOJ OIG. His report isn't even out yet and it has already resulted in the removal of the McCabe (Deputy Director of the FBI), Strzok (FBI Chief of the Counterespionage), Page (attorney that worked directly for the Deputy Director of the FBI) and Baker (Senior Counsel for the FBI). Those were some pretty heavy hitters. Good luck with that denial thing.
 
You are talking about the investigation that the FBI did on the emails? The same one that Strzok said they needed to take it easy on Hillary because she might be the new president? You should google Horowitz, DOJ OIG. His report isn't even out yet and it has already resulted in the removal of the McCabe (Deputy Director of the FBI), Strzok (FBI Chief of the Counterespionage), Page (attorney that worked directly for the Deputy Director of the FBI) and Baker (Senior Counsel for the FBI). Those were some pretty heavy hitters. Good luck with that denial thing.

I've not seen anything tying the resignation/removal of McCabe or Baker to the OIG investigation. Page and Strzok were idiots.
 
Only if your wildest dreams come true.

I assure you that my wildest dreams do not involve Trump, Pence nor Ryan. I only speak from my able prophesy; I can read the signs of the times.
 

Wait, you're using anonymous sources claiming these things as your evidence? LMMFAO. On this thread you said:

Unicorns could **** gold bricks in my driveway. A naked blonde could pull up in my driveway and give me the keys to a Lambo and want wild sex. Leprechauns could show up at my door and give me pots of gold.

How many times have we seen the press claim that Trump was going to fire Kelly or that Trump was going to fire Mueller and it hasn't happened yet? More stupid blather from CNN based on statements from people in the know. There is no more validity in these kinds of articles than if I wrote news articles and just made **** up.


LOL, same thing as above. Anonymous sources making anonymous claims. Got it. It's good when those sources tell you what you want to hear, and can be dismissed in all other cases.

What I will agree with is McCabe and Baker were on the Trump crap list, which is a bad place to be that high up in the FBI. Whether that was justified by actual wrongdoing on their part is still unclear, and nothing in those articles that I saw offers any evidence for actual wrongdoing. If there is, you're free to quote it, with a named source of course!
 
Wait, you're using anonymous sources claiming these things as your evidence? LMMFAO. On this thread you said:





LOL, same thing as above. Anonymous sources making anonymous claims. Got it. It's good when those sources tell you what you want to hear, and can be dismissed in all other cases.

What I will agree with is McCabe and Baker were on the Trump crap list, which is a bad place to be that high up in the FBI. Whether that was justified by actual wrongdoing on their part is still unclear, and nothing in those articles that I saw offers any evidence for actual wrongdoing. If there is, you're free to quote it, with a named source of course!

And my point was:
How many times have we seen the press claim that Trump was going to fire Kelly or that Trump was going to fire Mueller and it hasn't happened yet? More stupid blather from CNN based on statements from people in the know. There is no more validity in these kinds of articles than if I wrote news articles and just made **** up.

Looks like Kelly and Mueller are still there in spite of the idiotic claims that they were going to be fired. It's just people on the left dreaming about what they want and then try to turn it into a news article.
 
And my point was:

Looks like Kelly and Mueller are still there in spite of the idiotic claims that they were going to be fired. It's just people on the left dreaming about what they want and then try to turn it into a news article.

LOL, you got caught citing anonymous sources after dissing them in the same thread. Pretty hilarious to see such an obvious double standard. I don't believe CNN or anyone else fabricates sources and what they're telling us. Someone close to McMaster is I suspect leaking this with his approval, and it could be for any number of reasons - because he's actually planning on leaving or to signal to the WH to cut the crap or he's gone, or who knows? If it was made up, he's got a phone and can get a statement out in 5 minutes if it's made up BS, and that's not happened that I've seen.

