ADM Bill McRaven (Ret.) Calls Out Our Faux-Patriot President: Revoke My Clearance As Well

[apdst]

TR was a colonel in the Army. We recall Roosevent's Rough Riders, officially the 1st U.S. Volunteer Cavalry which TR commanded in Cuba.

Roosevelt then ordered a charge and took after the Spaniards on adjacent San Juan Hill. But he didn’t realize that only five men followed, three of whom fell wounded within a hundred yards. The other two held their ground while an angry Roosevelt returned to the main line through the continuing fire and confronted his men for not following. In the heat of the moment, the troops hadn’t heard Roosevelt’s order nor seen him charging up the hill almost single-handedly. Now the charge became general and the troops cleared the Spanish trenches and kept a tenuous hold on both San Juan and Kettle Hills. The Rough Riders lost 89 of 490 men killed or wounded in what came to be known as Roosevelt's Crowded Hour. Most experts agree that his personal valor and leadership were the single strongest elements leading to that day’s victory.

The Soldier - Theodore Roosevelt Association


Colonel TR and Admiral McRaven vs Trump. There are many more flag officers vs Trump, generals and admirals retired and on active duty throughout the armed services. McRaven said he'd prayed Trump would change to become a good Potus. In other words, Putin-Trump-Fanboyz are up against the wrong guy who moreover has a lot of support behind him.

What's your point?

And yes, I've gotten drunk at the Menger Hotel and toasted the Rough Riders all night. Tom Horn is one of my heroes.

 

[Tangmo]

:lamo
The Commander in Chief outranks a four star general, especially a retired one. :lamo:lamo

Putin outranks Trump.

It's the case anyway that Potus under the UCMJ can order a retired officer to shut his mouth. Problem is the last thing Trump wants to do concerning Bill McRaven is to get into a dick measuring contest. McRaven has big hands while Trump has a big mouth.

What a dumb thing to say.
No one wanted him to give you the proper forms to remove his clearance. It wouldn't go anywhere if that was done.
Do you really not know that?

McRaven knows Trump doesn't have the gall to act against him. Not that Bill McRaven is sacred cause he ain't. It's that Donald Trump is a wimp who can't face Robert Mueller either because Mueller is another straight arrow. Putin is on the other hand a master Trump can obey no problem. Make the USA more like Putin's Russia than the other way around. Putin-Trump-Fanboyz.

 

[Tangmo]

What's your point?

And yes, I've gotten drunk at the Menger Hotel and toasted the Rough Riders all night. Tom Horn is one of my heroes.

Cadet Bone Spurs is disrespected by the flag and theater officers across the services. Contempt. You referenced TR whom I then pointed out was a colonel of cavalry who in Cuba rallied his troops and routed the Spanish. Trump is the other guy, the one who wanted a Trump Jong Un parade but got shut down on it by Pentagon and the armed services committees of the Congress. McRaven is a major reinforcement to the operation. One expects more fresh forces to join in. BTW I thought I heard you toast Tin Horn so I looked again.

 

[Excon]

McRaven knows Trump doesn't have the gall to act against him. Not that Bill McRaven is sacred cause he ain't. It's that Donald Trump is a wimp who can't face Robert Mueller either because Mueller is another straight arrow. Putin is on the other hand a master Trump can obey no problem. Make the USA more like Putin's Russia than the other way around. Putin-Trump-Fanboyz.

Like I said; It is occupying your minds.

 

[apdst]

Cadet Bone Spurs is disrespected by the flag and theater officers across the services. Contempt. You referenced TR whom I then pointed out was a colonel of cavalry who in Cuba rallied his troops and routed the Spanish. Trump is the other guy, the one who wanted a Trump Jong Un parade but got shut down on it by Pentagon and the armed services committees of the Congress. McRaven is a major reinforcement to the operation. One expects more fresh forces to join in. BTW I thought I heard you toast Tin Horn so I looked again.

Anyone who has ever served in uniform knows you respect the office. Anyone in the service that doesn't understand that is a piece of ****, especially senior officers.

 

[Tangmo]

Anyone who has ever served in uniform knows you respect the office. Anyone in the service that doesn't understand that is a piece of ****, especially senior officers.

Washington, the Founders and military officers in the armed services know what is in their oath. The right can deny it repeatedly while saying the same thing, each time and every time, but that does not change US history up to the present and going forward. It was Washington who advocated successfully that the officer oath be to the three branches of government with a direct line to the people. That is, the Constitution. Washington wanted a firewall against a tyrant becoming Potus and officers in the armed services are it. Indeed, no person or office holder of any kind is in the officer oath. The military officer oath is to the Constitution only -- its values, provisions, purposes and goals.

