Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

StringerBell

Eric Cartman wrote: »

+1 I always thought with that case that she was hoping for an out of court settlement beforehand , the lads didnt even offer that as they knew they had done nothing wrong.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever though...

Water John

Total brainfart. Mixing up civil and criminal cases.

StringerBell

Manic Moran wrote: »

He can say what he likes on twitter/at rallies, the troops will follow their RoE instructions which will include the possibility for the use of lethal force, rocks or no rocks. In any case, I find it unlikely that they will be ever within rock-throwing range to begin with given their role.

So your ok with him saying that.

Good to know I suppose, removes more layers.

laugh

Voter suppression documentary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_GD7iHncZ8

aloyisious

StringerBell wrote: »

So your ok with him saying that.

Good to know I suppose, removes more layers.

Most actual troops on the ground, unlike militia, will have their own POV on the CIC and his political utterances, same as the senior and general staff members from Major up wards. Not all are like Gen Kelly or the Admiral or Al Haig and keep politics at arms length. Being a grunt doesn't limit ones savvy.

Manic Moran

batgoat wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

He can say what he likes on twitter/at rallies, the troops will follow their RoE instructions which will include the possibility for the use of lethal force, rocks or no rocks. In any case, I find it unlikely that they will be ever within rock-throwing range to begin with given their role.

Except other corrupt regimes can use his words to defend themselves when they actually do carry out such killings.(eg in Nigeria) His words have proven to be incredibly harmful, particularly in the last few weeks with two terrorists that align with his rhetoric...


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/world/africa/nigeria-trump-rocks.html

Knowing how various corrupt regimes and their militaries tend to act, I strongly doubt that Trump’s words had any bearing at all on the decision-making process involved. It may have made a convenient PR opportunity for the Nigerian Government after the fact, but i’m not sure the dead care much about that. I also doubt that the use of Trump’s words is an effective defense in world opinion.

Trump may be assessed by his rhetoric. Federal troops are bound by UCMJ and no matter what Trump bombasts, there is all but no chance of a military rock-thrower shooting event. That said, it may not be a bad thing for potential rock throwers to think there is.

BabyCheeses

Yet another right wing white male killing people. This time targeting women. At what point will we need to consider a travel ban? These people are clearly a problem and the president refuses to deal with it.

everlast75

2 Scoops wrote: »

I don't know what you're talking about. I don't dwell on your posts or anyone else's because they are of little importance to me. I've never said I agree with all of Trump's rhetoric or anything like it, go back a couple of days and you'll see I condemned him for that body slamming comment. There's no doubt some of the other stuff you'll deem racist I don't agree with either like for e.g. the Mexican rapists comment, but you're not going to shame me with your hate speech spiel for having different political opinions, try it on someone else. And fwiw calling Don Lemon an idiot isn't racist, that's what he is.

Bet offer Trump is gone by Xmas stands if you want to make it, like I said 10/1. Can donate to charities if you wish.

Thanks for replying to a post which has little or no importance to you.

I am not trying to "shame" you. The idea that anyone who still supports Trump at this stage is capable of shame is ludicrous.

You may yet again cherry pick what bits of his completely woeful actions to object to, but the fact is the guy is a racist. To be clear, the jury is not out on that. Its a fact.

What's also a fact is that he is (god help us all) the most powerful man in the world effectively. The fact that those two statements combined doesn't strike a chord within certain people can only, logically mean, that they don't mind racism.

It's inescapable.

What's also a fact is that his anti-media rhetoric has caused and will cause more violence. HE KNOWS THIS. And yet he will not stop.

He also has ramped up his lying. He managed something over 60 in one day.

And yet here you sit, comfortable in the fact that you took issue with one or two incidents. Well bully for you.

The fact is you and others turn a blind eye to ALL of the other monumental list of inappropriate, dangerous and downright disgracful and negligent actions.

Fingers crossed the majority (again) of americans will reject him and what he stands for.

