Former high ranking military members put Trump's threat in context.

[berg80]

Former top military officers push back on Trump immunity claim​

More than a dozen retired four-star generals, admirals and other former military leaders filed an amicus brief with in the Supreme Court on Monday, arguing against former President Trump’s claims of immunity in his criminal cases.

The group said Trump’s claims “would threaten the military’s role in American society, our nation’s constitutional order, and our national security,” and would have a “profoundly negative effects on military service members.”
https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...y-officers-push-back-on-trump-immunity-claim/

So, what's it going to be? How are defenders of all things Trump going to throw these former military personnel under the bus? Will they be accused of being part of the fictitious deep state, or Dems, or never Trumper's? In what way will their concerns be dismissed as civil society mobilizes to prevent a takeover of the levers of power in ways previously thought unimaginable?

 

[berg80]

STATEMENT OF INTEREST

Amici are retired four-star admirals and generals, and former secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. They served under each President from John F. Kennedy to Donald J. Trump. Amici are deeply interested in this case because presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would threaten the military’s role in American society, our nation’s constitutional order, and our national security. It also would have profoundly negative effects on military service members, who answer to the orders of the President as Commander-in-Chief. This submission is based on amici’s collective experience serving in and leading our military, as well as their collective interest in safeguarding our national security. Amici’s short biographies listed below only begin to describe their distinguished service to our country.

 

[elektra]

How do we put former Generals and Admirals into proper context when they become politicians?

 

[elektra]

Gee, berg, seems easy. Nothing is more political than the top ranks of the military. From being wined and dined by lobbyists or cajoled by politicians. Top Officers in the military are appointed by the President.

Yes, how do we reckon with Political Generals and Political Ambassadors, that is a tough one.

 

[elektra]

Worried about a claim of Immunity? Yet they can not give one example of where this immunity was exercised to the detriment of the military in the 4 years Trump was president.

All these silly claims of what we must fear if Trump is elected, a second time, as if Trump never was a president and is an unknown?

Trump was president for four years. Nothing happened? Why would it happen in the next four years but it did not happen in the first four years?

 

[elektra]

Are these Generals going to call for the prosecution of Biden and the Democrats for the failure in Afghanistan? Is this the type of incident that they claim presidents have no immunity for?

Top former US generals say failures of Biden administration in planning drove chaotic fall of Kabul

The rare testimony by the two retired generals publicly exposed the strain and differences the military leaders had with the Biden administration in the final days of the war.

apnews.com

Top former US generals say failures of Biden administration in planning drove chaotic fall of Kabul​

 

[rampart]

How do we put former Generals and Admirals into proper context when they become politicians?

as individuals. from great heroes like smedley butler or ike down to the sniveling toadies like flynn.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Another day; another stage four TDS foamer thread from Stalinberg80.

 

[elektra]

Or, did word get out that these former Generals and Admirals, could lose rich consulting jobs. Maybe, they filed this brief so that they could be awarded rich consulting jobs or be awarded rich jobs for lobbyists.

With this post I do provide a motive, for making such a statement. The Generals and Admirals, could simply be politicians on board so that they can receive nice $90hr consulting jobs or jobs for military contractors.

And as this article points out, they can be blackballed, fired, if they do the wrong thing.

US army general suspended for mocking Jill Bidenâs support of abortion rights

Gary Volesky, three-star general who took on lucrative consulting role, suspended over Twitter post that appeared under his name

www.theguardian.com

The US army has suspended a retired three-star general from a lucrative consultant’s role after a social media post appearing under his name taunted first lady Jill Biden’s support of abortion rights.

Former top army spokesperson Gary Volesky, who retired as a lieutenant general and earned a silver star for gallantry while serving in Iraq, was making $92 an hour advising military officers, staff and students who were taking part in war games and other similar activities.

 

[berg80]

How do we put former Generals and Admirals into proper context when they become politicians?

"So, what's it going to be? How are defenders of all things Trump going to throw these former military personnel under the bus?"

Got it. You don't like the idea that as experienced military leaders they see peril in the notion of a prez being able to do anything he/she damn pleases without regard for accountability or legal exposure. Their goal is to ensure the protection of the country. Trump's goal is the protection of himself. See the difference?