 

[apdst]

Washington, the Founders and military officers in the armed services know what is in their oath. The right can deny it repeatedly while saying the same thing, each time and every time, but that does not change US history up to the present and going forward. It was Washington who advocated successfully that the officer oath be to the three branches of government with a direct line to the people. That is, the Constitution. Washington wanted a firewall against a tyrant becoming Potus and officers in the armed services are it. Indeed, no person or office holder of any kind is in the officer oath. The military officer oath is to the Constitution only -- its values, provisions, purposes and goals.

You're mistaken, my friend...

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

 

[Tangmo]

You're mistaken, my friend...

The EP oath is the only military oath most Enlisted Personnel know so it is both expected and no surprise it is the oath you cite. The only oath you cite. I have been posting about the military officer oath for as long as I can remember and to many threads. I've posted each oath numerous times over time to include posting the difference between the EP oath and the officer oath and why the differences exists. Most people get it. However the rote and mindless ones do not.

So here again for the gain of the chronically oblivious is the oath of the military officer....

All commissioned officers in the United States military must make the following oath of office when they are appointed in the U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy or U.S. Marine Corps:

“I, (state your name), having been appointed a (rank) in the United States (branch of service), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Commissioned Officer Oath Of Office


Potus is not in the oath of the military officer. No person or official is in the oath of the military officer. This is deliberate, i.e., military officers take the oath to the Constitution, its precepts, principles, values, purposes, intents. This means military officers support the three branches of the government, the system of checks and balances and the value of co-equal governance among the three branches.


Title 5, United States Code, Section 3331 states the oath military members take is specifically an oath of office, not an oath of commission and not of loyalty. The nexus of the EP oath and the Officer oath is the Constitution. The Constitution is the law of the land to which each person is subject. The Constitution is both above and more important than the president. This is true no matter how many other titles the president may be granted, assume, usurp; abuse. EP to include of course NCO and Officers take the oath to support and defend the Constitution and to bear true faith and allegiance to same. All service members share this obligation, privilege, responsibility -- duty. It is thus that the oath of the armed forces is to the institutions of the government and not to any single person in the government, as stipulated in the Constitution.

The Constitution is always above the president and the Constitution is always more important than the president.

 

[apdst]

The EP oath is the only military oath most Enlisted Personnel know so it is both expected and no surprise it is the oath you cite. The only oath you cite. I have been posting about the military officer oath for as long as I can remember and to many threads. I've posted each oath numerous times over time to include posting the difference between the EP oath and the officer oath and why the differences exists. Most people get it. However the rote and mindless ones do not.

So here again for the gain of the chronically oblivious is the oath of the military officer....

All commissioned officers in the United States military must make the following oath of office when they are appointed in the U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy or U.S. Marine Corps:

“I, (state your name), having been appointed a (rank) in the United States (branch of service), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Commissioned Officer Oath Of Office


Potus is not in the oath of the military officer. No person or official is in the oath of the military officer. This is deliberate, i.e., military officers take the oath to the Constitution, its precepts, principles, values, purposes, intents. This means military officers support the three branches of the government, the system of checks and balances and the value of co-equal governance among the three branches.


Title 5, United States Code, Section 3331 states the oath military members take is specifically an oath of office, not an oath of commission and not of loyalty. The nexus of the EP oath and the Officer oath is the Constitution. The Constitution is the law of the land to which each person is subject. The Constitution is both above and more important than the president. This is true no matter how many other titles the president may be granted, assume, usurp; abuse. EP to include of course NCO and Officers take the oath to support and defend the Constitution and to bear true faith and allegiance to same. All service members share this obligation, privilege, responsibility -- duty. It is thus that the oath of the armed forces is to the institutions of the government and not to any single person in the government, as stipulated in the Constitution.

The Constitution is always above the president and the Constitution is always more important than the president.

You do realize that all officers take the enlisted oath, before the commissioned oath?

 

[Tangmo]

You do realize that all officers take the enlisted oath, before the commissioned oath?

You're a barrel of laffs so you'll have to name the planet on which this may occur. It certainly does not occur on this one. So you'll have to provide the name of your own home planet also. Until the civil war EP and Officers took the same oath. Since then however EP and Officers have taken different oaths. Neither EP nor Officers must or should subscribe to the oath of the other, either as a prerequisite to taking his own oath or for any other reason.

