The US Presidency 2020

[mariomike]

Time for a Democrat Senate.

A long-term problem for Democrats: a majority of the Senate now represents 18% of the country’s population.
https://twitter.com/redistrict/status/1031637719427018757?lang=en

And, 60% of the Senate now represents just 24% of the country’s population.
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1031639944551378944

 

[brihard]

The senate result clearly bothers you.  I note you never once commented on all the corrupt activities involving FISA, Horowitz findings etc.  You ignore all the evidence of corruption on the other side.    There was a concerted effort to prevent, remove, and damage POTUS using unlawful means by those in trusted positions of authority.  There are strong cases for treason, sedition, and corruption.  I'm looking forward to your commentary when those corrupt former officials are brought to justice.   

The senate results are disappointing, but exactly what I expected. I’m bothered to a modest extent about the state of American politics writ large, and I feel a bit of disgust that a country as great and decent as the US could or would choose a man like Trump to lead it. I refuse to be smug about the fact that his behaviour has proven his character to be what I and others feared; it’s just a really unfortunate predicament for their country to be in.

Your powers of observation serve you well. I did not comment on those other matters. Well done spotting that fact. I have limited time to follow this stuff; there’s more than enough to focus on with the problems at the top. Were my life slower and quieter I’d have had the interest and time to dive deeper into more of it, but alas that is not the case. You’ll note I’ve not played apologist or sycophant for those accused of corruption elsewhere, as many have for Trump. I don’t have the time or ability to be sufficiently well informed, so I hold my tongue. Hopefully the facts will be established, and justice will take its course, whatever that should appropriately look like.

All that said, having already tried to call this a ‘coup’, you now double down with ‘sedition’ and ‘treason’. Cute, but just as legally out to lunch as ‘coup’ was. Your struggle with the concepts here has not abated. As the subject of this thread is the US Presidency, my posts will focus on that, not your chosen “what about” of the day. You have a good one.

EDIT TO ADD: To assist you in learning the subject matter, here’s the applicable section of the United States Code, including Treason and Seditious Conspiracy. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-115

And, ‘treason’ is the only offence defined in the US Constitution, and quite specifically at that. Feel free to take a gander at section 3. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

 

[OceanBonfire]

Emboldened Trump fires 2 officials who testified in impeachment inquiry

An ambassador and a White House expert were removed from their posts.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/post-impeachment-trump-deny-white-house-ukraine-expert/story?id=68826785

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gordon-sondland-eu-ambassador-who-testified-in-impeachment-hearing-ousted-from-his-job-2020-02-07/

 

[Altair]

Col Vindman as well.

Because, you know,  respect for the armed forces and all.

 

[tomahawk6]

Vindman and his brother were fired from their NSC jobs and essentially they will return to the Army for reassignment. The CIA guys assigned to NSC need to be reassigned as well. Vindman was due for reassignment in July anyway. I heard that he may go to the War College next, but I hope not. If he is assigned to the War College then he probably will make Colonel unless a congressman puts a hold on it.

 

[brihard]

Vindman and his brother were fired from their NSC jobs and essentially they will return to the Army for reassignment. The CIA guys assigned to NSC need to be reassigned as well. Vindman was due for reassignment in July anyway. I heard that he may go to the War College next, but I hope not. If he is assigned to the War College then he probably will make Colonel unless a congressman puts a hold on it.

Out of curiosity, why do you ‘hope not’?

 

[Brad Sallows]

>unless a congressman puts a hold on it

Trump is pretty much free to fire anyone holding a presidential appointment for no reason or any reason, but politicians should keep their noses out of military career management (and civilian career management).  More political heat is not helpful.

 

[FJAG]

How Trump's three years of job gains compares to Obama's
By Chris Isidore, CNN Business
Updated 1:52 PM ET, Fri February 7, 2020

New York (CNN Business)President Donald Trump says he is particularly pleased with the jobs created during his three years in office.

"We're producing jobs like you have never seen before in this country," he said during a recent speech in Michigan.
But you don't have to go back far to find three years of better job growth. Just to back to the previous three years under Barack Obama.

During Trump's first 36 months in office, the US economy has gained 6.6 million jobs. But during a comparable 36-month period at the end of Obama's tenure, employers added 8.1 million jobs, or 23% more than what has been added since Trump took office.

The average monthly gain so far under Trump is 182,000 jobs. During the last 36 months under Obama, employers were adding an average of 224,000 jobs a month.

