• 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!

Do you believe Sec Navy's OP Ed

Do you believe=agree with Sec Navy's OP Ed


  • Total voters
    31

JANFU

Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
59,422
Reaction score
38,993
Location
Best Coast Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Richard Spencer: I was fired as Navy secretary. Here’s what I’ve learned because of it.

Do you believe Sec Navy's OP Ed


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...2e58bc-1092-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html

President Trump involved himself in the case almost from the start. Before the trial began, in March, I received two calls from the president asking me to lift Gallagher’s confinement in a Navy brig; I pushed back twice, because the presiding judge, acting on information about the accused’s conduct, had decided that confinement was important. Eventually, the president ordered me to have him transferred to the equivalent of an enlisted barracks. I came to believe that Trump’s interest in the case stemmed partly from the way the defendant’s lawyers and others had worked to keep it front and center in the media.
 
Richard Spencer: I was fired as Navy secretary. Here’s what I’ve learned because of it.

Do you believe Sec Navy's OP Ed


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...2e58bc-1092-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html

People are finding out just who is president Under previous administrations, everyone else got to play president. The press, ambassadors, Secretary if State, etc. I guess there is collective amnesia that Trump was elected and he is the REAL Commander in Chief and not some attorneys who think we dishonored Islam.
 
Clear your cache

Many use ccleaner or VPN to address that issue

I never click on Washington Post links because of that, just cleared my cache for that site, didn't work.
 
Richard Spencer: I was fired as Navy secretary. Here’s what I’ve learned because of it.

Do you believe Sec Navy's OP Ed


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...2e58bc-1092-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html

I can't read his Op-Ed, so I have to go on your "summary" quote.

Criminal trials under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice do not follow the same rules as normal criminal trials. They follow specific guidelines under U.S. Codes covering Summary, Special, and General Court's Martial. In each case there is a convening authority who orders the proceeding. However, regardless of whatever level, they are all subject to review by the chain of command, and the President is at the top of that chain as Commander in Chief.

So it does not matter what the ex-Secretary of the Navy has to say about "interference." There is no such thing when it comes to the direct military chain of command. If the person has the power to modify or reverse the results of the process, then there is no "interference." The convening authority has the power to modify conditions of pre-trial arrest and confinement. Trump, as the commander-in-chief can also instruct the commander below him who convened the court-martial to modify the confinement requirements. Period!

Meanwhile, these "instructions" did not result in the accused actually causing any "suspected harms" did they? NO!

So this is another non-story. :coffeepap:
 
Last edited:
I never click on Washington Post links because of that, just cleared my cache for that site, didn't work.

I also use ccleaner. Direct from the site,not 3rd party
Free version works quite well
 
People are finding out just who is president Under previous administrations, everyone else got to play president. The press, ambassadors, Secretary if State, etc. I guess there is collective amnesia that Trump was elected and he is the REAL Commander in Chief and not some attorneys who think we dishonored Islam.

I never doubted the Reality
 
Spencer's pissed off because he got ****-canned.
 
People are finding out just who is president Under previous administrations, everyone else got to play president. The press, ambassadors, Secretary if State, etc. I guess there is collective amnesia that Trump was elected and he is the REAL Commander in Chief and not some attorneys who think we dishonored Islam.

For the bloody rest, a very bad sales campaign for Conquistador Coffee, a cross-dressing PM now in the history books, a venture capitalist who wants whatever it is you've got, an advertisement for American Defence vs. International Communism, or Crelm toothpaste (with Fraudulin), or Shell petrol, murder by railway timetable, buck-toothed Romans, Crackpot Religions, Ltd, and the title number.
 