So you're stabbing in the dark over there, all of you are. Accepting a commission is btw focused on confirming professional ethics and morality. The oath of officer is the statement of fidelity and truth telling.

I reiterate, Title 5, United States Code, Section 3331 states the oath military members take is specifically an oath of office, not an oath of commission and not of loyalty. No original appointment of a military or naval officer is predicated on taking the oath of enlistment, or the oath of dogcatcher or whatever over there.

Original appointments in the grades of second lieutenant, first lieutenant, and captain, and in the grades of ensign, lieutenant (junior grade), and lieutenant in the Regular Navy are made by the President alone. Original appointments in the grades of major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel, and in the grades of lieutenant commander, commander, and captain are made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Generals and admirals are appointed/certified by a promotion board of generals or admirals, their names submitted directly to and voted on by the Senate, signed off on by Potus/CinC. The promotion board is appointed by other generals or admirals. Generals and admirals report to other generals and admirals, with some exception. Some generals and admirals for instance report directly to the Potus, such as the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the chairman, but not only those flag rank officers.


You are reminded or informed -- whichever may apply -- that the Constitution is always above the president and the Constitution is always more important than the president. The military officer oath is the standard and the oath is to the Constitution. The EP oath is to the Constitution, to include obeying Potus, however, fidelity to the Constitution is the superior value and it is supreme, always.

 

[apdst]

You're a barrel of laffs so you'll have to name the planet on which this may occur. It certainly does not occur on this one. So you'll have to provide the name of your own home planet also. Until the civil war EP and Officers took the same oath. Since then however EP and Officers have taken different oaths. Neither EP nor Officers must or should subscribe to the oath of the other, either as a prerequisite to taking his own oath or for any other reason.

So you're stabbing in the dark over there, all of you are. Accepting a commission is btw focused on confirming professional ethics and morality. The oath of officer is the statement of fidelity and truth telling.

I reiterate, Title 5, United States Code, Section 3331 states the oath military members take is specifically an oath of office, not an oath of commission and not of loyalty. No original appointment of a military or naval officer is predicated on taking the oath of enlistment, or the oath of dogcatcher or whatever over there.

Original appointments in the grades of second lieutenant, first lieutenant, and captain, and in the grades of ensign, lieutenant (junior grade), and lieutenant in the Regular Navy are made by the President alone. Original appointments in the grades of major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel, and in the grades of lieutenant commander, commander, and captain are made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Generals and admirals are appointed/certified by a promotion board of generals or admirals, their names submitted directly to and voted on by the Senate, signed off on by Potus/CinC. The promotion board is appointed by other generals or admirals. Generals and admirals report to other generals and admirals, with some exception. Some generals and admirals for instance report directly to the Potus, such as the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the chairman, but not only those flag rank officers.


You are reminded or informed -- whichever may apply -- that the Constitution is always above the president and the Constitution is always more important than the president. The military officer oath is the standard and the oath is to the Constitution. The EP oath is to the Constitution, to include obeying Potus, however, fidelity to the Constitution is the superior value and it is supreme, always.

Not one single officer joined the service as an officer. That's the real world.

 

[Tangmo]

Not one single officer joined the service as an officer. That's the real world.

You can't state or explain the reality that you think you are on to.

West Point cadets take the oath of enlistment on their entry to USMA. It puts them on active duty 24/7 and obliges them to complete the contract at the academy -- it also subjects 'em to the UCMJ. Likewise for USNA/Annapolis, USAFA/Colorado Springs. If I recall correctly USCG Academy is different, i.e., not as strict.

Rotc cadets at university enlist in the reserve of the branch of service. We do this on entrance to the uni during Rotc orientation. However, Senior Rotc cadets at uni are not on active duty, not in the regular forces and not subject to the UCMJ. This is because Rotc cadets at uni are civilians enrolled at a civilian university, not a government military academy, whether state or federal. Senior Rotc cadets at uni are instead assigned to the service branch Cadet Command, ROTC Control Group, commanded by a three star general or admiral as applicable and who you want to keep as your friend -- both in the present and going forward.

Rotc cadets are -- on enlistment in the reserve -- appointed to the pay grade of E-6 which provides a neat stipend without having or wearing the rank (three down one across). Rotc receive no other military direct compensation of a fiduciary character or nature beyond the scholarship.