Captain Obvious

Eric Cartman wrote: »

+1 I always thought with that case that she was hoping for an out of court settlement beforehand , the lads didnt even offer that as they knew they had done nothing wrong.

Has she brought a court action against someone?

Manic Moran wrote: »

He can say what he likes on twitter/at rallies, the troops will follow their RoE instructions which will include the possibility for the use of lethal force, rocks or no rocks. In any case, I find it unlikely that they will be ever within rock-throwing range to begin with given their role.

You don't see any issue at all with his words as commander in chief?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

He gets more childish by the day!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1058781668151050240?s=19

The real dangerous caravan.

batgoat

Manic Moran wrote: »

Knowing how various corrupt regimes and their militaries tend to act, I strongly doubt that Trump’s words had any bearing at all on the decision-making process involved. It may have made a convenient PR opportunity for the Nigerian Government after the fact, but i’m not sure the dead care much about that. I also doubt that the use of Trump’s words is an effective defense in world opinion.

Trump may be assessed by his rhetoric. Federal troops are bound by UCMJ and no matter what Trump bombasts, there is all but no chance of a military rock-thrower shooting event. That said, it may not be a bad thing for potential rock throwers to think there is.

There's still a problem when other regimes look at Trump and conclude they can use his words as a justification. You don't see an issue when domestic terrorists seem to either be a fan of his or buy into the 'globalist' conspiracies about the caravan that he buys into?

It's absolutely no coincidence that the synagogue shooting and the Magabomber occurred under his watch. He's amplified conspiracy theories and has made various people into targets.... I really don't understand how you can continue to diminish how dangerous his actions have become.

Water John

The Saudis would never have killed Jamal Khashoggi only because they knew they would get away with it, Trump and SIL.

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

He can say what he likes on twitter/at rallies, the troops will follow their RoE instructions which will include the possibility for the use of lethal force, rocks or no rocks. In any case, I find it unlikely that they will be ever within rock-throwing range to begin with given their role.

That is a really odd position for you to take Manic.

The CiC, the head of the military, you are saying that he should simply be ignored by the generals and other military leaders? Can they do that on any idea he has or just the ones they don't particularly agree with?

And isn't that the military basically taking over the role from the elected POTUS? Which General gets the final say and what happens if individual soldiers don't agree with that decision or is the ability to ignore orders limited to certain levels?

prawnsambo

Leroy42 wrote: »

That is a really odd position for you to take Manic.

The CiC, the head of the military, you are saying that he should simply be ignored by the generals and other military leaders? Can they do that on any idea he has or just the ones they don't particularly agree with?

And isn't that the military basically taking over the role from the elected POTUS? Which General gets the final say and what happens if individual soldiers don't agree with that decision or is the ability to ignore orders limited to certain levels?

The military have to abide by very specific laws. Apart from 'posse comitatus' (which basically precludes them from being an arm of civilian law enforcement), there's also the Geneva convention. Trump can bluster, but the army will have rules of engagement that will prevent them from doing what Trump says they should do.

Igotadose

Trump's rejoicing in the army - the army - being paid to put up barbed wire fence at the border. No doubt gains a few points with the Deplorables. I tell you, all that training and life on military bases and away from families to pitch barbed wire fence. Best military in the world being used to its highest capabilities.

In other news, US related but not due to Trump, there's a report making the rounds about an enormous CIA hack that's cost numerous (at least 30) lives. Being called the worst intelligence failure since 9/11. Definitely a bad day for the USA, and so many scary arcs to this - Iranians and Chinese cooperating to out agents, trivial google searches to find covert websites run by the CIA for communication (like, this wasn't going to happen?!), and an ignored whistleblower:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cias-communications-suffered-catastrophic-compromise-started-iran-090018710.html?.tsrc=fauxdal

Blame falls mostly on the Obama admin's CIA, the failure of the CIA Inspector General's office... unconscionable.

Stuff like this doesn't get much shrift today though. Not nearly as important as the army spreading barbed wire.

