daz28 Posted July 8 Posted July 8 On 7/4/2024 at 12:00 AM, reddogblitz said: Are you serious? You couldn't have even hung a dog on that thing. It did make for an iconic photo though. It's funny you call it iconic, because the symbolism works. How many fake news scaffolds have been made for you in jest? On 7/4/2024 at 1:58 AM, sherpa said: I had a required course in the UCMJ prior to being commissioned as a Naval Officer. I am familiar with the process. You are not correct in stating that legality is determined at court martial. Legality would generally be know when the directive was given. These people aren't uneducated robots. What has been suggested here, and it has been discussed in this forum before using a crazy hypothetical of directing an air strike against the US population, is using US military forces against the US population, and that is not currently legal, and any officer would know that. Kent State was brought up as an example, but it isn't valid. National Guard forces are controlled by their state governors, and in certain cases can assist state police. They can only use force if threatened, which was the argument in subsequent legal action. Anyway, using US military forces against US citizens is a violation, and not a legal order. I have no sympathy nor concern about a US citizen who has left the country, is on foreign soil and joined a terrorist organization threatening the US, and neither did Obama. For the third time, I am talking about replacing officers of a rank necessary to issue such "orders." Evidence of how that is not simply a matter for the president was demonstrably evident this past year when Sen Tuberville held up such appointments for months in an extremely publicized action. At a certain level, generally three start, any combatant appointment has to be approved by Congress. Ok I get you, but the executive has too much power. Not only can he nominate any general but dismissing them is easy too. I showed you twice he has that power if he chooses
All_Pro_Bills Posted July 8 Posted July 8 (edited) 30 minutes ago, daz28 said: It's funny you call it iconic, because the symbolism works. How many fake news scaffolds have been made for you in jest? Ok I get you, but the executive has too much power. Not only can he nominate any general but dismissing them is easy too. I showed you twice he has that power if he chooses The irony is people issuing dire warnings choose to ignore the abuse of power by the Biden administration in pursuing their main political rival with endless legal cases of questionable merit which led to a Supreme Court legal filing and ruling where the very same cast of characters which cheer the prosecution of Trump while supporting the DOJ/FBI operation against Trump now claim the court's ruling about formal and informal actions and duties can lead to some hypothetical abuse of power scenarios by the chief executive in the future. Edited July 8 by All_Pro_Bills 1 1
sherpa Posted July 8 Posted July 8 1 hour ago, daz28 said: Ok I get you, but the executive has too much power. Not only can he nominate any general but dismissing them is easy too. I showed you twice he has that power if he chooses You didn't show me anything. I am very familiar with the process. The President is presented a list of potential candidates for these positions. He usually is unfamiliar with the various candidates and usually, he chooses the candidate from among those that the services recommend. To go rogue as the president would be a very stupid thing to do. Funny coincidence, but Biden did not chooses the recommended 3 star to serve as Chief of Naval Operations. The recommendation from the Navy, and agreed to by SecDef Austin was ADM Paparo, head of the Pacific Fleet. Instead, Biden chose ADM Lisa Franchetti, no doubt becasue she is a woman. Qualified. but not the best candidate, as has been Biden's history of appointments. Still, very unusual, and not a thing that makes you a popular president to the military.
Doc Posted July 8 Posted July 8 1 hour ago, sherpa said: You didn't show me anything. I am very familiar with the process. The President is presented a list of potential candidates for these positions. He usually is unfamiliar with the various candidates and usually, he chooses the candidate from among those that the services recommend. To go rogue as the president would be a very stupid thing to do. Funny coincidence, but Biden did not chooses the recommended 3 star to serve as Chief of Naval Operations. The recommendation from the Navy, and agreed to by SecDef Austin was ADM Paparo, head of the Pacific Fleet. Instead, Biden chose ADM Lisa Franchetti, no doubt becasue she is a woman. Qualified. but not the best candidate, as has been Biden's history of appointments. Still, very unusual, and not a thing that makes you a popular president to the military. My brother went to school with her. He sent her a congrats when she got the job.
Irv Posted July 8 Posted July 8 On 7/6/2024 at 11:27 AM, Big Blitz said: This would require journalists to do their jobs and demand like they would of Republicans answers to these issues I wish Trump would stay away from this type of thing. Needs to keep Joe in the race, not chase him out. What a mess.
All_Pro_Bills Posted July 8 Posted July 8 20 minutes ago, Irv said: I wish Trump would stay away from this type of thing. Needs to keep Joe in the race, not chase him out. What a mess. Never interrupt your enemy while they're in the process of making a mistake. He should sit back and let them fight it out among themselves and just keep his mouth shut. But he won't! 1
K D Posted July 8 Posted July 8 How can Biden possibly win when half of his party has already said publicly that he's too old to do the job? If you vote for him then you clearly hate this country and should be deported by Dictator Trump 1
Doc Posted July 8 Posted July 8 1 hour ago, Irv said: I wish Trump would stay away from this type of thing. Needs to keep Joe in the race, not chase him out. What a mess. He's telling Biden to hold firm and stay in the race. And Biden is listening, apparently.
Unforgiven Posted July 8 Posted July 8 12 minutes ago, Gregg said: Far left lunkheads actually say this, heard one say it on fox internet radio the other day, which is closet democrat .. "count all the great things he has done over the last three and half years" This same loser claimed kamala is a great vp and would make a great first woman of color president. Absolutely astonishing the steep falloff of intellect in this country. 1
Tiberius Posted July 8 Author Posted July 8 Biden’s three d chess, he is dominating the media cycle now The only bad news is no news 1 2
Tommy Callahan Posted July 8 Posted July 8 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Biden’s three d chess, he is dominating the media cycle now The only bad news is no news You mean the corporate media is again being the mouthpiece of the dnc. Nothing new 1
Doc Posted July 8 Posted July 8 19 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Biden’s three d chess, he is dominating the media cycle now The only bad news is no news No, Oscar Wilde, it's bad news when leaders of your party say you should step down. But yes, let's let that dominate for weeks to months. 1
Irv Posted July 8 Posted July 8 1 hour ago, GETTOTHE50 said: The phone call sounds like a robot is speaking. I thought that too. Potential AI? I mean the WH already gave MSNBC the questions. What a mess. 1
Recommended Posts