Since Gulf War I most Rotc cadets get to join West Point gung ho cadets at Airborne or Air Assault school. Further, USMA grads are commissioned to the active service whereas Rotc grads on commissioning are assigned to the reserves. WP cadets rag on us about it -- there's more but it's mostly shop talk such as whether an Rotc cadet should insist on getting a service branch ID card. There are advantages and lesser factors to having your ID card in hand, such as access to PX, commissary, phone rate discounts and the like if you're near a base (in my instance Ft. Dix and McGuire AFB) but it also means you already have your ID card so you'll get shipped to Airborne school with the WP cadets cause you're ready to go. Busted.

 

[cabse5]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/revoke-my-security-clearance-too-mr-president/2018/08/16/8b149b02-a178-11e8-93e3-24d1703d2a7a_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e670554dd2ff

I won't editorialize. The article is worth reading. This is a lifelong public servant and warrior whom many of us had the privilege of serving under and learning from. He oversaw NEPTUNE SPEAR (operation that killed UBL). I suppose this is one more actual American hero who will have to go under the bus for President *****-grabbing bone spurs.

More attempted manufacturing of news, I see. Oh look, see who's covering this, the MSM.

 

[cabse5]

Washington, the Founders and military officers in the armed services know what is in their oath. The right can deny it repeatedly while saying the same thing, each time and every time, but that does not change US history up to the present and going forward. It was Washington who advocated successfully that the officer oath be to the three branches of government with a direct line to the people. That is, the Constitution. Washington wanted a firewall against a tyrant becoming Potus and officers in the armed services are it. Indeed, no person or office holder of any kind is in the officer oath. The military officer oath is to the Constitution only -- its values, provisions, purposes and goals.

EDIT: Obviously, McRaven must be retired (and political (and non-active-military)) because, otherwise, the president is considered the commander in chief.

 

[Tangmo]

EDIT: Obviously, McRaven must be retired (and political (and non-active-military)) because, otherwise, the president is considered the commander in chief.

Admiral McRaven is an admiral. William McRaven is an admiral retired. In Admiral McRaven's retirement he is subject to the UCMJ and all orders from the CinC to include the SecDef and the Department of the Navy. As Potus, Trump has the authority to order a court martial of Adm. McRaven. Trump has the authority to order McRaven to STFU. Trump has the authority to revoke McRaven's security clearance. Trump has this authority over virtually all retired armed services personnel. This is the law.


However, Trump will not execute any of the authority he has over Admiral McRaven. Trump does not want a fight and confrontation with the commanders of the armed forces which is what will happen almost for certain. A rough and tumble instigated by Trump against the chiefs of the armed forces and its commanders at home and abroad would necessarily include retired generals and admirals, to include former Pentagon under secretaries, assistant secretaries, deputy secretaries -- and likely former SecDef. Trump Himself knows that while his mouth is huge his hands and feet are too small to measure up to any of that. The one thing Trump will not do against the generals and admirals is to let it all hang out. To include those who are retired.

While LTG McMaster was in fact relieved to go and accepted going, Kelly won't go. Trump's stuck with John Kelly, the Marine four-star retired. Trump as CinC could order Kelly off the premises at will and Kelly would have to scoot. Trump however hasn't the will. Or the balls to take on Kelly or any flag officer whether active duty or retired. Trump said during his campaign he'd "fire the generals." Trump actually thought he was going to move in and move 'em out. Yet all Trump has done in respect of flag officers is to, well, give 'em respect. The respect Ole Bone Spurs knows he must render to 'em. Pentagon has been clear with Trump about this since day one. One suspects btw that we are presently closer to Trump's final day that we are to his day one.



Outnumbered, Outmaned and Outranked

Trump, VP Pence, SecDef Mattis. Next to Mattis is Joe Dunford, chairman JCS and the Joint Chiefs. Next to Pence are the commanders of the geographic theater commands of the global armed forces. Third in from our right is Admiral Harry J. Harris Jr., former commander India-Pacific command who has since retired, and is presently ambassador to South Korea. Harris was originally to be ambassador to Australia but due to exigencies was designated to SK instead. Army Gen. Raymond Thomas chief of US Special Operations Command is third out after Gen. Dunford.




Scuttlebutt had it that Trump was going to be presented with framed bone spurs but no one seems to know anything about whether that was true or not. Or whether it did in fact occur. After all, in Trumpworld truth is not true. Truth is not truth. The motive of course is that people who can't handle the truth must needs be slay truth. Or be slain by it.