1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

 

The you can fire the CEO of Amazon and not one order will be late as a result of it. 

I mean it's not like there is a stable of 4 star generals just waiting in the wings in case a new Sec Def wants to clean house.  Last time I checked military promotions at this level need congressional approval.

Just now, Yellowtail said:

I am not claiming he did anything wrong, that's not what a conflict of interest means. 

So any Sec Def candidate who worked at a Defense Contract company is disaqualified? 

1 minute ago, sqwakvfr said:

So any Sec Def candidate who worked at a Defense Contract company is disaqualified? 

Not at all. 

6 hours ago, Walker88 said:

I'll explain what an experienced SecDef might do if a CCP spy balloon took a leisurely flight over the entire US....

 

What?  Use if for propaganda purposes?

 

The Pentagon said they had been tracking the weather barroom from liftoff on Hainan Island, across the South China Sea, into a storm where it was blown off course, then as it was pushed by winds up towards Alaska.

 

No alarm was sounded as it entered US airspace, crossed Alaska, entered Canada, left Canada, entered mainland US airspace, and then crossed half the country.

 

It wasn't until Mr. Blinken needed an excuse to cancel a meeting with the Chinese he officially announced was scheduled for that Friday, a meeting the Chinese never agreed to, that the old spy barroom was trotted out............and blowed up, costing millions of dollars in missiles and aircraft deployment.

 

All because a slimy politician couldn't face the embarrassment of being ignored by the Chinese.

 

 

3 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

Trump has not been sworn in yet and Musk is a private citzen and he can talk to anyone and anywhere.  

 

I think he's still subject to this law

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953

1 minute ago, pattayasan said:

 

I think he's still subject to this law

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953

Every US citizen is subject to that law, so?

9 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I think Commander in Chief is a "big picture" CEO type position and Secretary of Defense is more of a Chief Operating Officer. 

And he will have the well-educated and trained US General to advise him, yes? 

 

Not if the skilled and educated  officers are "purged" and only  rank driven yesmen are left.  I

The US military is made up of a diverse range of  officers and it it has its share of Major Frank Burns types.

If the US military becomes politicized, by a cadre of non command experienced social dinosaurs, it risks losing some of its best command officers, who won't put up with the  politicization.

8 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Every US citizen is subject to that law, so?

 

so he's breaking it.

Senator Tammy Duckworth of IL is on the Senate Armed Services Committee.  She is a Democrat. Also, she is a retired Lt Col from the Illinois Army National Guard who lost both legs while flying a Blackhawk helicoprter in Iraq.  The helicopter was shot down. Her questions to Hegseth will be very interesting.  

 

This is irreleavnt to the subject but she was born in Thailand and is half Thai. 

Edited November 15, 20241 yr by sqwakvfr

7 hours ago, pattayasan said:

 

so he's breaking it.

No. Talking to a foreign leader does not break the law.  

7 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Not if the skilled and educated  officers are "purged" and only  rank driven yesmen are left.  I

The US military is made up of a diverse range of  officers and it it has its share of Major Frank Burns types.

If the US military becomes politicized, by a cadre of non command experienced social dinosaurs, it risks losing some of its best command officers, who won't put up with the  politicization.

There are a lot of people that believe that many of the  "...current skilled and educated officers are...rank driven yesmen, and that the US military has already become politicized.

Trump's Pentagon pick was investigated for alleged sexual assault. Who would've thought?

Seems sexual assault is a badge of honor and a right of entry into MagaWorld. Just one case here, Gaetz the same, with the rapist-in-chief Trump some 26 cases.

Trump Pentagon pick Pete Hegseth was investigated for alleged sexual assault

Edited November 16, 20241 yr by LosLobo

3 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Trump's Pentagon pick was investigated for alleged sexual assault.

Trump Pentagon pick Pete Hegseth was investigated for alleged sexual assault

 

He was also vindicated. 

14 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

 

He was also vindicated. 

LInk?

Just now, LosLobo said:

LInk?

You've made the claim. Do you have a link to his conviction? 

1 hour ago, Cryingdick said:

 

He was also vindicated. 

No links?

Did the worm from eating roadkill tell you he was 'vindicated,' or did you come up with that on your own?

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

LInk?

He was never convicted=vindicated.

23 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

He was never convicted=vindicated.

 

LOL. Hitler was vindicated too then.

On 11/14/2024 at 6:15 PM, Yagoda said:

Did you?

