The original TRB was called for by Admiral Green.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Stand by for high seas, heavy rolls in NSW and JAGC
- Thread starter nittany03
- Start date
The entire point is to use something obviously absurd, contrast it with the given occurrence, and use those to ask where the boundary line is.
There's more to being educated than understanding how neutrons work, and you're proving this in spades.
Might as well commission Gallagher as a LT at this stage. What's to stop him?
Senate approval of commissions.
Goodfou
Well-Known Member
BLUF according to Brett: “Words.”
Hypothetically, would taking that man’s Trident have done anything to fix NSW culture? The answer to that question is what matters. Just like the collisions in PACFLT, this whole story brings to light how jacked up NSW culture currently is. Seriously, several dudes were okay with taking a picture with a corpse....that numbness to the value of life arguably comes from over exposure to death over a significant period of time. This same type of thing has happened to many Americans in every war. Mental health counseling and prolonged time away from the battlefield, arguably, is what those men need. Beyond that, there are several ways to instill good order and discipline into the force long term-taking one man’s Trident walking out the door is not one of them.
The President answers to the people in 2020. He made a decision about a very public case knowing that a number of civilians don’t agree with how the Navy has handled this situation.
NSW has bigger issues to address than beating a dead horse with Gallagher. Did anyone really think they could get away with doing anything else perceived as disciplinary to him? The President made clear his expectations on the issue. NSW leadership should have moved on.
Hypothetically, would taking that man’s Trident have done anything to fix NSW culture? The answer to that question is what matters. Just like the collisions in PACFLT, this whole story brings to light how jacked up NSW culture currently is. Seriously, several dudes were okay with taking a picture with a corpse....that numbness to the value of life arguably comes from over exposure to death over a significant period of time. This same type of thing has happened to many Americans in every war. Mental health counseling and prolonged time away from the battlefield, arguably, is what those men need. Beyond that, there are several ways to instill good order and discipline into the force long term-taking one man’s Trident walking out the door is not one of them.
The President answers to the people in 2020. He made a decision about a very public case knowing that a number of civilians don’t agree with how the Navy has handled this situation.
NSW has bigger issues to address than beating a dead horse with Gallagher. Did anyone really think they could get away with doing anything else perceived as disciplinary to him? The President made clear his expectations on the issue. NSW leadership should have moved on.
I guess the distinction being original appointments, as promotions to O3 still require Senate confirmation. Learned something new. ?
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Very nice.
Education is rooted in facts and research. So before debating on what the law does and does not allow the President to do, you should probably know what the law actually says and then have some examples on how it has been enforced by the executive branch and interpreted by the judicial branch.
The only thing that people are proving in this thread is that they can't be bothered to use google and don't understand the fundamental role of the President. Instead they want to make up fictitious scenarios that don't even have the same logical structure as the original problem.
The majority of the President's fundamental domestic powers come from two basic functions: the ability to appoint government officials (including military), and the ability to say no to things.
You are welcome to peruse the link and find in Title 14 where it gives the President the power to spot appoint a licensed pilot and/or some case law to support your argument. If you can, then he has this power. If you can't, then he doesn't. Taken a step further, he has the ability to appoint a newly minted 1390 up to the rank of O-3, but he can't force him to immediately be allowed to fly where he'd be a threat to public safety.
Now, he can decide to order a CO to spot promote someone to O-3 and let him fly anyway, and that CO can refuse the order on the grounds that it's illegal, and this will turn into a long drawn out process that requires Congressional involvement where the CO is going to lose his job in the short-term and ultimately better be sure he's right. And we both know that the CO and the office of the President have real live lawyers available to them who actually know the law and previous cases to give them advice on the legality of this whole thing, so the idea that a CO has to unilaterally decide whether an order is legal also isn't grounded in how things actually work.
The President doesn't have unbridled arbitrary power over all things government, nor should he. A bunch of smart people decided this on Jun 21, 1888. But he does have the specific ability to pardon people, and he does have the ability to stop government officials under him who attempt to undermine that pardon by pursuing further administrative action.
It should tell you a lot that the Democrats, who have spent the last 3 years tilting at windmills to indict the President on charges of conspiring with foreign governments, have not stepped in here.
Last edited:
I made no judgement on how any of this affects NSW culture. We’re exploring the bounds of the law WRT the Civ-Mil relationship.
The Ivanka Naval Aviator example is interesting because... it's already happened, in a sense. Both Ivanka and her husband have been serving as Senior Advisors to the CiC for the duration of the administration, despite objectively lacking any relevant experience in Foreign Affairs (and licensing the Trump name to intl hotel developments does not count), are unconfirmed by the Senate, and are leading efforts like 'the Middle Eastern Peace talks' that don't exist. If that has passed muster, then yeah Trump is well within his rights to decide the fate of a SEAL's Trident.
Going back to the lawful order piece, this seems like it falls the same way as a lot of Trump's decisions, and is a reason people underestimate the hell out of him. Does it potentially harm the community it affects? Maybe so. Does it piss off his political opponents and even some of his supporters? Probably so. Is it illegal? Probably not. Will it serve as anecdotal or emotional if not truly compelling evidence that he is 'supporting great Americans' or 'Making America Great Again' by sticking it to the PC police? Absolutely it will. So he'll do it, knowing the only outcome is a persistent storyline where his opponents are painted as whiners that are out to get him and Great Americans like him, and he looks like he's just trying to support the troops. The second and third order effects of all this that have been discussed on these 21 pages do not concern him at all, but doesn't mean he's not one clever dude.
Going back to the lawful order piece, this seems like it falls the same way as a lot of Trump's decisions, and is a reason people underestimate the hell out of him. Does it potentially harm the community it affects? Maybe so. Does it piss off his political opponents and even some of his supporters? Probably so. Is it illegal? Probably not. Will it serve as anecdotal or emotional if not truly compelling evidence that he is 'supporting great Americans' or 'Making America Great Again' by sticking it to the PC police? Absolutely it will. So he'll do it, knowing the only outcome is a persistent storyline where his opponents are painted as whiners that are out to get him and Great Americans like him, and he looks like he's just trying to support the troops. The second and third order effects of all this that have been discussed on these 21 pages do not concern him at all, but doesn't mean he's not one clever dude.
I don’t think that’s the best example. The qualifications for non-Senate confirmed presidential staff is not codified in law, policy or procedure (as a Naval Aviator qualification is). He can literally pick anyone he chooses for any reason, or no reason at all. There is no muster to pass. So, I don’t agree that this is an equivalency to my analogy in any sense.
Gallagher’s brother wrote an op-ed. Pretty harsh.
www.navytimes.com
Op-ed: Navy corruption and the Gallagher case
Sean Gallagher defends the president's intervention in his brother's court-martial case.
www.navytimes.com