30 November 19
We are fighting to hold on to our budget and serving our readership with dedication while doing it. It can be a thankless assignment.
Ask yourself why you trust RSN.
It requires support.
Now is the time.
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News
Founder, Reader Supported News
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
29 November 19
Richard Spencer | I Was Fired as Navy Secretary. Here's What I've Learned Because of It.
Richard Spencer, The Washington Post
Spencer writes: "The case of Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL who was charged with multiple war crimes before being convicted of a single lesser charge earlier this year, was troubling enough before things became even more troubling over the past few weeks. The trail of events that led to me being fired as secretary of the Navy is marked with lessons for me and for the nation."
Richard Spencer, The Washington Post
Spencer writes: "The case of Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL who was charged with multiple war crimes before being convicted of a single lesser charge earlier this year, was troubling enough before things became even more troubling over the past few weeks. The trail of events that led to me being fired as secretary of the Navy is marked with lessons for me and for the nation."
he case of Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL who was charged with multiple war crimes before being convicted of a single lesser charge earlier this year, was troubling enough before things became even more troubling over the past few weeks. The trail of events that led to me being fired as secretary of the Navy is marked with lessons for me and for the nation.
It is highly irregular for a secretary to become deeply involved in most personnel matters. Normally, military justice works best when senior leadership stays far away. A system that prevents command influence is what separates our armed forces from others. Our system of military justice has helped build the world’s most powerful navy; good leaders get promoted, bad ones get moved out, and criminals are punished.
In combat zones, the stakes are even higher. We train our forces to be both disciplined and lethal. We strive to use proportional force, protect civilians and treat detainees fairly. Ethical conduct is what sets our military apart. I have believed that every day since joining the Marine Corps in 1976.
We are effective overseas not because we have the best equipment but because we are professionals. Our troops are held to the highest standards. We expect those who lead our forces to exercise excellent judgment. The soldiers and sailors they lead must be able to count on that.
Earlier this year, Gallagher was formally charged with more than a dozen criminal acts, including premeditated murder, which occurred during his eighth deployment overseas. He was tried in a military court in San Diego and acquitted in July of all charges, except one count of wrongfully posing for photographs with the body of a dead Islamic State fighter. The jury sentenced him to four months, the maximum possible; because he had served that amount of time waiting for trial, he was released.
President Trump involved himself in the case almost from the start. Before the trial began, in March, I received two calls from the president asking me to lift Gallagher’s confinement in a Navy brig; I pushed back twice, because the presiding judge, acting on information about the accused’s conduct, had decided that confinement was important. Eventually, the president ordered me to have him transferred to the equivalent of an enlisted barracks. I came to believe that Trump’s interest in the case stemmed partly from the way the defendant’s lawyers and others had worked to keep it front and center in the media.
After the verdict was delivered, the Navy’s normal process wasn’t finished. Gallagher had voluntarily submitted his request to retire. In his case, there were three questions: Would he be permitted to retire at the rank of chief, which is also known as an E-7? (The jury had said he should be busted to an E-6, a demotion.) The second was: Should he be allowed to leave the service with an “honorable” or “general under honorable” discharge? And a third: Should he be able to keep his Trident pin, the medal all SEALs wear and treasure as members of an elite force?
On Nov. 14, partly because the president had already contacted me twice, I sent him a note asking him not to get involved in these questions. The next day, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone called me and said the president would remain involved. Shortly thereafter, I received a second call from Cipollone, who said the president would order me to restore Gallagher to the rank of chief.
This was a shocking and unprecedented intervention in a low-level review. It was also a reminder that the president has very little understanding of what it means to be in the military, to fight ethically or to be governed by a uniform set of rules and practices.
Given my desire to resolve a festering issue, I tried to find a way that would prevent the president from further involvement while trying all avenues to get Gallagher’s file in front of a peer-review board. Why? The Naval Special Warfare community owns the Trident pin, not the secretary of the Navy, not the defense secretary, not even the president. If the review board concluded that Gallagher deserved to keep it, so be it.
I also began to work without personally consulting Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper on every step. That was, I see in retrospect, a mistake for which I am solely responsible.
On Nov. 19, I briefed Esper’s chief of staff concerning my plan. I briefed acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney that evening.
The next day, the Navy established a review board to decide the status of Gallagher’s Trident pin. According to long-standing procedure, a group of four senior enlisted SEALs would rule on the question. This was critical: It would be Gallagher’s peers managing their own community. The senior enlisted ranks in our services are the foundation of good order and discipline.
