Sunday, July 31, 2016

FLASH UPDATE: THE "COMPLETE MELT-DOWN ON THE DOUBLE-DOWN" EDITION


JOHN ALLEN APPEARED ON "THIS WEEK WITH GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS" TO DOUBLE-DOWN ON HIS STRING OF HITS ON REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE DONALD TRUMP ---  INSTEAD ALLEN MIGHT HAVE HAD AN ON-AIR MELT-DOWN BY RAISING THE POSSIBILITY OF A U.S. MILITARY COUP


EARLIER TODAY JOHN ALLEN BACKED UP HIS PRIOR ANTI-TRUMP REMARKS WITH THE VEILED THREAT OF A MILITARY COUP RIGHT HERE IN THE USA IF TRUMP WERE ELECTED PRESIDENT


ODDLY, ABC DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE HAD ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT



WHAT POLITICO SAYS ABOUT IT

In what might have been the most outrageous thing advocated by a top-level former U.S. Marine since the extremism of Smedley Butler before WWII, John Allen said the election of Republican Donald Trump as president could mean a breakdown in the relationship between civilian and military leaders (See "The election of Republican Donald Trump as president could mean a breakdown in the relationship between civilian and military leaders" by Connor O'Brien, 7/31/16, Politico [http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/john-allen-donald-trump-226479]).

The Politico article started out with these observations about what Allen had to say:  "The election of Republican Donald Trump as president could mean a breakdown in the relationship between civilian and military leaders, a former top commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan warned Sunday.... In an interview on ABC's "This Week," retired Marine Gen. John Allen criticized Trump for his rhetoric on the wider use of military force and torture. And if Trump followed through with those pledges, Allen said, it would create "a civil military crisis, the like of which we've not seen in this country before.'...  'It's an inherent responsibility in who we are,' Allen said. "So what we need to do is ensure that we don't create an environment that puts us on a track conceivably where the United States military finds itself in a civil military crisis with a commander in chief who would have us do illegal things.'...  'That's a major issue that we're facing here, the potential for a civil military crisis where the military could be ordered to conduct illegal activities,' he added."

WHAT ABC HAD TO SAY ABOUT IT

Interestingly, neither interviewer George Stephanopoulos nor ABC's own text report on General Allen's Sunday morning remarks seemed to have any problem with the part of General Allen's interview mentioning a possible "civil military crisis".   In fact, as of 12:00 Noon, ABC's initial text report  on the Stephanopoulos-Allen interview didn't mention that part of the exchange in any way whatsoever (See "Ret. Gen. John Allen on Donald Trump: 'He Has No Credibility' " by Nicki Rossoll, 7/31/16, ABC News [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ret-gen-john-allen-donald-trump-credibility/story?id=41021091].

>>>MORE ON THIS LATER<<<

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Curtis LeMay lives !!

Anonymous said...

This guy Allen sounds like the crazy General Jack D. Ripper from "Doctor Strangelove"

Anonymous said...

Trump has the military industrial complex scared stiff.

Galewyn Massey said...

FLASHBACK & BACKFILL: THE “MORE ON HILLARY CLINTON’S (AND BARACK OBAMA’S) FAVORITE FAILED GENERAL” EDITION

EVEN AFTER HIS “RETIREMENT” UNDER THE SAME CLOUD OF A SECURITY SCANDAL THAT LANDED GENERAL PATRAEUS IN HOT WATER, GENERAL JOHN ALLAN, USMC, WAS STILL A RISING STAR WITHIN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION --- HOWEVER, MANY AT THE PENTAGON DIDN’T LIKE IT & WERE SAYING THAT JOHN ALLEN, GEN., USMC (RET.), WAS UPSETTING THE CHAIN OF COMMAND & THAT HE WAS “IN WAY OVER HIS HEAD”

THEIR CRITICISMS PROVED TO BE PRESCIENT --- ALLEN RESIGNED FROM OBAMA’S SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT OVERSEEING THE WAR AGAINST ISIS WHEN CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY BY SEVERAL ACTIVE DUTY U.S. OFFICERS INDICATED THAT THE OBAMA-ALLEN EFFORTS AGAINST ISIS/ISIL WERE AT A “STALEMATE” --- AND EVEN WITH ALLEN VOICING HIS FRUSTRATIONS WHEN HE ANNOUNCED HIS STEPPING DOWN AS OBAMA'S ENVOY

