This was discussed in the last few pages of this thread.Originally Posted by randyho
ETA: Original answer had wrong thread, fixed it.
This was discussed in the last few pages of this thread.
ETA: Original answer had wrong thread, fixed it.
Last edited by revchuck38; 10-19-2019 at 06:48 PM.
Thank you. Wasn't following that thread... until now. And not sure it was.
Last edited by randyho; 10-19-2019 at 06:41 PM.
This was covered pretty well in the Mattis thread. It is absolutely a violation of UCMJ. Now, let’s see the DOD dust off its manual of procedures for something that has been used exactly ONCE, unsuccessfully I might add, against a retiree 100 years ago. Be sure to skip over the portions that specify “Service member’s right of expression should be preserved to the maximum extent possible” and “that retired Soldiers will not be tried for any offense by courts-martial unless extraordinary circumstances are present” (AR 27-10).
https://www.lawfareblog.com/law-reti...sements-primer
Perhaps they can use McRaven as a warm-up for that other “over-rated general“ and SecDef who made such unfortunate heel spur comments. However, Trump should be sure to tell the DOD to focus their attention on retirees who criticize him; avoid guys like Flynn, Allen, Kelly who supported him and criticized Democrats.
That would probably be the best way to insure Mattis and McRaven actually do throw a 3rd party ticket into the hat for 2020. We all know that would likely mean a President Warren
I like my rifles like my women - short, light, fast, brown, and suppressed.
"I can just hear it now..."Hail to the Chief"
There's nothing civil about this war.
If either one of them did get their pension yanked I know I would throw in for an annuity for them.
I'm thinking any 3rd party candidate will sink Trump.
If you look at his popularity numbers, steady at about 42%, there'll be a giant sucking sound caused by conservative voters heading for the exits. Call it a protest vote or whatever you like, but it will take 5% from the GOP easily. Dem voters won't care about a 3rd party candidate because more than likely the candidate will be conservative. The socialist/democrat lane is already jammed up.
Ross Perot put Clinton back in the WH.
Last edited by Borderland; 10-19-2019 at 10:47 PM.
In the P-F basket of deplorables.
Wishful thinking. The economic and resource cost of a serious Presidential campaign runs in the millions of dollars. Less then 5% of Americans can afford that bill out of pocket. Everyone else has to raise the money, and that kind of donation comes with expectations. The party affiliation is irrelevant. Trump, Clinton, Warren,Harris- the names and parties change. The economics don’t.
Most working Americans understand this plainly, and thus vote for whomever has a tangible benefit to their way of life. Even if the benefit is a non functional administration. Trump’s best asset is his ineffectual nature- with deep business interests and no experience advancing agendas or convincing people , he won’t trash the economy or get anything else passed. A brain dead GOP President > a motivated Liberal with “investors” to support & a platinum tongue.
The Minority Marksman.
"When you meet a swordsman, draw your sword: Do not recite poetry to one who is not a poet."
-a Ch'an Buddhist axiom.
You might ask Jason Amerine, and the other people in ODA574, what they think of Mattis.
_______________
"Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here I am. Send me." - Isaiah 6:8
He voted for Gus Hall in 1976. Ron DeSantis, without substantiation, claimed that Brennan had been a party member.
https://www.politifact.com/florida/s...mmunist-party/
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
You could be right, of course, but I'm not seeing it. Obama raised the money for his first campaign by small contributions from donors. He didn't accept any PAC money until his second campaign. First president to use the internet effectively to organize and raise money. Could easily happen again with the right touch.
Trump has plenty of experience convincing people. I used to work with land developers and real estate guys in AZ. The sales pitch has to be polished or no deal. Trump is a long way from brain dead and still has plenty of support from people who might buy real estate in the AZ desert sight unseen. For a developer, lying is not a sin. It's nothing more than a means to an end that has to be honed to a fine edge. To be a successful developer you have to be able to convincingly lie to investors, contractors, bankers, suppliers and just about everyone you deal with. Goes with the territory. The Clintons tried it early on but got hooked up with some stupid people.
The primary reason I didn't vote for him was the fact that he was a successful real estate developer. Seen way to many of those operators to be comfortable with one in the WH. This latest play to have the G-7 summit at his Miami resort is a good example of how the real estate developer mind works. It was a good deal and people just needed to be convinced that it would be.
No Bueno amigo.
Last edited by Borderland; 10-20-2019 at 10:00 AM.
In the P-F basket of deplorables.
Reply With Quote