On Friday, the Labor Department reported that employers added a fairly robust 225,000 jobs in January. But it also made some revisions to past data, which lowered many previous job growth estimates. While some of the revisions go all the way back to the last century, most of the changes to data took place during 2018 and 2019. So the revisions reduced the gains during Obama's final three years by 47,000 jobs, but it reduced the gains during Trump's tenure by a total of 354,000 jobs.

The job record under Trump is far better than the job record during Obama's first 35 months in office, when the economy lost 805,000 jobs. But Obama took office in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. In the final job reading before Obama took office, the economy lost 784,000 jobs in that month alone. And it continued to lose jobs throughout the rest of 2009 as Obama's economic policies went into effect.

By comparison, Trump took office with the labor market in relatively good shape, with unemployment at 4.7%, and a string of 76 straight months of job gains. The labor market has clearly continued to improve. Unemployment of 3.6% in January is nearly at a 50-year low now. But it is a continuation of an improving job market, not the turnaround that occurred in the early years of the Obama administration.

And Trump's job record is not unique. A gain of more than 6.6 million jobs during a 35-month period has been common during the 80 years that the Labor Department has counted jobs. There are hundreds of overlapping 36-month periods of better growth on record.

At this point in his first and only term, Jimmy Carter had enjoyed a gain of about 10.1 million jobs. Employers added 8.5 million jobs during the first 36 months of Bill Clinton's term and 7.8 million jobs during the first 36 months of Lyndon Johnson's tenure, even though the labor force at that time was less than half the size of what it is today.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/06/economy/trump-obama-jobs-comparison/index.html

:cheers:

 

[Brad Sallows]

Job growth unexpectedly slows as period of growth becomes longer.  Film at 11.

 

[mariomike]

I refuse to be smug about the fact that his behaviour has proven his character to be what I and others feared; it’s just a really unfortunate predicament for their country to be in.

An Albertan put it this way,

Imagine a scenario where a criminal jury is allowed to determine what evidence, if any, it will hear in support of, or in contradiction of, the charges the accused is facing.

Imagine that jury has the ability to decide that no actual evidence from witnesses or documents is required to do its job. Imagine that the majority of the same jury advised in advance that it will acquit the accused. Imagine this jury publicly swearing on live TV to uphold the law and act impartially.

Then, imagine that portion of the jury that has already vowed to acquit the accused submitting sham, softball questions to the legal counsel overseeing the trial. On top of this, imagine the accused having a worldwide platform to express his disdain for the process and his comfort that he will be acquitted.

Then, picture the jury voting exactly in accordance with their house leader’s, and the accused’s expectations (with one notable exception) to acquit the accused. And then, imagine the jury being the first to publicly express delight over the results of the trial.

What is the result of this terrifying fantasy? According to the accused, Donald Trump, “total exoneration.”
https://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/letters/saturdays-letters-trump-trial-a-terrifying-fantasy

 

[tomahawk6]

Out of curiosity, why do you ‘hope not’?

I googled his name to see what came up and I was not impressed. In time he can retire as a Lt Col. Let me site a few links. I have known a number of officers who retired as Lt Colonels who se careers were not kind to them.

https://tennesseestar.com/2019/11/05/retired-army-officer-remembers-lt-col-vindman-as-partisan-democrat-who-ridiculed-america/

https://tennesseestar.com/2019/11/05/retired-army-officer-remembers-lt-col-vindman-as-partisan-democrat-who-ridiculed-america/



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/out-trump-says-he-was-right-to-remove-insubordinate-nsc-aide/ar-BBZMZSs?ocid=spartanntp

 

[mariomike]

Trump supporters vent fury at decorated war veteran Alexander Vindman amid impeachment battle

Twitter has ‘become the president’s war room’ as supporters take aim at colonel

Several officials have publicly defended Mr Vindman since his testimony emerged. General Joseph Dunford, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has called the colonel “a professional, competent, patriotic and loyal officer”.

Michael McFaul, the former ambassador to Russia, has said he had worked with the colonel “and interacted with him in front of Russian officers. He never once said anything near what this ‘retired Army officer’ claims”.

The rest of the story,
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-impeachment-alexander-vindman-testimony-ukraine-call-conspiracy-a9192131.html

Top Military Officers Unload on Trump
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/11/military-officers-trump/598360/
The commander in chief is impulsive, disdains expertise, and gets his intelligence briefings from Fox News. What does this mean for those on the front lines?

