# Trump's Cabinet of Curiosities **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 10, 2016, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367 "2016-11-10T16:28:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/221 "2016-12-02T16:00:00Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Whether or not they are pissed off at the hypocracy shoukdnt have any bearing on whether they believe he is qualified. If you think Clinton’s mishandling of emails was a big deal then so should what Petraeus did. If you think what Clinton did was inconsequential then what Petraeus did shouldn’t have much bearing on his nomination. Anything else is hypocrisy. Which is why many Senate republicans are not happy about the possibility. No-everything else is NOT hypocricy, because he did something deliberately, and he did something different, _as has already been pointed out_. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/222 "2016-12-02T16:07:33Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I believe that it was approved with great difficulty, and a plea that it be the last time this ever happens. I’m curious about your personal opinion. The law states that there has to be a seven year gap between retirement and appointment. If he had retired a few years earlier this wouldn’t be an issue. Would you object to any former general for the post? At the time of the inauguration he will be retired from the military for 3 years 11 months. In your opinion would the additional three years make that much of a difference? Do you have any other objection to him beyond the 7 year issue? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/223 "2016-12-02T16:11:19Z")
I too don’t understand the objection to Mattis. Mattis should be the sort of experienced, rational, factual rock of stability that you’d want in a Trump administration. The opposition to someone like Mattis, at this point, from the political left, is starting to sound like the obstruct-for-the-sake-of-obstructing stuff we saw from the GOP against Obama. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/224 "2016-12-02T16:21:15Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > All true except leaving out the fact that the woman he gave the information to did have a security clearance. She was a Reserve Military Intelligence Lieutenant Colonel. The classified information was mishandled but not exposed to the public. > > I’m not defending Petraeus. He was punished and rightfully so. I wasn’t aware of that, every story I read never mentioned that she had a clearance. I just skimmed a number of stories and none mentioned it, she is identified as his biographer/mistress. I found one reference on FoxNews that identified her as a former Army Reserve officer with no mention of rank or level of clearance. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/225 "2016-12-02T16:22:10Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > I too don’t understand the objection to Mattis. Mattis should be the sort of experienced, rational, factual rock of stability that you’d want in a Trump administration. The opposition to someone like Mattis, at this point, from the political left, is starting to sound like the obstruct-for-the-sake-of-obstructing stuff we saw from the GOP against Obama. I disagree. I do not support DeVos because she is a known enemy of public education. I do not support Mattis because of the principle of civilian control of the military. I do not support Sessions because he is a flaming racist. I do not support Mnuchin because he is a hedge fund pirate whose bank foreclosed on a 90 year old woman over a 27 cent underpayment. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/226 "2016-12-02T16:22:26Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > I’m curious about your personal opinion. The law states that there has to be a seven year gap between retirement and appointment. If he had retired a few years earlier this wouldn’t be an issue. Would you object to any former general for the post? At the time of the inauguration he will be retired from the military for 3 years 11 months. In your opinion would the additional three years make that much of a difference? Do you have any other objection to him beyond the 7 year issue? I think there is a good point to having a civilian being in ultimate charge of our military, and I have my doubts that anything less than 7 years(although 10 would be preferable for some, in my opinion) is enough to give a military lifer a civilian outlook. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/227 "2016-12-02T16:25:36Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > When Palin heard she was considered for VA she said “Great! I love Virginia!” Don’t be ridiculous. There is no way she knows what the state abbreviation are!! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/228 "2016-12-02T16:26:00Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I disagree. I do not support DeVos because she is a known enemy of public education. There are those in education that are looking forward to her appointment-[The for-profit education industry.](https://consumerist.com/2016/12/02/for-profit-college-industry-eyes-resurgence-under-trump-administration/) ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/229 "2016-12-02T16:26:48Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > No-everything else is NOT hypocricy, because he did something deliberately, and he did something different, _as has already been pointed out_. Ok so he did something different. Then it’s not hypocritical on either side since it’s a completely different situation in both cases. If you place both cases under the umbrella “mishandle classified information” then you have to either say that it means neither can be trusted with sensitive information or at least it’s a limiting factor, or both are inconsequential. If you pick and chose due to party affiliation you are a hypocrite. If you truely want to look at them separately then look at them realistically. Patreaus exposed classified information to someone who had a Top Secret security clearance but who did not have a need to know. Clinton had classified and other sensitive information on an improperly secured server that could have been potentially at risk of being hacked. Neither instance was earth shattering. Neither put the country at great risk. Both showed poor judgement. Personally I put Clinton’s actions in the negative column. I never thought it disqualified her for president but I felt it showed poor judgement. As for Petraeus, I think it should knock him out of consideration but there are other choices that could be worse. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/230 "2016-12-02T16:28:35Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I think there is a good point to having a civilian being in ultimate charge of our military, and I have my doubts that anything less than 7 years(although 10 would be preferable for some, in my opinion) is enough to give a military lifer a civilian outlook. A civilian is in ultimate charge of the military. Currently his name is Barrack Obama. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/231 "2016-12-02T16:34:27Z")