But the question was quickly made moot: On Nov. 21, the president tweeted that Gallagher would be allowed to keep his pin — Trump’s third intervention in the case. I recognized that the tweet revealed the president’s intent. But I did not believe it to be an official order, chiefly because every action taken by the president in the case so far had either been a verbal or written command.
The rest is history. We must now move on and learn from what has transpired. The public should know that we have extensive screening procedures in place to assess the health and well-being of our forces. But we must keep fine-tuning those procedures to prevent a case such as this one from happening again.
More importantly, Americans need to know that 99.9 percent of our uniformed members always have, always are and always will make the right decision. Our allies need to know that we remain a force for good, and to please bear with us as we move through this moment in time.
House Intelligence Committee members Adam B. Schiff, left, and Devin Nunes. (photo: AP)
A New Ruling Could Let Congress Haul In All of Trump's Allies Who Have Refused to Testify So Far
Sonam Sheth, Business Insider
Sheth writes: "This week, a federal judge came down with a momentous ruling that may throw a wrench in Trump's efforts and allow Congress to haul in all the firsthand witnesses who have so far refused to testify in the impeachment inquiry."
Sonam Sheth, Business Insider
Sheth writes: "This week, a federal judge came down with a momentous ruling that may throw a wrench in Trump's efforts and allow Congress to haul in all the firsthand witnesses who have so far refused to testify in the impeachment inquiry."
EXCERPT:
McGahn refused to comply with the subpoena at the White House's direction, and the House committee took him to court to compel his testimony. Congressional lawyers argued that they had a legitimate right to call Trump's aides to testify, as part of Congress' oversight powers. The White House argued that McGahn and other current and former White House and executive-branch officials had "absolute immunity" from testifying.
There is no legal concept called "absolute immunity." And though the Justice Department said it would appeal, Jackson's ruling on Monday dropped a hammer on the White House's argument, making it that much more difficult for Trump to keep stonewalling Congress in its impeachment inquiry.
'Presidents are not kings'
"Stated simply, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that presidents are not kings," Jackson's ruling said. "This means that they do not have subjects, bound by loyalty or blood, whose destiny they are entitled to control."
She continued: "Rather, in this land of liberty, it is indisputable that current and former employees of the White House work for the people of the United States, and that they take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
"Moreover, as citizens of the United States, current and former senior-level presidential aides have constitutional rights, including the right to free speech, and they retain these rights even after they have transitioned back into private life."
We are one (small) step closer to making Medicare for All a reality. (photo: CQ Roll Call)
Winning Medicare for All Will Require Taking On Powerful Interests. Here's How We Overcame One.
Connie Huynh, In These Times
Huynh writes: "Achieving Medicare for All in the United States would mean replacing our current broken patchwork of a healthcare system with one where everyone could access comprehensive, equitable care whenever and wherever they need it."
Connie Huynh, In These Times
Huynh writes: "Achieving Medicare for All in the United States would mean replacing our current broken patchwork of a healthcare system with one where everyone could access comprehensive, equitable care whenever and wherever they need it."
EXCERPT:
As the movement toward Medicare for All gains steam, with presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren touting the proposal on the campaign trail, the mounting threat to insurance companies and Big Pharma is becoming more and more clear. The end of private insurance, or at least most forms of it, stands as an existential threat to the future of these obscenely profitable corporations.
They should be scared. Close to a majority of Democrats in the U.S. House are now co-sponsoring Rep. Pramila Jayapal’s Medicare for All bill. Healthcare has become a dominant issue in the 2020 Democratic primary. Medicare is one of the most popular programs in American history, and at a time when good jobs with guaranteed healthcare are hard to find, it makes sense that Americans want to expand it.
The AMA has a long, troubling history of opposing healthcare reforms, including Medicare and Medicaid, which it called “socialized medicine” back in 1965. During the Obama administration, the AMA lobbied with private insurers to undermine the Affordable Care Act, significantly reducing the number of people able to get coverage under the law.
Currently, 30 million people in the United States are uninsured. Twenty-five million more are underinsured, meaning they spend 10% or more of their income on out-of-pocket medical expenses. Meanwhile, 70% of Americans now support Medicare for All, which, until this month, the AMA backed the PAHCF in inactively opposing.
Magistrate Mike Pitts. Pitts, a former state representative, was appointed to the magistrate's bench after he retired from the legislature. (photo: Paul Zoeller/The Post and Courier)
He Defended the Confederate Flag and Insulted Immigrants. Now He's a Judge.