 

[berg80]

Or, did word get out that these former Generals and Admirals, could lose rich consulting jobs. Maybe, they filed this brief so that they could be awarded rich consulting jobs or be awarded rich jobs for lobbyists.

With this post I do provide a motive, for making such a statement. The Generals and Admirals, could simply be politicians on board so that they can receive nice $90hr consulting jobs or jobs for military contractors.

I certainly can understand, since as a Trump supporter the concept is so foreign to you, that you never considered they did this out of a sense of loyalty and duty to the nation they served. A thought that never enters Trump's narcissistic head.

 

[eagle1462010]

Former top military officers push back on Trump immunity claim​

More than a dozen retired four-star generals, admirals and other former military leaders filed an amicus brief with in the Supreme Court on Monday, arguing against former President Trump’s claims of immunity in his criminal cases.

The group said Trump’s claims “would threaten the military’s role in American society, our nation’s constitutional order, and our national security,” and would have a “profoundly negative effects on military service members.”
https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...y-officers-push-back-on-trump-immunity-claim/

So, what's it going to be? How are defenders of all things Trump going to throw these former military personnel under the bus? Will they be accused of being part of the fictitious deep state, or Dems, or never Trumper's? In what way will their concerns be dismissed as civil society mobilizes to prevent a takeover of the levers of power in ways previously thought unimaginable?

BS. Presidents can declassify by execurive order. Generals cant.

Whole thing is lawfare by you communists

 

[elektra]

Wow, the brief is off the rails, to state the "danger" immunity poses, they cite a Lieutenant in Viet-Nam who murdered 22 civilians? That is reaching deep into the pickle barrel. A man convicted of murder 50 years ago is what makes these politicians concerned about Trump???????

The My Lai Massacre provides a vivid example of this principle. There, Army personnel murdered unarmed civilians in South Vietnam. Platoon leader Lieutenant 19 William Calley, Jr., was court-martialed and ultimately convicted at trial for killing 22 Vietnamese civilians. Fred L. Borch, What Really Happened at My Lai on March 16, 1968? The War Crime and the Legal Aftermath, 2018 Army L. 1, 2-3 (2018). He claimed a defense of superior orders—i.e., that he was simply following orders from his commanding offcer. Id. at 2. But, as the guilty verdict underscored, Lieutenant Calley’s foremost obligation was to obey the law, which forbids premeditated killing of innocent civilians

 

[ColonelAngus]

Didnt 70 FORMER HIGH RANKING INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS CLAIM THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP WAS A RUSSIAN FAKE?

 

[berg80]

Gee, berg, seems easy. Nothing is more political than the top ranks of the military.

The opposite is true.

Amici are deeply interested in this case because presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would threaten the military’s role in American society, our nation’s constitutional order, and our national security.

 

[elektra]

I certainly can understand, since as a Trump supporter the concept is so foreign to you, that you never considered they did this out of a sense of loyalty and duty to the nation they served. A thought that never enters Trump's narcissistic head.

Which concept is foreign to me, me being a USMC veteran.

The concept foreign to you, is that top Military officials, are politicians

Are you a veteran?

 

[elektra]

The opposite is true.

Amici are deeply interested in this case because presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would threaten the military’s role in American society, our nation’s constitutional order, and our national security.

I stated that top military officials, are political, politicians, now you claim the opposite is true? You are showing you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[berg80]

Wow, the brief is off the rails, to state the "danger" immunity poses, they cite a Lieutenant in Viet-Nam who murdered 22 civilians? That is reaching deep into the pickle barrel. A man convicted of murder 50 years ago is what makes these politicians concerned about Trump???????

They were explaining the conflict officers would face between following orders from an unaccountable CIC and following the law. I guess it was too complicated for you.

 

[berg80]

Which concept is foreign to me, me being a USMC veteran.

The concept foreign to you, is that top Military officials, are politicians

Are you a veteran?

If you think you gain any credibility for your opinion because of a claim you're a vet you'd be wrong about that too. BTW, if you really are a vet, thanks for your service.

 

[eagle1462010]

If you think you gain any credibility for your opinion because of a claim you're a vet you'd be wrong about that too. BTW, if you really are a vet, thanks for your service.

Your side has no credibility as your own have done Way worse and nothing was done.