Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jaxson66 
The fat bastard suppressed the truth about the Mueller report
Uh, the Mueller report was printed in full and hearings with Mueller testifying on national television. So what is it you think was "suppressed"? Or is it just that you didn't like the outcome of the investigation because it didn't lay a glove on Trump?
Originally Posted by HedonistForever
jax is always jabbering about "suppression" isn't he? except there isn't any. Mueller himself stated his letter to Barr did NOT claim any inaccuracies about Barr's summary. what he complained about is the press's rush to judgement about what the report said without it being released yet. imagine that? the press making judgements and speculation without the facts? and people wonder why Trump calls them out for fake news and that the general public is tired of this and has lost faith in the objectivity of the press and their factual accuracy.
jax the hax also likes to claim the Senate vote was tainted due to no witnesses while conveniently ignoring the absolute unfairness of the House inquiry. they stonewalled any and all rebuttal witnesses proposed by the Republicans then paraded a slew of "fact witnesses" who were nothing more than disgruntled Obamatard holdovers who disagreed with Trump's policy vs. what Obama's had been. even that asshole Vindman could not refute the accuracy of the released transcript and he was there to hear it. oh he made big noise about some omission of a minor detail that even he had to admit did not change the transcript's accuracy.
jax the hax won't admit that there never was any factual basis to impeach Trump and that it was a political kangaroo court to sway voters and that it blew up in the Democrat's faces BIGLY.
BAHHAAAAAAAA
How about the rest of it? Staffers for MaGuire went around him to the house committee and gave an unsubstantiated report to people like Adam Schiff. Schiff leaked a version of it to the New York Times. Maguire had lost control of his command and that, as any military person knows, will get you shitcanned.
Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn
the commanding officer is always accountable for the actions of his subordinates. it goes with the authority of command. any good CO knows this and like a good coach doesn't complain when a ref's call goes against him in a game.
on one of my deployments in the Navy we went to the Land of OZ and some sailor met his aussie version of Olivia Newton-John and then tried to smuggle her back to the US by having her stow away on his ship. this was the fault of several actually, the quarterdeck watch should have caught it as all visitors must sign in and be accounted for after visiting hours are over. either they didn't catch it as they should or the sailor colluded with them to conceal it (don't recall what the inquiry revealed on that, i've slept since then). regardless, the Commander who was the CO got burned for it. the sailor and the watch did too but the CO took the big fall. he lost his command, and was forced to retire from the Navy.
even Captain Jimmy T. Kirk couldn't have foreseen such an event happening. impossible to predict, especially if it was a pure mistake by the watch not to account for this girl.
Originally Posted by Jaxson66