Joseph Cranney, ProPublica
Cranney writes: "Former state Rep. Mike Pitts made anti-immigrant and racially charged remarks seemingly at odds with South Carolina's judicial code. He sailed through an appointment process as a magistrate nominee with little scrutiny and no debate."
READ MORE
Joseph Cranney, ProPublica
Cranney writes: "Former state Rep. Mike Pitts made anti-immigrant and racially charged remarks seemingly at odds with South Carolina's judicial code. He sailed through an appointment process as a magistrate nominee with little scrutiny and no debate."
READ MORE
Rep. Ilhan Omar. (photo: Getty)
Ilhan Omar Republican Challenger Banned From Twitter Over Post Saying She Should Be Hanged
Aris Folley, The Hill
Folley writes: "Twitter has permanently suspended a campaign account belonging to Republican Danielle Stella, who is running to unseat Rep. Ilhan Omar next year, following a report that her account shared lynching comments about the congresswoman."
Aris Folley, The Hill
Folley writes: "Twitter has permanently suspended a campaign account belonging to Republican Danielle Stella, who is running to unseat Rep. Ilhan Omar next year, following a report that her account shared lynching comments about the congresswoman."
EXCERPT:
Twitter's move to suspend the campaign account comes as the social media giant has made efforts over the years to toughen its polices on hate speech and abusive behavior.
On a webpage outlining its rules, the platform said “violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation.”
“Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely,” it adds.
Omar, one of the first two Muslim women to be elected to Congress, won election last fall in the overwhelmingly Democratic district and has repeatedly been a target for Republicans over her foreign policy views.
Protest banners hang on the perimeter fence of Camp Schwab, a United States military base on May 30, 2018, in Nago, Okinawa prefecture, Japan. (photo: Carl Court/Getty)
Okinawa: "No Rape, No Base, No Tears"
Jessie Kindig, Jacobin
Kindig writes: "The US military presence around the world doesn't just create death and destruction - in places like Okinawa, Japan, its bases foster an environment of sexual violence against women."
Jessie Kindig, Jacobin
Kindig writes: "The US military presence around the world doesn't just create death and destruction - in places like Okinawa, Japan, its bases foster an environment of sexual violence against women."
EXCERPT:
It’s these women’s stories that Akemi Johnson chronicles in her deeply researched and skillfully narrated account, Night in the American Village: Women in the Shadow of the US Military Bases in Okinawa.
At the end of World War II, the emerging American superpower spawned a global empire of permanent military bases, a massive complex of 730 to 867 permanent military installations in 153 countries around the world. Nowhere is the US military presence more intrusive than in Okinawa. An independent island kingdom before being colonized by Japan in 1879, Okinawa was under the US military’s direct purview until 1972, when it reverted to Japanese control. Today, 70 percent of the US military bases in Japan are clustered in Okinawa prefecture, and the US military controls one-fifth of the island’s land mass.
Extinction Rebellion protests. (photo: Victoria Jones/PA)
Charges Dropped Against More Than 100 Extinction Rebellion Protesters
Owen Bowcott, Guardian UK
Bowcott writes: "More than 100 Extinction Rebellion protesters have had charges against them dropped after the ban forbidding protest in London last month was ruled unlawful."
Owen Bowcott, Guardian UK
Bowcott writes: "More than 100 Extinction Rebellion protesters have had charges against them dropped after the ban forbidding protest in London last month was ruled unlawful."
EXCERPT:
The Crown Prosecution Service decision will affect about 105 cases immediately, mostly those involving defendants facing trial for allegedly breaching section 14 of the 1986 Public Order Act.
Others formally accused of obstructing the highway will also have the cases against them discontinued, the CPS confirmed. Many cases will still go ahead.
The announcement may encourage large numbers of the estimated 1,800 protesters who were held between 14 October and 19 October to sue for wrongful arrest and detention.
Earlier this month, the high court ruled that the section 14 order obtained by the Metropolitan police, which declared that XR “must now cease their protests within London”, exceeded the police powers.
Delivering judgment, Mr Justice Dingemans said: “Separate gatherings, separated both in time and by many miles, even if coordinated under the umbrella of one body, are not a public assembly under the meaning of section 14(1) of the 1986 act.”
As a result of that ruling, charges based on breaching section 14 orders became legally impossible to pursue. A CPS spokesperson said: “We will be discontinuing a number of cases against Extinction Rebellion protesters who were arrested during the October protests.
No comments:
Post a Comment