[Purple Haize]

Well there are actually pictures with Jerry. And a named source out in the Public. Unlike the Atlantic article

[tyndal23]

https://americanmind.org/essays/the-coming-coup/

[TH Spangler]

https://americanmind.org/essays/the-coming-coup/

Michael Anton is Lecturer in Politics and Research Fellow at Hillsdale College’s Washington, D.C. campus.

Liberty's conservative leanings should be pattern after Hillsdale College. Great school.

[rhezick]

Well there are actually pictures with Jerry. And a named source out in the Public. Unlike the Atlantic article

Well...no. There's no picture or proof that Jerry participated (not defending him I'm just going down that train of logic).

Side note, it would be interesting to see how watergate would be handled today. I understand anonymous sources don't play well with people, more so those who fall in line with Trump's view that the press is the enemy of the state. But this is standard journalism, whether you like the Atlantic or not. Please don't misconstrue, I'm not equating watergate to this, outside of the importance for anonymous sources, cited both by the EIC of the Atlantic and a reputable, credible Fox News reporter. Wonder why Trump actually decided to go after her livelihood, when all she was doing was her job (and doing it well according to those at Fox News who have stood up for her today). If it was nonsense, you'd think he'd have a thicker skin and just move on. Reminds me of another President who threatened Reuters earlier.

Again, Trump literally made the comments before. I don't see how it's a stretch, based on his previous disparagement of POWs to think that there may be some truth to this article?

Now if it's just because he's POTUS45 and nothing he can do is wrong and is occupying that third leg of the trinity there...well then we've got a different conversation.

[Purple Haize]

At the time of Watergate the use of anonymous sources to break news was rare. And the vetting process was extensive. In today’s world their use is common and their accuracy not vetted nearly as much
I know what Trump has said. He and McCain loathed each other. I’m not going to extrapolate his comments about McCain to the entire military.
Trump has far more statements and actions on the record that make these claims dubious than make them believable. Why not list all the positive quotes about the militar Trump has on record? Why not post all the testimonials from the military and military families about the positive things he’s done? Put those two in a compare and contrast column.
I love this. It says a lot for someone who is supposed to hate the military.

[rhezick]

At the time of Watergate the use of anonymous sources to break news was rare. And the vetting process was extensive. In today’s world their use is common and their accuracy not vetted nearly as much
I know what Trump has said. He and McCain loathed each other. I’m not going to extrapolate his comments about McCain to the entire military.
Trump has far more statements and actions on the record that make these claims dubious than make them believable. Why not list all the positive quotes about the militar Trump has on record? Why not post all the testimonials from the military and military families about the positive things he’s done? Put those two in a compare and contrast column.
I love this. It says a lot for someone who is supposed to hate the military.

Sure I think objectively and by any rationale argument you can't negate the good when looking at the actions of any ordinary citizen. Mabye it's just me but I believe the unique position the President holds means the example you gave is the bare minimum expectation when occupying 1600 penn ave. The fact that there is even two columns for any potus on the issue of "do they appreciate the military, POWs, and veterans" is insane, which is my point. We disagree, and such is life.

[Purple Haize]

Your point keeps changing. It’s gone from “Look at how horrible this article is. I can’t believe the President said this” to “He May not have said it but I can see him saying it” to “He might have said bad things about POWs and Veterans on other occasions and that’s bad”. Which is so far off from the original point of the article to prove the fact it was a hit piece
I am seeing it have the opposite than the desired effect Lots of every day vets are defending Trump. Which was the target of the hit piece. Some Generals etc have jumped on the bash band wagon but that’s not Trumps target audience
I see Trumps attacks against McCain Mattis and others as more personal and directed in nature. I just don’t see those comments as encompassing the entire Military. His actions just don’t back that up.
But we disagree. I can’t help it you are wrong!

[Purple Haize]

Here’s an on the record account, easily verifiable in terms of attendance and attendees that paints a sharply contrasting picture to the Atlantic article. But we are told to believe unnamed sources in an article filled with factual errors over this

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/t ... cna1239425

[TH Spangler]

Obama Biden were "fundamentally" changing military leadership. Hopfully Trump can reverse that in a second term.

And Trump's not sending guys and gals into senseless wars. Enlisted soldiers and their families value that, along with better equipment and a pay raise. Actions can be seen and you don't need a secret source to confirm.

[Purple Haize]

Obama Biden were "fundamentally" changing military leadership. Hopfully Trump can reverse that in a second term.

And Trump's not sending guys and gals into senseless wars. Enlisted soldiers and their families value that, along with better equipment and a pay raise. Actions can be seen and you don't need a secret source to confirm.

Yes but some general went on Twitter and said bad things about Trump. So we must believe Trump hates the military

[thepostman]

I wonder if those in the military don't fall into one way of poltical thought...hmmmm

[Purple Haize]

I wonder if those in the military don't fall into one way of poltical thought...hmmmm

I was told they do
It’s a smart play by the Democrats. Trump has been very Pro Military during his First Term. Trying to put a crack in that is a solid move. They did the same with Romney on 2012. Hit him on his strength. Everyone thought of Mittens as a really wholesome decent guy. But stories of dogs on the roof, binders full of women and corporate restructuring they made him seem evil incarnate. Same play here.

