Posted on 12/03/2016 11:55:00 AM PST by traumer
The first Senate Democrat has come out against one of President-elect Donald Trump's more popular cabinet nominees, as Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York says she won't back a special waiver for the general.
'While I deeply respect General Mattis's service, I will oppose a waiver,' Gillibrand said in a statement. 'Civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and I will not vote for an exception to this rule.'
Mattis' wartime experiences as a 'fighting general' and his intellect have won him strong early reviews from Republicans and Democrats, including Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democratic on the House Intelligence Committee.
He also is seen as a possible check against some of Trump's instincts. Mattis has publicly criticized Russia, and Trump has credited him with raising persuasive arguments against water-boarding, a harsh interrogation technique the president-elect has said should be brought back.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I never understood this “waiver” thing. The Constitution says the president can nominate whomever he wants. There is no mention in the Constitution about any 7-year waiting rule.
“’While I deeply respect General Mattis’s service, I will oppose a waiver,’ Gillibrand said in a statement. ‘Civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and I will not vote for an exception to this rule.’”
Pure, unadulterated inside-the-beltway bullsh*t.
She’s just loving to be obstructionist.
Is it ant wonder Americans are tired of this political-speak.
any
So I suppose she would have opposed Washington to serve as CIC. Or Ike as POTUS.
Trump is a civilian, and he will be in charge of the military.
The Senate is free to adopt rules governing its consent to Presidential appointments.
Nothing in her background indicates she has any understanding or competence to evaluate military issues.
There was a long discussion here on FR about this yesterday, and it comes down to a question of whether that restriction would even pass a constitutional challenge. From what I’ve been able to figure out, it dates back to a provision of the Federal law that established the Department of Defense in 1947. The U.S. Secretary Defense is a statutory office that only exists because Congress established it, so the question is whether Congress ever had the authority to establish such an office and attach restrictions to it that conflict with the President’s authority under the U.S. Constitution.
In all the confusion of 1789, Congress forgot to vote him a waiver. So everything he did as President is under suspicion.
/s
Schumer’s Shiksa and nothing more!
The minute Trump showed up, demon rats suddenly feel the need to lecture us on the principles of democracy.
Exactly! Just another jumped-up nobody.
She has had enough “ink” over this. Stop making her more well known.
Gillibrand is such a tool.
Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems that a Senator who voices opposition to extending a waiver to the Defense Secretary restriction is wasting her time. The Senate can simply reject the candidate in the confirmation process for any reason whatsoever.
3rd time in 3 days this story has been posted.
Progressive tools being progressive tool Senator Gilldumb needs to make us all a sammich. :)
Mattis is a civilian also, or does it really take seven years to regain your status as a civilian?
I think Mattis is a good choice.
My one concern with him is that he has never been married.
How can an unmarried man truly understand fighting?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.