According to a 2014 report in the wonky “Foreign Policy” magazine ( a more conservative variant of the CFR’s journal, “Foreign Affairs”) General Allan, USMC, was regarded by many generals at the Pentagon as more of a booby than as a prize. The article in the FP magazine by Mark Perry started out by putting it this way --- “President Obama’s point man in the fight against the Islamic State faces a ruthless foe. But his detractors at home -- even in the Pentagon -- may be his biggest enemy…. When U.S. President Barack Obama appointed retired Marine Gen. John Allen to serve as his special envoy to the global coalition against the Islamic State, the news was greeted with applause from the jihadi group’s greatest enemies. Kurdish and Iraqi Sunni leaders welcomed the appointment, with good reason — these same leaders had requested that Allen, widely known as one of Obama’s favorite generals, be appointed to the position…. But not everyone was pleased, especially at the Pentagon, where top generals had deep misgivings over how Obama had chosen to manage the campaign against the Islamic State….” (See “Is Gen. John Allen in Over His Head?” by Mark Perry, 10/30/14, Foreign Policy Magazine [http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/10/30/is-gen-john-allen-in-over-his-head/?wp_login_redirect=0]). This article from almost two years ago throws around lots of names and gives lots negative commentary about the same General Allen, who was so strongly supported by President Barack Obama back then, and who is so strongly supporting Hillary Clinton now.

BTW, some snarky blogs have gone so far as to say that John Allen resigned his USMC generalship, along with the Obama Administration’s nomination as NATO commander, because he didn’t want to face hostile questioning by Senator Ted Cruz in upcoming confirmation hearings on his appointment (See “Gen. John Allen Retires Over Jill Kelly/ Paula Broadwell/David Petraeus Scandal” by John Amato, 2/20/13, Crooks and Liars [http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/gen-john-allen-retires-over-jill-kelly]).

More recently Allen’s tenure as President Obama’s Special Envoy to the “global coalition fighting against ISIS [ISIL] in Syria and Iraq” was also severely criticized by many in the U.S. military and in the Congress (See “Obama's hand-picked ISIS war czar is resigning” by Jeremy Bender, 9/22/15, Business Insider/ Military & Defense [http://www.businessinsider.com/john-allen-isis-war-obama-2015-9]; see also “Gen. John Allen to step down as Obama’s ISIS Czar” by staff writers, 9/22/15, Fox News.com / Threats [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/22/gen-john-allen-to-step-down-as-obamas-isis-czar.html], which discusses Allen’s frustrations and a Marine General’s testimony that the fight against ISIL was a “stalemate”).

[This comment is a slightly edited version of one that appeared earlier today with a publication time of 3:22 PM -- one typographical error in that earlier comment was corrected & the rest remains the completely the same, except for placement in the comments thread & a new later time of publication]

Anonymous said...

The General sounds so third world

Galewyn Massey said...

The establishment Republicans are showing why their real conservative supporters call them the stupid party and a bunch of cowards. They have thoughtlessly bought into all this Khazir & Ghazala Khan BS being peddled by the Clinton Campaign and the media, instead of getting behind Donald Trump's really justifiable pushback.

Galewyn Massey said...

MORE ON THE ABOVE: THE “RELATED MATTERS” EDITION

ODDLY, THE ISSUES RAISED BY GENERAL JOHN ALLEN’S SPEECH AT THE DNC AND THE KHZIR & GHAZALA KHAN KERFUFFLE ARE REALLY QUITE RELATED --- THEY BOTH ARISE OUT OF THEIR CYNICAL PRESENTATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE DNC AND THE HILLARY CLINTON CAMPAIGN

MAYBE, SOME HELP IS ON THE WAY FOR ALL THE GOP TRUMP FANS LOOKING FOR SOME KIND OF ORGANIZED PUSHBACK ON THESE FRONTS*

People need to read the Daily Caller article “The Disingenuous Outrage Over Khan-Gate.”

That article by Scott Greer opens with these sarcastic statements: “Our incredibly objective media has moved on from declaring Donald Trump an agent of the Kremlin and gushing over every moment of the Democratic National Convention to fixating itself on another unbiased story…. Namely, Trump hates the families of dead veterans….” (See “The Disingenuous Outrage Over Khan-Gate by Scott Greer, 7/31/16, Daily Caller [http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/31/the-disingenuous-outrage-over-trumps-response-to-the-khan-family/]).

