Political Wrinkles

Political Wrinkles (http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/)
-   News & Current Events (http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/news-current-events/)
-   -   Harward turns down Trump's national security offer (http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/news-current-events/50239-harward-turns-down-trumps-national-security-offer.html)

saltwn 02-16-2017 09:08 PM

Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 



Quote:

...according to an individual familiar with Harward's thinking, the former Navy SEAL who served on the National Security Council under President George W. Bush turned down the Trump offer because he did not receive sufficient assurances about staffing and autonomy. Specifically, the source said Harward wanted commitments that the National Security Council would be fully in charge of security matters, not Trump's political advisers. And he wanted to be able to select his own staff.
Just another brick in the wall...

link

RedState 02-16-2017 09:18 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Harward turns down National Security Adviser post - dispute is over Flynn staffers, chief among them Deputy NSA McFarland.


Look over these two resumes and guess which one Trump chose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Harward

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._T._McFarland


You don't fuc* with chain-of-command. You tell subordinates what to do, not how to do it.

Refusing to allow Harward to choose his own staff is a sign that Trump will continue to micromanage and politicize the military.

I can imagine this being a deal-breaker for any retired flag officer he tries to appoint to the position, except maybe someone like Petraeus who has nothing to lose.

saltwn 02-16-2017 09:50 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RedState (Post 872915)

Look over these two resumes and guess which one Trump chose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Harward

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._T._McFarland


You don't fuc* with chain-of-command. You tell subordinates what to do, not how to do it.

Refusing to allow Harward to choose his own staff is a sign that Trump will continue to micromanage and politicize the military.

I can imagine this being a deal-breaker for any retired flag officer he tries to appoint to the position, except maybe someone like Petraeus who has nothing to lose.


Presently here's where I'm at:
I'm disgusted with both major parties but the Democrats never nominated a psychopath.

jimbo 02-16-2017 10:00 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RedState (Post 872915)

Look over these two resumes and guess which one Trump chose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Harward

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._T._McFarland


You don't fuc* with chain-of-command. You tell subordinates what to do, not how to do it.

Refusing to allow Harward to choose his own staff is a sign that Trump will continue to micromanage and politicize the military.

I can imagine this being a deal-breaker for any retired flag officer he tries to appoint to the position, except maybe someone like Petraeus who has nothing to lose.

Apparently a disagreement over policy. Harward, who would be the employee, wanted no input from President Trump, who would be the boss as to how to run his part of the administration.

Regarding your implication that the other choice would have been better, there's this:

McFarland's candidacy was plagued by media and other allegations that she overstated her credentials. The New York Times reported that McFarland's claim that she had written part of Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" speech was false and had actually been written by Reagan's "top national security advisers," which did not include McFarland.[7] Regarding her being the highest ranking woman of her time at the Reagan Pentagon, the newspaper reported that this was also false and that two women at the Pentagon at the time held higher ranks

The left, including you, whose stated goal is is obstruction by any means, would have had a field day with that one.

jimbo 02-16-2017 10:01 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn (Post 872917)
Presently here's where I'm at:
I'm disgusted with both major parties but the Democrats never nominated a psychopath.

No, they nominated a long standing felon instead.

Mellon_Collie 02-16-2017 10:15 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo (Post 872920)
No, they nominated a long standing felon instead.

Accused of felony does not make one a felon, that requires a conviction in a court off law, not a court of public opinion. BTW she wasn't even indicted, and still has not been indicted except by armchair prosecutors in an internet forum.

RedState 02-16-2017 10:18 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo (Post 872919)
Apparently a disagreement over policy. Harward, who would be the employee, wanted no input from President Trump, who would be the boss as to how to run his part of the administration.

Regarding your implication that the other choice would have been better, there's this:

McFarland's candidacy was plagued by media and other allegations that she overstated her credentials. The New York Times reported that McFarland's claim that she had written part of Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" speech was false and had actually been written by Reagan's "top national security advisers," which did not include McFarland.[7] Regarding her being the highest ranking woman of her time at the Reagan Pentagon, the newspaper reported that this was also false and that two women at the Pentagon at the time held higher ranks

The left, including you, whose stated goal is is obstruction by any means, would have had a field day with that one.

Huh? McFarland is the deputy national security advisor. Harward wanted to bring in his own staff and get rid of mcfarland and the reat of Flynns loony tune crew. Trump refused that, so Harward declined the job.

RedState 02-16-2017 10:22 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo (Post 872920)
No, they nominated a long standing felon instead.

What?

jimbo 02-16-2017 10:41 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mellon_Collie (Post 872921)
Accused of felony does not make one a felon, that requires a conviction in a court off law, not a court of public opinion. BTW she wasn't even indicted, and still has not been indicted except by armchair prosecutors in an internet forum.

It absolutely does. A felony is the performing of the act. What you speak of is convicted felon.

The term felony, in some common law countries, means a serious crime. The word originates ... A person who has committed a felony is a felon, and upon conviction of a felony in a court of law is known as a convicted felon or a convict.

Hairy Jello 02-16-2017 10:51 PM

Re: Harward turns down Trump's national security offer
 
Shame. Harward woulda done a great job.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0