Captain Obvious

prawnsambo wrote: »

The military have to abide by very specific laws. Apart from 'posse comitatus' (which basically precludes them from being an arm of civilian law enforcement), there's also the Geneva convention. Trump can bluster, but the army will have rules of engagement that will prevent them from doing what Trump says they should do.

But is there not an understanding that an order is automatically deemed lawful when it comes from a superior?

listermint

Leroy42 wrote: »

That is a really odd position for you to take Manic.

The CiC, the head of the military, you are saying that he should simply be ignored by the generals and other military leaders? Can they do that on any idea he has or just the ones they don't particularly agree with?

And isn't that the military basically taking over the role from the elected POTUS? Which General gets the final say and what happens if individual soldiers don't agree with that decision or is the ability to ignore orders limited to certain levels?

Manic picks and chooses what he wants to take from trumps presidency. Tax cuts good . Conservative rethoric good. All the other stuff he brushes to the side.

Clearly not understanding that's not how the presidency works. You have to take it as a whole.

If the price of these lovely short term tax cuts and conservative talks is enough for some folks to take with the racism , vindictiveness, stupidity, lowering environmental protections, ruining the countries standing on the world stage, adultery , oh and the lies the constant lies.

Well then I guess those people need to take stock of their priorities

StringerBell

aloyisious wrote: »

Most actual troops on the ground, unlike militia, will have their own POV on the CIC and his political utterances, same as the senior and general staff members from Major up wards. Not all are like Gen Kelly or the Admiral or Al Haig and keep politics at arms length. Being a grunt doesn't limit ones savvy.

It's not about whether they will carry it out or not, they obviously won't. It's about whether that is acceptable from the commander in chief.

aloyisious

Leroy42 wrote: »

That is a really odd position for you to take Manic.

The CiC, the head of the military, you are saying that he should simply be ignored by the generals and other military leaders? Can they do that on any idea he has or just the ones they don't particularly agree with?

And isn't that the military basically taking over the role from the elected POTUS? Which General gets the final say and what happens if individual soldiers don't agree with that decision or is the ability to ignore orders limited to certain levels?

Pardon me butting in here [I'm not a proxy for Manic]. Despite the bit about obeying the last order [from CIC/above] the military [all levels] will have a degree of humanity and conscience [call it cop-on] when it comes to considering the orders received and complying with the same and that [IMO] would not be deposing POTUS by stealth.

Call it stringing out obeying an order seen as ridiculous to where it's past it's use-by date, procrastination, logistical impossibility, or even insisting on getting the order in writing over signature, making it obvious then that there will be a follow-up to issuing the order. Call it looking after his/her fellow citizens from the consequences of stupidity from above. Don's choice of options placed before him seems extremely random when it comes to the consequences listed alongside [the downside].

Don has a personal "make it so" way of controlling the ship of state which is as close to recklessness as is possible for a head of state and Govt to behave.
I honestly believe his way of operating is to respond immediately to something he sees or even to rubbish advice from an senior adviser always steering him in one direction, taking advantage of him on the basis of personal views of the route the US should follow.

Water John

That's why Bolton is so dangerous.

everlast75

The idea that Donald "bone spurs" Trump, who evaded the draft 5 times, is sending troops down south on a pure political stunt, which will unnecessarily cost the public a fortune, should make people's eyes roll back so far in their head, they black out.

aloyisious

StringerBell wrote: »

It's not about whether they will carry it out or not, they obviously won't. It's about whether that is acceptable from the commander in chief.

In this CIC's case, the orders are much more likely open to question and think-through by his fellow citizens, incl citizen-soldier. I see Don's instructions as lip-jerk reactions and not acceptable as orders, even if they come from the office-holder.

prawnsambo

Captain Obvious wrote: »

But is there not an understanding that an order is automatically deemed lawful when it comes from a superior?

No. That's why there's military law.

amandstu

aloyisious wrote: »

In this CIC's case, the orders are much more likely open to question and think-through by his fellow citizens, incl citizen-soldier. I see Don's instructions as lip-jerk reactions and not acceptable as orders, even if they come from the office-holder.