I never doubted the Reality

The reality is that there were too many co-presidents in the past, including MSM. CNN, MSNBS, WaPo, the NY Times and all of the other rag papers who went to cocktail parties, hob-nobbed with ambassadors, talked about fundamentally changing America into a European utopia, the ideal of open borders and unfettered illegal immigration, and how America has been too imperialistic and we need to become less and support third worlders and just kind of back off and be just another country. This is how we got into the current Ukraine circus. Ambassadors the world over got to thinking that they were more important and influential than the president and instead of AMERICA first, they wanted UKRAINE first, with Vidman being overly tied to Ukraine rather than America and he thought he should call the shots and most likely did before Trump slapped the little arrogant DOB down.

I never saw such a collection of arrogant self important people than at the hearings. Vidman angrily insisting he be be called by his military title and wearing his getup? Seriously??

In short, we had hundreds of mini presidents in congress, the Senate, Secretary of State, the press until Trump came along to break up the little gane and take the ball away.
 
For the bloody rest, a very bad sales campaign for Conquistador Coffee, a cross-dressing PM now in the history books, a venture capitalist who wants whatever it is you've got, an advertisement for American Defence vs. International Communism, or Crelm toothpaste (with Fraudulin), or Shell petrol, murder by railway timetable, buck-toothed Romans, Crackpot Religions, Ltd, and the title number.

Would you repeat that in English? "bloody rest"? Are you from Europe? Do you say "Mum" instead of "Mom"?
 
I can't read his Op-Ed, so I have to go on your "summary" quote.

Criminal trials under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice do not follow the same rules as normal criminal trials. They follow specific guidelines under U.S. Codes covering Summary, Special, and General Court's Martial. In each case there is a convening authority who orders the proceeding. However, regardless of whatever level, they are all subject to review by the chain of command, and the President is at the top of that chain as Commander in Chief.

So it does not matter what the ex-Secretary of the Navy has to say about "interference." There is no such thing when it comes to the direct military chain of command. If the person has the power to modify or reverse the results of the process, then there is no "interference." The convening authority has the power to modify conditions of pre-trial arrest and confinement. Trump, as the commander-in-chief can also instruct the commander below him who convened the court-martial to modify the confinement requirements. Period!

Meanwhile, these "instructions" did not result in the accused actually causing any "suspected harms" did they? NO!

So this is another non-story. :coffeepap:

That oh so long post to state it was legal- well we know it was legal
The reality is that there were too many co-presidents in the past, including MSM. CNN, MSNBS, WaPo, the NY Times and all of the other rag papers who went to cocktail parties, hob-nobbed with ambassadors, talked about fundamentally changing America into a European utopia, the ideal of open borders and unfettered illegal immigration, and how America has been too imperialistic and we need to become less and support third worlders and just kind of back off and be just another country. This is how we got into the current Ukraine circus. Ambassadors the world over got to thinking that they were more important and influential than the president and instead of AMERICA first, they wanted UKRAINE first, with Vidman being overly tied to Ukraine rather than America and he thought he should call the shots and most likely did before Trump slapped the little arrogant DOB down.

I never saw such a collection of arrogant self important people than at the hearings. Vidman angrily insisting he be be called by his military title and wearing his getup? Seriously??

In short, we had hundreds of mini presidents in congress, the Senate, Secretary of State, the press until Trump came along to break up the little gane and take the ball away.

If Presidential Pardons via FOX entertainers, and I use that term loosely, is OK with you is what I gather?
 
As long as Trump keeps hating on Mexicans he can fire whomever he wants (honorable person or not) with no pushback from Republicans (including the real leaders, Rush and Sean).

Happy Holidays!!
 
That oh so long post to state it was legal- well we know it was legal


If Presidential Pardons via FOX entertainers, and I use that term loosely, is OK with you is what I gather?

What?!? :doh

If it is LEGAL then there is NO STORY!

This is the problem with so many arguments made by those who oppose the Administration. Even when they recognize that the action was perfectly legal and within the purview of the President, they go to emotional appeals. "It may be legal, but is it Right?"

That's all I've seen from members of "the resistance." Over and over the same refrain.

If you don't like something he's done, but recognize it was both within his power and perfectly "legal," you try to turn it into a "moral wrong" and argue he was "bad" to do it.

