Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

mainejeff wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:Frankly I think the President should be viewed as any other citizen is viewed. If law enforcement sees some indication that they should investigate the President for a crime he or she should be investigated for a crime just as anybody else would be. We in this country have put Presidents on WAY too high a pedestal for a long time. They're just another person doing a job. It's an important job. But their **** stinks just like everybody else's does. They are not royalty. They are not indispensable. They are not above the law.

Amen John! I don't see how anyone can argue with what you just stated.

JohnStOnge wrote:Frankly I think the President should be viewed as any other citizen is viewed. If law enforcement sees some indication that they should investigate the President for a crime he or she should be investigated for a crime just as anybody else would be. We in this country have put Presidents on WAY too high a pedestal for a long time. They're just another person doing a job. It's an important job. But their shit stinks just like everybody else's does. They are not royalty. They are not indispensable. They are not above the law.

CID1990 wrote:When it comes to Mattis....

Obama and Trump are same-same.... at odds with Mattis for exactly the same reasons


At least Trump got a resignation out of the guy instead of relieving him without even doing him the courtesy of letting him know

SeattleGriz wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:Frankly I think the President should be viewed as any other citizen is viewed. If law enforcement sees some indication that they should investigate the President for a crime he or she should be investigated for a crime just as anybody else would be. We in this country have put Presidents on WAY too high a pedestal for a long time. They're just another person doing a job. It's an important job. But their **** stinks just like everybody else's does. They are not royalty. They are not indispensable. They are not above the law.

We'll John, they did investigate Trump, and they're doing it like they would a true outsider.

No wink wink, nudge nudge and all is fine like they do with the majority of DC professionals.

houndawg wrote:

CID1990 wrote:When it comes to Mattis....

Obama and Trump are same-same.... at odds with Mattis for exactly the same reasons


At least Trump got a resignation out of the guy instead of relieving him without even doing him the courtesy of letting him know

Which one do you think put more stock in his advice?

CID1990 wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Which one do you think put more stock in his advice?

The Obama admin at large was generally contemptuous of the military, particularly the one who was micromanaging it- Susan Rice. Ignoring general officers was her stock in trade.

∞∞∞ wrote:

CID1990 wrote: The Obama admin at large was generally contemptuous of the military, particularly the one who was micromanaging it- Susan Rice. Ignoring general officers was her stock in trade.

Good. Civilian rule should dictate that generals are bombarded with oversight and scrutiny.

Military leaders are to listen to their civilian bosses, not the other way around. They only exist to serve the People.

93henfan wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote: Good. Civilian rule should dictate that generals are bombarded with oversight and scrutiny.

Military leaders are to listen to their civilian bosses, not the other way around. They only exist to serve the People.

That worked well in Vietnam.

President Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, including on at least one occasion taking possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructing the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials, current and former U.S. officials said.

Trump did so after a meeting with Putin in 2017 in Hamburg that was also attended by then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. U.S. officials learned of Trump’s actions when a White House adviser and a senior State Department official sought information from the interpreter beyond a readout shared by Tillerson.

The constraints that Trump imposed are part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States’ main adversaries.

As a result, U.S. officials said there is no detailed record, even in classified files, of Trump’s face-to-face interactions with the Russian leader at five locations over the past two years. Such a gap would be unusual in any presidency, let alone one that Russia sought to install through what U.S. intelligence agencies have described as an unprecedented campaign of election interference.

∞∞∞ wrote:Even an idiot like Trump - who is independently elected - deserves better than Mattis.

For an unelected official, the guy always thought his opinion should be final. At least when Presidents argue their word, they have the Democratic process to fall on...even if the argument doesn't hold water in the end. WTF does Mattis have?

Good riddance.

∞∞∞ wrote:F Mattis.

He bitched about abandoning allies, yet never resigned as Trump trashed NATO, gave the middle finger to global allies, sucked Putin off, got tricked by Kim Jong Un, and cozied up to despots. Mattis resigned when Trump (correctly) decided to pull 2000 troops out of Syria...which is less troops than Trump wants to send to the border for a made-up emergency.

It tells me Mattis is a warmonger, plain and simple.

He's also proof why the military is overseen by a civilian authority.

CID1990 wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote:F Mattis.

He bitched about abandoning allies, yet never resigned as Trump trashed NATO, gave the middle finger to global allies, sucked Putin off, got tricked by Kim Jong Un, and cozied up to despots. Mattis resigned when Trump (correctly) decided to pull 2000 troops out of Syria...which is less troops than Trump wants to send to the border for a made-up emergency.

It tells me Mattis is a warmonger, plain and simple.

He's also proof why the military is overseen by a civilian authority.

Those are some pretty minor things (bad mouthing NATO without actually doing anything... oh my!)

Your overarching dislike of the military is shining through and it clouds your thinking

Incidentally, how many military actions did Mattis get us into?

It seems to me that he provided advice and was ignored by the last two guys

civilian control intact! straw man unnecessary

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

∞∞∞ wrote:I have no ill will against the military when leadership and members understand their role within society. A standing army is necessary.

But IMO, the military industrial complex has grown large and needs to be reigned in; Mattis played a role in that.

Anyways, Trump is taking achingly large measures to hide what is said in his meetings with Putin.

Not suspicious at all...

∞∞∞ wrote:I have no ill will against the military when leadership and members understand their role within society. A standing army is necessary.

But IMO, the military industrial complex has grown large and needs to be reigned in; Mattis played a role in that.

Anyways, Trump is taking achingly large measures to hide what is said in his meetings with Putin.

Not suspicious at all...

Ivytalk wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote:I have no ill will against the military when leadership and members understand their role within society. A standing army is necessary.

But IMO, the military industrial complex has grown large and needs to be reigned in; Mattis played a role in that.

Anyways, Trump is taking achingly large measures to hide what is said in his meetings with Putin.

Not suspicious at all...

Military industrial complex? How Ike Eisenhower of you.

*reined

kalm wrote:

Ivytalk wrote: Military industrial complex? How Ike Eisenhower of you.

*reined

C’mon Ivy...you think all of our FP decisions and military spending are driven by need?



Obvious troll is obvious.

houndawg wrote:

SDHornet wrote: So no Trump-Russia collusion still?

No such thing - but conspiracy and obstruction of justice are still in play and it is already being said that Manafort's lawyer's screw up wasn't unintentional.

You saw the speech, he's a beaten, medicated man and its only now beginning to dawn on him that he's well and truly fucked.
.

∞∞∞ wrote:

WASHINGTON — In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.

The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.

The investigation the F.B.I. opened into Mr. Trump also had a criminal aspect, which has long been publicly known: whether his firing of Mr. Comey constituted obstruction of justice.

Agents and senior F.B.I. officials had grown suspicious of Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign but held off on opening an investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and magnitude. But the president’s activities before and after Mr. Comey’s firing in May 2017, particularly two instances in which Mr. Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, the people said.

The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, took over the inquiry into Mr. Trump when he was appointed, days after F.B.I. officials opened it. That inquiry is part of Mr. Mueller’s broader examination of how Russian operatives interfered in the 2016 election and whether any Trump associates conspired with them. It is unclear whether Mr. Mueller is still pursuing the counterintelligence matter, and some former law enforcement officials outside the investigation have questioned whether agents overstepped in opening it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/us/p ... quiry.html

SDHornet wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/us/p ... quiry.html

This article basically just rehashes everything from like 2 years ago.