As to other stories that don't pan out, there's a big difference between the leak being WRONG versus fabricated by the reporter, and IMO relying on the latter being true is kind of silly/stupid. If it's wrong, the next step is figuring out why someone in the WH leaked that bad info? Who in the WH gained from that leak? It's not, "CNN! FAKE NEWS!!!!!!@!#@!@"

And my point about McCabe and Baker was the part at the end - address it or not, it's off topic - but we're not really sure why McCabe was effectively fired or Baker left or whether the OIG will conclude anyone did anything wrong versus just politically untenable in the Trump administration.
 
McMaster speaking out rightfully about Russian involvement in the election may have done him in. It wuz at the Munich Security Conference McMaster said it's conclusive given the Mueller indictments against 13 Russians. Plus most of his fellow generals to include admirals active and retired have been telling him he's mucking up the rep of the military by retaining his active duty status while working in the WH.

There is a definite indicator we can look for either way.

The position of Army vice chief of staff is due for a rotation this year and a new Army number two will need to be recommended soon by SecDef Mattis, SecArmy Mark Esper, and who is compatible to the current CSA Gen. Mark A. Milley. If McMaster might be on his way out this could be a clean exit for both him and Trump. Despite Trump's campaign rhetoric about "fire the generals" he's not fired a one of 'em (including admirals of course). Kelly too would want McMaster to make a soft landing so the up aspect of the old "up or out" is just about unanimous.

The one general Trump is known to have wanted to replace is the current commander in Afghanistan, Gen. John Nicholson who this year is two years in a command position that is typically two years. If McMaster were moved into either position he'd get a fourth star and also need Senate confirmation. Sen. McCain chairman of armed services committee and a strong supporter of Gen. Nicholson is fast losing leverage over the WH as testified by the appointment last month of Esper as army secretary despite McCain having blocked it for several months.

Plus McMaster has not been strong enough on Nato which is a severe criticism Pentagon brass have of him given the strong and unanimous support of Nato the military brass has.

Being publicly invited to leave by a former chairman JCS only increases the pressure on McMaster. Retired Admiral Mike Mullen is the guy who called the retired three-star Flynn after Flynn's lock her up speech to advise him it was conduct unbecoming, i.e., violated both the spirit of the officer oath and the decorum of a retired general officer....

That’s a dilemma all the generals current and former must wrestle with, including McMaster, according to former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, retired Adm. Michael Mullen.

“Inside the White House, it’s politics all the time,” Mullen said in comments at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “In these jobs, you get pushed to the edge of who you are.”

The retired four-star admiral said you have to decide, “What are my limits here? When am I going to say no, meaning I’m not here anymore?”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/mcmas...-generals-stars-his-old-military-comrades-say
 
Trump hires and fires people as needed...as any good executive does.


In Washington a revolving personnel door is a dead giveaway the guy in charge couldn't run a meat market. It's well known throughout the city whether it's congress or the cabinet. And for a long time. Clinton settled things down in the WH once he appointed Panetta chief of staff. Neither Bush had the problem; neither did OB. The chart presented in scrolling attests to the facts.

business-commerce-work-workers-employee-employer-staff-rde0418_low.jpg



Yet Trump replaces people with people who need to get replaced. We are looking now at the realistic probability of the third national security adviser since February last year. Trump made clear last year he wants Mike Pompeo in the job which is like the boss saying he knows today who will replace you tomorrow -- or as soon as he can line it up. LTG McMaster retained his active duty status in the WH despite objections by colleagues and because he knows that when worse comes to worst he can leverage a fourth star out of the commotion. Coming soon one suspects. Which is a good deal for McMaster and he knows it considering he was going to retire until Trump grabbed him up.

Pompeo will likely stay for the rest of the Trump run because above all else Pompeo is a savvy politico and Trump needs him to parry the heat about the Russia connections. This is another when not an if. McMaster has gone over to the other side on the Russia pipeline into the WH so the nyet is on him too now. Pompeo is both feet onside.
 
Back
Top Bottom