Is it a simple case of him throwing red meat to his base in the hope that it will get the GOP over the mid terms with a majority in both Houses?

Rhineshark

amandstu wrote: »

Is it a simple case of him throwing red meat to his base in the hope that it will get the GOP over the mid terms with a majority in both Houses?

Probably, but the militia idiots are roused now and they don't have normal chains of command or indeed "cop on". It's no real surprise that people living near the border are far more concerned with them than the caravan.

Getting the military down there as a publicity stunt is shameful but I'm inclined to agree that it will behave. The militias I have no such confidence in.

Itssoeasy

There's a hashtag on twitter of #GOPvotingblue and it's really interesting to read the diverse reasons and lengths of time they've been voting republican and why they won't be now. It's not all trump related.

Captain Obvious

Itssoeasy wrote: »

There's a hashtag on twitter of #GOPvotingblue and it's really interesting to read the diverse reasons and lengths of time they've been voting republican and why they won't be now. It's not all trump related.

Probably just a counter to the #walkaway one the Trumpers have been pushing for a while now.

Harry Palmr

Well at least he didn't say "I love the sight of barbed wire in the morning...looks like victory"

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

He can say what he likes on twitter/at rallies, the troops will follow their RoE instructions which will include the possibility for the use of lethal force, rocks or no rocks. In any case, I find it unlikely that they will be ever within rock-throwing range to begin with given their role.

That is a really odd position for you to take Manic.

The CiC, the head of the military, you are saying that he should simply be ignored by the generals and other military leaders? Can they do that on any idea he has or just the ones they don't particularly agree with?

And isn't that the military basically taking over the role from the elected POTUS? Which General gets the final say and what happens if individual soldiers don't agree with that decision or is the ability to ignore orders limited to certain levels?

The positions of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is that public statements by the President, on teeets, at rallies, etc, are not orders. This was put out publicly over a year ago. There is a process by which orders may be issued, and a public statement is not it. Orders which are sent throigh channels may then be verified for legality by JAG on route to the troops. This is not me being selective because I am deemed to like Trump, this is me observing what correct, declared protocol is.

It is also worth observing that the commentary is not as outlandish as it is being taken. There is a difference between “throwing rocks will be considered equal to a firearm” and “throwing rocks can be considered equal to a firearm”. The latter is a position taken by pretty much every force on the planet. The reason it is not a bad idea for potential protestors to believe that US agencies will shoot them when throwing rocks is because we -do- shoot people who are throwing rocks on occasion. Police in California did just that a few weeks ago.
https://abc7.com/montclair-police-shoot-assault-suspect-accused-of-throwing-rocks-at-cars/4222433/

Border patrol will also shoot people on the other side of the border who are throwing rocks, if they believe the situation calls for it. Witness the death of Jose Rodriguez in 2012. It is unlikely that the military will be involved in such a situation, but the police forces are likely to be.

[Edited to Add]
Cpt Obvious, you are referring to the presumption of lawfulness. The doctrine that an order is presumed to be lawful unless it is blatantly unlawful or a person of reasonable sense and understanding would have concluded the order to be unlawful. As a result. An order is disobeyed at the subordinate’s peril. However, since Trump public statements are not considered orders, the situation does not apply here.

StringerBell

aloyisious wrote: »

In this CIC's case, the orders are much more likely open to question and think-through by his fellow citizens, incl citizen-soldier. I see Don's instructions as lip-jerk reactions and not acceptable as orders, even if they come from the office-holder.

Still missing the point.

everlast75

everlast75 wrote: »

The idea that Donald "bone spurs" Trump, who evaded the draft 5 times, is sending troops down south on a pure political stunt, which will unnecessarily cost the public a fortune, should make people's eyes roll back so far in their head, they black out.

It should, as should nearly everything he does or says. But the last two years have shown that the people who support him do not give one crap what he says or does as long as its not a democrat in office. Anything goes as long as your a republican and not a loony lefty librul.