tips fedora M’lady
I’m torn on this one.
I have no problem condemning Trump and the people like Bannon, Lewandowski, and Manafort who helped him get elected. The man had no business running for president and nobody should have assisted him in doing it.
And I’ll condemn the Republicans in Congress who are putting their party above the country and not doing their duty and removing Trump from office.
But people like Kelly, Mattis, and McMaster don’t fall into either of those groups. They didn’t put Trump into office and they can’t remove him. They’re just stuck with Donald Trump as President like the rest of us are.
So do you deny support to Trump and let him crash? The problem with that is he takes the country down with him. Or do you work with Trump and try to minimize the damage he’ll cause? I can see how military men would see their duty to the country as justifying helping a terrible president.
I found it a few days ago, but I can’t seem t find it again.
But the soldiers mother cursed at him, I don’t think she physically attacked him. She told him it should have been him, not her son. And he just took it and comforted her,
But my favorite part of the story is what allegedly happened afterwards. He turned to his aides and said something to the effect of “that momma was really mad at me.” Then he paused and said “Can’t say that I blame her.”
By flat out lying about the Congresswoman, Gen. Kelly showed he’s no better than Trump.
Maybe Gen. Kelly should have told Trump that he won’t lie for him and if he’s fired, he spills everything.
Yes, that’s a really bad ideal. Back in the past as Kelly remembers it, men were supposed to protect women. Maybe some men took that seriously. But a lot of men failed at that role and stood by while women were mistreated.
It’s a lot of better to have a society where women can defend themselves than to have one where women have to rely on men to defend them.
I do see your side of it, and I’m not saying yours is an unreasonable conclusion to reach. Mine is a potentially dangerous game of chicken. But I do feel the Republicans would be forced to take steps to remove Trump if his training wheels were gone. I could be wrong, but would Republicans really risk everything, including the secure future of their own children and grandchildren, just to leave a mentally ill narcissist in place to sign tax cut legislation? I mean, wouldn’t Pence sign it, too?
I am also uncomfortable with military men acting in roles at the highest level of government. We’re supposed to avoid that in this country. These are civilian posts. Coupled with the new edict from on high that it is “inappropriate” to question the veracity of a four star general, I am even more unnerved with these men in their stations. Feels more like a Putin style government every day.
That, of course, is only in effect until some O-10 says something that factually contradicts Mr. Smallhands.
Good thing both Kelly and Mattis retired before Donnie Two-Scoops was even elected, so that those civilian posts actually went to civilians. Or does serving permanently block anyone from further government service?
I’m also a little bit torn. Knowing his base and what a mess they will try to make. There is no working with Trump. Give him an inch, he will take a mile.
As **AspenGlow **said - We CANNOT let this become the new normal. It will only become worse.
As much as I don’t like Pence either, you have to start somewhere.
Emphasis added. You flew to the extreme there when you said “permanently block.”
**Aspenglow **said “highest levels of government,” not “ANY government service.”
Also, I don’t think a 4-star general can ever totally morph back into a civilian.
Don’t forget we’ve even had retired generals serving as president.
Of course not. And as ThelmaLou pointed out, you immediately grabbed an extreme position that I was not in any way advocating.
If only it had been apparent when the asserted basis by Sarah Huckabee Sanders to not question anything Kelly said was the fact that he was* “a four star Marine general,”* I’d agree you had made a meaningful distinction. But Trump is resting his well-larded laurels on this exact point – which kind of eliminates the civilian aspect of Kelly’s position, doesn’t it?
The Trump administration is constantly harping on the military service aspect of these men as what qualifies them for their positions. That’s what makes me uncomfortable.
An officer must beretired at least seven years before being legally eligible to serve as Secretary of Defense unless Congress provides a waiver. Don’t know if any other governmental positions have a similar restriction.
As to generals occupying senior governmental positions, this is one retired chief warrant officer’s viewpoint.
Harry Truman on Douglas MacArthur: “I fired him because he wouldn’t respect the authority of the President. I didn’t fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that’s not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail”. I guess he shouldn’t have fired him, either, since four stars are sacrosanct.
I guess it was okay for Lincoln to sack McClellan, since he was only a two-star.
Trump actually criticized four star general John Allen on Twitter, even though Sarah Huckabee said that’s a no-no.
“General John Allen, who I never met but spoke against me last night, failed badly in his fight against ISIS. His record = BAD #NeverHillary”
God knows what the hashtag is all about.
And Trump specifically got a waiver for Mattis Since he had only been out for 3 years.
MacArthur had five stars, so he was double sacrosanct.
Washington did a good job as president guiding a new nation with its new civil rights. Grant did a good job as president guiding the nation into recognizing new Black rights (and your country still has one hell of a long way to go on that issue). Ike did a good job as president advancing the nation’s civil rights. All of them had been senior generals, and all of them were exemplary presidents.
That being said, have a look at totalitarian countries. Very often the key used by a wanna-be strongman is to have strong ties with military leaders who then support the wanna be into power and/or once in power then extend the rule indefinitely.
Presidents per se are not the problem. Generals per se are not the problem. The problem only arises when a wanna-be strongman has ties with military leaders. Trump is a wanna-be strongman and he now has a tie with a military leader who has chosen to bolster Trump. That is not a good thing, for Trump is a bad king.
I’m on Ward’s side in this, but she needs to lose the cowboy hats. There’s no advantage to dressing like a clown.
For protection from attacks by Mr. Trump and his cronies, it is necessary to have preservation of the record through recording and transcription, and to have a powerful friend with press connections. Trump is toxic. Prevention of persecution is by preservation, press and publication.
Sycophantic worms who have a problem with that approach are welcome to worm right back up Mr. Trump’s ass where they came from.