Here is what Scott Greer and “Daily Caller” see as the main takeaways from all of this:
“…. One, Trump and his proposals have zero responsibility for Captain Khan’s death. The same cannot be said of Hillary Clinton, who authorized the Iraq war and continue supporting it long after it was abundantly clear it was a major disaster. Moreover, her hawkish foreign policy would lead to more unnecessary interventions into the Middle East and other parts of the world and sadly create more Gold Star families like the Khans…. To criticize Trump for his lack of sacrifice, but overlook Hillary’s lack of sacrifice and tacitly endorse her policies forcing more American families to lose their children on behalf of fuzzy ideological objectives is ridiculous...."

[THIS COMMENT IS CONTINUED IMMEDIATLY BELOW]

Galewyn Massey said...

CONTINUATION OF THE COMMENT IMMEDIATELY ABOVE: "'MORE ON THE ABOVE: THE RELATED MATTERS' EDITION"

".... Two, Khizr Khan is draping himself in his son’s death to attack Trump on an issue unrelated to his son’s death. A moratorium on countries where radical Islamists (whom, by the way, killed Capt. Khan) are abundant is about national security. Same goes for the proposal to secure the U.S.-Mexico border. The elder Khan claims it is unconstitutional and un-American to do both, when, in fact, legal scholars argue the measures fit very much within the precedents of American immigration law…. To denigrate or undermine the Khan family for their sacrifice is wrong and we should honor their son’s service. However, that does not mean the father is immune from criticism on political issues after he decided to take them up in the public arena. Upholding the standard that the families of fallen soldiers should not be criticized for anything is illogical and asinine. We certainly didn’t apply the same standard to Cindy Sheehan and her crusade against George W. Bush — a leader who was actually responsible for her son’s death.
Three, the impression given by the media that Captain Khan is reflective of all Muslims who may want to enter in the United States is just as faulty as claiming all Muslims are terrorists. It is true that 14 Muslims have lost their lives in service to this country since 9/11. It is also true that over 5000 Muslims are currently serving in our armed services. Various outlets love to report these facts with the hope it transmits the notion that Muslims are incredibly patriotic and are indispensable to our national security. While these individuals are unquestionably devoted to America, as a community, Muslims are very underrepresented in the military…. Muslims constitute one percent of the U.S. population, yet comprise a little under .3 percent of the armed forces. In contrast, whites are 62 percent of the population, yet make up 71 percent of the present military. Moreover, whites comprise over 83 percent of those who have died in the line of duty since 9/11, while Muslims constitute .2 percent of the fatalities…. With that in mind, declaring Trump’s policies on Middle Eastern migration as a barrier to the military getting the personnel they need to protect this country is not at all accurate…. Finally, it’s 100 percent certain the mainstream media is an unofficial arm of the Clinton campaign. After a whole week of trying to downplay the Wikileaks DNC scandal and cheering on every moment of the convention, they created a top-down outrage story for the sole purpose of shaming Trump and his supporters…. While claiming that Khan is above any criticism due to his loss, they had spent the prior week attacking Pat Smith — the mother of a Benghazi victim — for being exploited by the Republican National Convention. Her crime? Sharing the story of how she believes Hillary Clinton is responsible for her son’s death, which clearly has more basis in fact than Trump being responsible for Khan’s death…. Additionally, the media entirely ignored the stories of the families at the Republican convention who lost loved ones to illegal immigrants. Their children died as a direct result of policies supported by the Democratic Party, but the media plays by a double standard when it comes to who gets to use their tragedy to highlight a policy issue.
The Khan affair is another demonstration that the media is deadset against Trump and will blow any story out of proportion in order to gin up resistance to his candidacy. The journalists hyperventilating over Trump’s response to Khan don’t care about Gold Star families or veterans — they just see it as a good opportunity to derail The Donald….”

Anonymous said...

Gail, why did you leave out the big Breitbart expose of Khzir Khan as a wolf in Gold Star Father's clothing. It says that Khan is tied into several layers of Hillary Clinton's corruption. I know that you talked about it; why didn't you write about it on your blog.

Even before he was recently paid-off with a 5th Avenue NYC office for his legal practice and a pro-Islamic organization , Khzir Khan had been a foreign agent with Saudi Arabian connections, facilitating the movement of money and people from Islamic countries into the United States.