As for your "deflection" to alleged "influencers?" well, I could counter by asking why so many people allow themselves to be "influenced" by a clearly biased and politically motivated media?

No point in doing so when the convinced can't see it themselves. :coffeepap:
 
Last edited:
Yes I do.

It constantly amazes me how these lifelong patriots - secretaries of defense or state, of the navy, chiefs of staff, national security advisers, career diplomats, military officers, intelligence officials - are all dismissed as cowards, liars and never Trumpers the moment they turn on him.

Is the most obvious explanation that these qualified, competent and experienced people are all wrong and Twump alone is right? Really is that the best his supporters can come up with?
 
I can't read his Op-Ed, so I have to go on your "summary" quote.

Criminal trials under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice do not follow the same rules as normal criminal trials. They follow specific guidelines under U.S. Codes covering Summary, Special, and General Court's Martial. In each case there is a convening authority who orders the proceeding. However, regardless of whatever level, they are all subject to review by the chain of command, and the President is at the top of that chain as Commander in Chief.

So it does not matter what the ex-Secretary of the Navy has to say about "interference." There is no such thing when it comes to the direct military chain of command. If the person has the power to modify or reverse the results of the process, then there is no "interference." The convening authority has the power to modify conditions of pre-trial arrest and confinement. Trump, as the commander-in-chief can also instruct the commander below him who convened the court-martial to modify the confinement requirements. Period!

Meanwhile, these "instructions" did not result in the accused actually causing any "suspected harms" did they? NO!

So this is another non-story. :coffeepap:

Would you still consider it a non story in light of the fact that such action by a POTUS is beyond Highly Unusual....and that said POTUS has invited the pardoned one to join him on the campaign trail?
 
The reality is that there were too many co-presidents in the past, including MSM. CNN, MSNBS, WaPo, the NY Times and all of the other rag papers who went to cocktail parties, hob-nobbed with ambassadors, talked about fundamentally changing America into a European utopia, the ideal of open borders and unfettered illegal immigration, and how America has been too imperialistic and we need to become less and support third worlders and just kind of back off and be just another country. This is how we got into the current Ukraine circus. Ambassadors the world over got to thinking that they were more important and influential than the president and instead of AMERICA first, they wanted UKRAINE first, with Vidman being overly tied to Ukraine rather than America and he thought he should call the shots and most likely did before Trump slapped the little arrogant DOB down.

I never saw such a collection of arrogant self important people than at the hearings. Vidman angrily insisting he be be called by his military title and wearing his getup? Seriously??

In short, we had hundreds of mini presidents in congress, the Senate, Secretary of State, the press until Trump came along to break up the little gane and take the ball away.

Eric? Is that you Eric? Sounds as dumb as Eric.
 
Would you repeat that in English? "bloody rest"? Are you from Europe? Do you say "Mum" instead of "Mom"?

LOL....you are apparently too young to catch the reference. Do you live with your Mum?
 
Would you still consider it a non story in light of the fact that such action by a POTUS is beyond Highly Unusual....and that said POTUS has invited the pardoned one to join him on the campaign trail?

NO! What part of "It is within his power and authority as Commander-In-Chief" do you find so hard to understand? :doh

You don't have to like or agree with it, but regardless, in this instance he did nothing illegal, and thus nothing wrong....PERIOD!
 
That oh so long post to state it was legal- well we know it was legal


If Presidential Pardons via FOX entertainers, and I use that term loosely, is OK with you is what I gather?

Are you suggesting that Obama didn't take marching orders from CNN and MSNBS and the other far left printed media? Trump listens to Fox and probably dug into the story more because of of Fox. But, of ALL presidents, (and this is what we LOVE about him) Trump takes orders from NO ONE!.
 
Eric? Is that you Eric? Sounds as dumb as Eric.

You are as cryptic as your female friend. I don't understand a word you are saying. Probably because you are slightly liberal? Not sure but in the next post, try to make some sense. OK?
 
Back
Top Bottom