Maybe if it had not been for those five Vietnam-era draft deferments, things might have been different as C in C?

But, when I was born, a former five-star general was president. They all had been in the war,

Eisenhower, JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr.

Perhaps wartime experience helped in their job as Commander in Chief?

 

[FJAG]

I googled his name to see what came up and I was not impressed. In time he can retire as a Lt Col. Let me site a few links. I have known a number of officers who retired as Lt Colonels who se careers were not kind to them.

https://tennesseestar.com/2019/11/05/retired-army-officer-remembers-lt-col-vindman-as-partisan-democrat-who-ridiculed-americ
https://tennesseestar.com/2019/11/05/retired-army-officer-remembers-lt-col-vindman-as-partisan-democrat-who-ridiculed-america/

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/out-trump-says-he-was-right-to-remove-insubordinate-nsc-aide/ar-BBZMZSs?ocid=spartanntp

I wouldn't demonize Vindman based on anything reported in those articles. I know that you frequently question the press. I think that these articles are questionable. Not withstanding what it says here, Vindman's superiors considered him highly enough to promote him to LTC and post him to the White House National Security Council. I tend to believe that those people had a fairly solid understanding of Vindman's dedication to his country.

:cheers:

 

[Brad Sallows]

>An Albertan put it this way,

Imagine a trial where the prosecution demands to go fishing for new evidence and refuses to release potentially exculpating evidence and much of the investigation has been conducted publicly with the documents and testimony released to the press...etc, etc.  Everyone can play that game.  Stupid, isn't it?

 

[tomahawk6]

In the US military we are supposed to be apolitical so we can serve either a Democrat or Republican President. I think Vindman must have been absent when that course was taught. Now that he has ventured out of his lane then he is fair game. I have seen injustice in the service but this aint it.

 

[FJAG]

In the US military we are supposed to be apolitical so we can serve either a Democrat or Republican President. I think Vindman must have been absent when that course was taught. Now that he has ventured out of his lane then he is fair game. I have seen injustice in the service but this aint it.

That laughingly reminds me of being at Bragg the evening before the polls closed when Reagan was running against Carter and the commander of XVIII Airborne Corps stood on a table with a beer in his hands and loudly announced to everyone present that "Tomorrow we'll either have a new president or you'll have a new Corps Commander". Raucous cheers resulted. Apolitical. My shinny metal butt.

[

 

[brihard]

I like the part where complying with a congressional subpoena against the personal wishes of the president is being declared ‘insubordinate’. That’s some Louis 16ie bullcrap, right there... “l’état, c’est moi” seems to be exactly in line with the position Trump imagines himself occupying.

One thing I wish in this whole schmozzle is that the House has slowed down and pursued refusal to comply with subpoenas through the court process. Something like a dozen different administration officials were in contempt of Congress. Letting that slide could have dangerous implications for the effective balance of powers between the branches of government. Refusal to comply with a congressional subpoena should not be something that just gets to slide. I give credit to Vindman for having the courage and integrity to faithfully fulfill his duties against the sure knowledge that he would face professional consequences.

 

[tomahawk6]

There were two issues here the legality of the subpoena and executive privelage which has been asserted under various Presidents.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

>unless a congressman puts a hold on it

Trump is pretty much free to fire anyone holding a presidential appointment for no reason or any reason, but politicians should keep their noses out of military career management (and civilian career management).  More political heat is not helpful.

The US system, however, is different.  Congressional approval is required for all promotions to General / Flag rank (O7), as well as postings, further promotions etc.  The services were recently (NDAA 2019)granted some new authorities with respect to management of careers up to O6 (Col) including the ability to grant acting rank up to Maj / LCdr, and to direct enroll skilled professionals with an entry rank of up to O6.

https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/article221712510.html

In Canada, the practice for GOFOs is different.  Although technically the MND approves promotions to and within the Generals Officer corps, the reality is that all GOFOs serve at the pleasure of the CDS, who in turn serves at the pleasure of the PM.

 

[FJAG]

...
In Canada, the practice for GOFOs is different.  Although technically the MND approves promotions to and within the Generals Officer corps, the reality is that all GOFOs serve at the pleasure of the CDS, who in turn serves at the pleasure of the PM.

With one small exception. The JAG, like the CDS, is a Governor in Council appointment and therefore not subject to the chain of command to the CDS.

:cheers: