Posted on 12/01/2016 7:33:42 PM PST by kevcol
The Senate Armed Services chair vowed to help move Mattis through the upper chamber's confirmation process. McCain, who will chair Mattis's confirmation hearing, told the Washington Examiner that he would write the bill to grant Mattis a waiver of the seven-year rule.
Not all lawmakers agreed on that Thursday night. Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, D-N.Y., a former Hillary Clinton supporter, said she is against changing that rule in order to accommodate Mattis.
"While I respect Gen Mattis's service, I oppose a waiver-civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy," Gillibrand tweeted.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Iron my shirt!
You! Fix me a sammich!
“Eisenhower was a general. :)”
It may not be true any longer but it used to be that the most common previous profession for presidents was a general.
Let me see how many I can name
Washington
Van Buren
Jackson
Tyler
Buchanan?
Grant
T Roosevelt
Eisenhower
You did good! Eisenhower was the first one that came to my mind. :)
Well, if Gillibrand is opposed to him, then I KNOW Trump made a great choice.
You have to wonder about McCan’s position.
The left exploit top-down institutions such as the military where they need merely utter a regulation and where they can reasonably expect to have it enforced. How much easier than being forced to rely on suasion in civil society.
She needs to learn that Donald J. Trump is the Commander in Chief of the Military and he is a civilian. Mattis is his pick as is Flynn. You don’t lose your citizenship because you WERE in the Military. George Washington is the shining example.
What are the benefits of this law, rule, or whatever this requirement is called?
How about Andrew Jackson, a General and US President, Teddy Roosevelt also comes to mind along with San Juan Hill and his stint in the White House. Any others?
Gillibrand needs to first have a talk with her fellow New Yorker, Hillary, about respecting democracy.
So then, you do agree that he can be appointed.
He was both, at different times!
Amazing. A defense department that is run by someone who actually KNOWS what the military needs instead of what he thinks it needs based on some academic papers
Interesting that a democrat is suddenly concerned about complying with our laws.
Quite possibly. What do you think Auh?
While such a provision barring recent Military retirees from the position would laudable in some third world hellhole prone to military dictatorship, it seems to be entirely unnecessary and counter-productive here. A former General seems like the most qualified person for the job.
Gillibrand is toad.
Redundant. She is stupid, uninformed and ignorant, which is another way of saying she is a liberal. [wink] :)
Wait until after Trump’s swearing in. Write the bill, fast track it, use reconciliation, pass and sign it in a couple weeks total. The reason for 7 years between active duty and civilian job in DOD? To prevent counter reaction to social change experiments, to prevent lobby connections, and to prevent vendetta replacements. 7 years was an arbitrary number longer than the term of any elected US office. 4 years will be just fine. The length of a presidency seems more than enough separation.
“I think Gillibrand is a special kind of stupid.”
Not that special, she has “company” in the Senate, Patty Murray and Debbie Stabenow. Ayotte is going so she doesn’t count. Collectively, these women don’t have a single brain cell between them.
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.