Thanks for reminding, maybe a nice paper cut with some lemon juice? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/232 "2016-12-02T16:36:48Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I disagree. I do not support DeVos because she is a known enemy of public education. I do not support Mattis because of the principle of civilian control of the military. I do not support Sessions because he is a flaming racist. I do not support Mnuchin because he is a hedge fund pirate whose bank foreclosed on a 90 year old woman over a 27 cent underpayment. I guess it’s a good thing Harry Reid got rid of the filibuster, or else like-minded Democrats could really pose a problem here. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/233 "2016-12-02T16:37:15Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > A civilian is in ultimate charge of the military. Currently his name is Barrack Obama. The intent quite clearly is to have a civilian in charge of the day-to-day running of the Department of Defense, not merely having the commander in chief be the civilian oversight. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/234 "2016-12-02T16:45:25Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > If you truely want to look at them separately then look at them realistically. > > Patreaus exposed classified information to someone who had a Top Secret security clearance but who did not have a need to know. > > Clinton had classified and other sensitive information on an improperly secured server that could have been potentially at risk of being hacked. It should be added that Petraeus denied retaining or passing on classified information in interviews with the FBI, until the FBI executed a search warrant and found his notebooks in his desk. Say what you want about Hillary Clinton’s server, but the Petraeus denial of wrongdoing is right up there in the same league as “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/235 "2016-12-02T16:56:39Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > It should be added that Petraeus denied retaining or passing on classified information in interviews with the FBI, until the FBI executed a search warrant and found his notebooks in his desk. Say what you want about Hillary Clinton’s server, but the Petraeus denial of wrongdoing is right up there in the same league as “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” Hillary Clinton denied pretty heavily at first, too: ['Meet the Press' video skewers Hillary's evolving email alibis](http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/08/23/meet-the-press-video-skewers-hillarys-evolving-email-alibis-242055) ETA: “security inquiry” will always be one of my favorite phrases, thanks to HRC. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/236 "2016-12-02T16:58:29Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Hillary Clinton denied pretty heavily at first, too: ['Meet the Press' video skewers Hillary's evolving email alibis](http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/08/23/meet-the-press-video-skewers-hillarys-evolving-email-alibis-242055) > > ETA: “security inquiry” will always be one of my favorite phrases, thanks to HRC. So logically I expect that you will oppose him as much as you opposed her, for the same reasons. Right? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/237 "2016-12-02T17:08:05Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > So logically I expect that you will oppose him as much as you opposed her, for the same reasons. > > Right? I don’t want Petraeus at State. I think he’d be a bad choice, precisely because of the poor judgement he showed with his affair and mishandling of classified information. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/238 "2016-12-02T17:15:54Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The intent quite clearly is to have a civilian in charge of the day-to-day running of the Department of Defense, not merely having the commander in chief be the civilian oversight. Agreed. I believe that Mattis is capable of staying in his lane and many of his non-combatant commands make him qualified for the administrative aspect of the job. > [@Ravenman](#): > > It should be added that Petraeus denied retaining or passing on classified information in interviews with the FBI, until the FBI executed a search warrant and found his notebooks in his desk. Say what you want about Hillary Clinton’s server, but the Petraeus denial of wrongdoing is right up there in the same league as “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” Agreed and as I said it I don’t believe he is a good choice because of what he did and pled guilty to. It’s ridiculous to have a Secretary of State that has to report to a parole officer. I’m probably not the only one on the board but I worked for Petraeus. My unit was directly attached to MNFI (Multi-National Forces Iraq) headquarters. The chain went from my commander to the MNFI Chief of Staff (2 star) to Petraeus. I saw him pretty often in the Presidential Palace. The command culture he built did not endear him to me. Obviously on my level I didn’t deal with him directly. I did have to deal with his aides and his secretary. His secretary thought she was wearing at least 3 stars and had people afraid for their careers. His aides were all entitled assholes. They sneeringly threw their weight around because they worked for “P4.” When he left to take over CENTCOM it was like night and day. GEN Odierno ran a much different command. Same secretary was no longer a tyrant. His aides were good officers that were pleasant to work with. No one complained about working for the Iron Giant. On the other hand by all accounts Petraeus was very good at the political side of the job. Working with foreign governments was at least as important as military strategy. He literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency which emphasized the need for political solutions and how military operations impact politics. I think that without the baggage he might have been able to do a decent job as Secretary of State. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/239 "2016-12-02T17:19:17Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Thanks for reminding, maybe a nice paper cut with some lemon juice? When that becomes Donald Trump I think it would be a good thing to have a SECDEF who is not afraid to say “That’s a stupid idea Mr President.” Say what you want about Mattis, he is not a political toady. He will speak his mind to the president even if it goes against what Trump thinks or what is coming out of Bannon’s mouth. ---
**Author:** ![dasmoocher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@dasmoocher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dasmoocher)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367/240 "2016-12-02T17:51:35Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > I was still hanging on to my proud ignorance of… …[insert subject] You sound suspiciously like a supporter of a certain candidate. > [@BobLibDem](#): > > When Palin heard she was considered for VA she said “Great! I love Virginia!” I heard she thought she could have affairs with veterans. Petraeus has already been burned by that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trumps-cabinet-of-curiosities/771367.md?page=13)