You must be joking?  The back of a cereal box has more interesting information!

5 minutes ago, pattayasan said:

 

LOL. Hitler was vindicated too then.

Biden was investigated for corruption.

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Biden was investigated for corruption.

 

Right, so he's vindicated because he wasn't convicted if you're using the same logic. Which is it?

As Donald Trump’s cabinet selections begin to take shape, in particular the selection of Matt Gaetz as attorney general and Pete Hegseth as defense secretary, one can begin to see the chaos of his second term unfolding, right on cue.

 

To no one’s surprise, Mr. Trump is seeking to insulate himself with a coterie of sycophantic loyalists who will be expected to do his bidding at all times, whether or not they are genuinely qualified to oversee the day-to-day management and institutional integrity of the departments he wishes them to head.

If anyone thought, despite all evidence to the contrary, that

 

I Mr. Trump was going to view his second stint as commander in chief as an opportunity to tamp down the partisan rancor and general angst and distrust on the part of the American people toward their government, these cabinet picks are proof positive that he has no intention of doing so.

 

Quite the contrary, as all signs are pointing to the next four years as being no less tumultuous, fraught and dispiriting than the preceding eight years, with Mr. Trump on the political scene.

 

The choice of Pete Hegseth demonstrates Donald Trump’s prioritization of personal loyalty over competence or qualifications. Mr. Hegseth has never been in charge of any organization but will oversee the largest federal department. He has no experience with foreign policy.

 

Do Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth think that playing the role of Fox News host on TV really qualifies him to be secretary of defense? Or does Mr. Trump only want a willing stooge who will follow orders to deploy troops to American cities to counter protests and deport suspected undocumented immigrants?

It is also frightening that the Republicans in the Senate may be willing to forgo their constitutional role by allowing Mr. Trump to make recess appointments without hearings or votes to approve his blatantly unqualified appointments.

 

Edited November 16, 20241 yr by spidermike007

 

12 minutes ago, pattayasan said:

LOL. Hitler was vindicated too then.

As was Jack the Ripper!

Trump's picks show he's going for maximum chaos, division and dysfunction in government. That's the Heritage's Society's manifesto to destroy government which is now Trump's marching orders.

14 minutes ago, pattayasan said:

 

LOL. Hitler was vindicated too then.

Of what? Link?

5 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

As Donald Trump’s cabinet selections begin to take shape, in particular the selection of Matt Gaetz as attorney general and Pete Hegseth as defense secretary, one can begin to see the chaos of his second term unfolding, right on cue.

 

To no one’s surprise, Mr. Trump is seeking to insulate himself with a coterie of sycophantic loyalists who will be expected to do his bidding at all times, whether or not they are genuinely qualified to oversee the day-to-day management and institutional integrity of the departments he wishes them to head.

If anyone thought, despite all evidence to the contrary, that

 

I Mr. Trump was going to view his second stint as commander in chief as an opportunity to tamp down the partisan rancor and general angst and distrust on the part of the American people toward their government, these cabinet picks are proof positive that he has no intention of doing so.

 

Quite the contrary, as all signs are pointing to the next four years as being no less tumultuous, fraught and dispiriting than the preceding eight years, with Mr. Trump on the political scene.

 

The choice of Pete Hegseth demonstrates Donald Trump’s prioritization of personal loyalty over competence or qualifications. Mr. Hegseth has never been in charge of any organization but will oversee the largest federal department. He has no experience with foreign policy.

 

Do Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth think that playing the role of Fox News host on TV really qualifies him to be secretary of defense? Or does Mr. Trump only want a willing stooge who will follow orders to deploy troops to American cities to counter protests and deport suspected undocumented immigrants?

It is also frightening that the Republicans in the Senate may be willing to forgo their constitutional role by allowing Mr. Trump to make recess appointments without hearings or votes to approve his blatantly unqualified appointments.

 

Expand  

President elect Trump, thank you very much. 

 

President Trump needs loyalists this time. 

Just now, Cryingdick said:

Of what? Link?

 

Oh, I don't know. Maybe genocide and mass murder, who knows?

11 minutes ago, amykat said:

You must be joking?  The back of a cereal box has more interesting information!

Cool. The preferred state of the Left. Ignorance. Why learn about the subject, just shouting slogans is easier

Just now, pattayasan said:

 

Oh, I don't know. Maybe genocide and mass murder, who knows?

You said Hitler was vindicated.