I find the lack of posts about the Secretary of Navy Spencer's firing (resignation?), Trump's tweets about it, Gallagher's dismissal of the thing as being about egos, and SecDef Esper's complaint about Spencer going behind his back, to be curious, given the number of veterans on this board.
Does anybody want to chime in?
For reference, here is an article about it:
Pentagon chief fires Navy secretary over SEAL controversy
No Commentary About the Spencer/Esper/Gallagher Flap?
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by InTheLight, Nov 25, 2019.
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
I've been watching it. Early on, I said, whoever is responsible for setting up this review to take Gallagher's pin and go against the President needs to be FIRED. ...because their lack of loyalty is on display.
P.S. I've felt strong enough about this injustice that I donated to Gallagher's defense fund...
. -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
He shouldn't have gone around the Defense Secretary. His letter only sounds like a disingenuous attempt at self-justification.
He doesn't have to like the decisions the President makes, and he doesn't have to like the decisions the Defense Secretary makes. But unless he is being ordered to take an illegal action and has already objected to the order, he has no business skipping up in the chain of command. If it isn't an illegal order, then his option is to execute the order or to resign. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
It seems to me that SecDef Esper was out of the loop for the whole thing and seemed to react by trying to assert authority and fired Spencer.
I don't blame Spencer for not taking Trump's tweet saying Gallagher would not lose his status as official policy, considering there was a hearing set for next week on that very matter. Really, is the military supposed to accept Trump's tweets as official policy? Or consider his tweets as an order from the Commander in Chief? -
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Now suppose Spencer follows your suggestion. He goes to Esper and says, "Is this an order from the President not to take away Seal status from Gallagher?"
Now what?
You think Esper is going to ask Trump, "When you tweeted the other day about Gallagher, was that an official order not to have his pin stripped?" or "Should we cancel the hearing?"
It's possible Spencer (allegedly) went to the President for clarification in order to keep his boss Esper from being put in an embarrassing position. His reward was to get fired. -
No matter what, this is likely a job-ending situation. But if he follows the chain of command, he can at least claim that he was following protocol. -
Anyone and everyone involved in pushing this defiant act in any way should get the ax. -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member
Have we considered this angle? When a scapegoat case reaches the public eye, it's bound to give the organization a black one. Once the top man signaled his support for doing the right thing, they should have cleared every step with him—that's the loop. Anything else is essentially insubordination. Of course, it would have been better had they not created a scapegoat case in the first place.
"A lot of people were upset by this result, where Eddie Gallagher is the only person that gets punished, despite the entire platoon being in the picture, including his superior officer," Tim Parlatore, one of Gallagher's attorneys, told Task & Purpose.
Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher's Family Is Asking Trump for a Presidential Pardon -
-
Today's lesson, if you're telling the public one thing and your boss's boss another, you should probably let your boss know.
-
Spencer jumped the chain of command and Esper asked Trump's permission to fire him and got it.
How this turns out if Spencer doesn't get stupid is anybody's guess.
But the actual facts of the firing are very straight forward.