[thepostman]

I don't like to discuss Potus and military relations for a pretty obvious reasons but one of my absolute pet peeves is when people try to put military people in a box. It just isn't an accurate narrative and it is less true now than when I joined 11+ years ago.

[TH Spangler]

I don't like to discuss Potus and military relations for a pretty obvious reasons but one of my absolute pet peeves is when people try to put military people in a box. It just isn't an accurate narrative and it is less true now than when I joined 11+ years ago.

Don't care what you say postman. Obama was cleansing the military of leaders that didn't agree privately and some publicly with his worldview and agenda. He spent 8 years on it. I just hope some went along for the promotion and can be flipped again.

[thepostman]

I never have disagreed with you on that. Every Commander in Chief does that. Some of the names you brought up in the past that were removed from their positions were not good examples as they were removed for legit reasons.

But I wasn't even talking about that. Simply stating the fact that polical views of active duty service members are much more diverse than the republican party would like you to think.

Please remember, I never voted for Obama and have no regrets on that. Maybe I am not reading between the lines correctly, but it sure seems like you think I am a card carrying democrat. That couldn't be further from reality.

[Purple Haize]

I never have disagreed with you on that. Every Commander in Chief does that. Some of the names you brought up in the past that were removed from their positions were not good examples as they were removed for legit reasons.

But I wasn't even talking about that. Simply stating the fact that polical views of active duty service members are much more diverse than the republican party would like you to think.

Please remember, I never voted for Obama and have no regrets on that. Maybe I am not reading between the lines correctly, but it sure seems like you think I am a card carrying democrat. That couldn't be further from reality.

Yeah pretty sure Vindman isn’t a Republican

[Purple Haize]

And this is where the hit piece may backfire. Plenty of time to get surrogates out there showing what Trump has actually done. Actions are always louder than words. Added to that stories by real people who give accounts diametrically opposed to what some anonymous source said. He deluges the airways with “everyday vets” and one or to members of the brass singing his praises and accomplishments, this could turn in to a positive long term.

[thepostman]

It'll be a wash because next week will be the new thing. Because politics.

[thepostman]

I have no idea what thread to put this in, but the executive order that is temporarily suspending the social security pay roll tax seems like an incredibly dumb and short sited move. I am having to ensure I educate the people I supervise on this so they don't go out and spend their extra money and just put it in savings because they'll need it come January.

For all you Trump diehards, do you support this move? Like I said, it seems shortsighted and now that the crap is hitting the fan I can't see it being a good thing politically. I get it, he wanted congress to act but they didn't and this, to me, seems worse than no action.

Maybe my understanding is incorrect, if so please correct me.

[alabama24]

do you support this move?

I agree with you... it was dumb.

If I were a betting man, here is my prediction: If Trump wins reelection, the money will be owed in taxes. If Biden wins (and keeps the house), the taxes will be waived. In any case, people would be wise not to spend the money without taking into consideration that they will be due in April.

[thepostman]

Yeah, I supervise some very young guys and that is basically what advice I provided.

[Purple Haize]

My understanding was it was just Federal Pay Roll taxes Not Social Security. I could be wrong
I’m not a fan of having to owe and br responsible for it later. I’ll take the opposite approach and say if Trump wins it will be forgiven. If not....that will be paid back and it will be the first step in Federalizing 401k’s IRA’s and other private retirement accounts. “”To pay for the frivolous economic policies under the Trump Administration “. Because “only the wealthy have these types of accounts and were the ones who benefitted most from Trumps Stock Market”
Go ahead. Pin it. I’m right on this.
Also I’m pretty confident the Dems will hold the House unfortunately

[thepostman]

This is where I got the info on social security deferral.

https://www.dfas.mil/taxes/Social-Security-Deferral/

In order to provide relief during the COVID-19 pandemic, a Presidential Memorandum was issued on August 8, 2020 and guidance followed by Internal Revenue Service on August 28, 2020, to temporarily defer Social Security (Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) tax withholdings. This change is effective through the end of the 2020 calendar year.

[Purple Haize]

This is where I got the info on social security deferral.

https://www.dfas.mil/taxes/Social-Security-Deferral/

In order to provide relief during the COVID-19 pandemic, a Presidential Memorandum was issued on August 8, 2020 and guidance followed by Internal Revenue Service on August 28, 2020, to temporarily defer Social Security (Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) tax withholdings. This change is effective through the end of the 2020 calendar year.

Thanks. I wasn’t aware of the 28th memo which is probably where the Soc Security thing came from.
I’m curious as to what his Constitutional Authority is here. It appears he has the power to unilaterally suspend collection but does he have the authority to make those changes permanent. Obviously they will start collecting again but does he have the power to say that money not withheld isn’t needed to be repaid or does he need Congressional authority to make it stick?
I understand this came out of a failure to get a Second Rona Stimulus passed. Which after the pork riddled first one I’m not sure it’s a bad thing. This is Trumps attempt to at least get money to “The People” in the most direct manner. I get it in theory, but if I have to pay it back later I’m not sure that’s helpful. Of course it IS my money so in theory I’m always glad the Government wont be taking as much

[Jonathan Carone]

Start at 2:13