Pentagon chief asks for Navy secretary’s resignation over private proposal in Navy SEAL’s case

  
Via:  pj  •  3 weeks ago  •  46 comments

Pentagon chief asks for Navy secretary’s resignation over private proposal in Navy SEAL’s case

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T




Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper asked for the resignation of Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer on Sunday after losing confidence in him over his handling of the case of a Navy SEAL accused of war crimes in Iraq, the Pentagon said.



Spencer’s resignation came in the wake of the controversial case of Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL who was accused of war crimes on a 2017 deployment. He was acquitted of murder but convicted in July of posing with the corpse of a captive.





Esper asked for Spencer’s resignation after learning that he had privately proposed to White House officials that if they did not interfere with proceedings against Gallagher, then Spencer would ensure that Gallagher was able to retire as a Navy SEAL, with his Trident insignia.



Spencer’s private proposal to the White House — which he did not share with Esper over the course of several conversations about the matter — contradicted his public position on the Gallagher case, chief Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said in a statement.



Esper said in the statement that he was “deeply troubled by this conduct.”



“Unfortunately, as a result I have determined that Secretary Spencer no longer has my confidence to continue in his position," Esper said. "I wish Richard well.”



Spencer’s spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.



Esper and Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, learned of Spencer’s private offer to the White House when they spoke with President Trump on Friday, Hoffman said.



Spencer’s proposal to the White House came after Trump intervened in the cases of Gallagher and two soldiers on Nov. 15. Countering Pentagon recommendations, the president issued pardons to Army Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, who faced a murder trial next year, and former 1st Lt. Clint Lorance, who was convicted in 2013 in the murder of two unarmed men in Afghanistan.



Trump reinstated Gallagher’s rank after the SEAL was demoted as punishment for posing for the photograph with the corpse. As a result of the actions over the last few days, Hoffman said, Esper has decided to let Gallagher keep it.



Spencer made his private pitch to the White House in conversations before a Thursday tweet by Trump, in which the president publicly pushed back against the Navy launching a review that could have stripped Gallagher of his Navy SEAL status.



“The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin,” Trump wrote. “This case was handled very badly from the beginning. Get back to business!”



Hoffman said that Esper has suggested to Trump that Kenneth Braithwaite, a retired Navy rear admiral who is currently the U.S. ambassador to Norway, be considered as the next Navy secretary.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
PJ
1  seeder  PJ    3 weeks ago

Another one bites the dust.......

 
 
 
bbl-1
2  bbl-1    3 weeks ago

"This case was handled very badly from the beginning.  Get back to business!"  DJT.  ( bone spurs has spoken.  You will obey. )

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

Trump doesnt care about any of this, except as it helps his political standing. 

He would spit in an admiral's face if he thought the MAGA's approved. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    3 weeks ago

When you join the service you volunteer to hold the rope for whom ever the commander and chief is.

Respect the authorityyyyyyyyyyy

 
 
 
bbl-1
4.1  bbl-1  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4    3 weeks ago

False.

Respect the authority?  Only if the 'authority' deserves it. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4.1.1  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  bbl-1 @4.1    3 weeks ago

Wrong, hold the rope....

 
 
 
bbl-1
4.1.2  bbl-1  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

Constitution matters not anymore since Trump?

 
 
 
Ronin2
4.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  bbl-1 @4.1.2    2 weeks ago

Show what Constitutional law Trump violated? He is acting as CiC, and is well within his power.

TDDDDS syndrome is not a just cause for impeachment. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  bbl-1 @4.1    2 weeks ago
Respect the authority?  Only if the 'authority' deserves it. 

In the military, respecting authority is not optional.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
4.2  FLYNAVY1  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4    3 weeks ago

But the Chief didn't follow his orders....

He was in violation of the UCMJ, ROEs and the Geneva Convention we he started shooting at civilians.  The Chief took matters into his own hands, took actions in violation of the aforementioned, and Trump said that was okay to violate his orders.  Trump needs to keep his fat, bone-spurred ass out of military rules and regulations.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.2.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.2    3 weeks ago

Correct. Resisting a direct order from the President clearly constitutes insubordination.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
4.2.2  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.2.1    3 weeks ago

The Chief violated his orders.  Trump says it was okay for him to violate his orders.  Very dangerous precedence.

Equate this to the My Lai Massacre.  Troops in the field need to know that they are in deep shit if they violate ROEs, and the Geneva Convention.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.2.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.2.2    3 weeks ago

Chief Petty Officer Gallagher?

He was only convicted of posing with a corpse. Acquitted on all other charges.

The troops also know that there is too much lawyering going on. It makes the mission that much harder.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.2.4  MUVA  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.2.3    3 weeks ago

He was in the picture with 12 other guys they are only going after him and two other seals that defended him.These in the rear with the  gear and beer types want to put the smack down on a real war fighter.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.2.5  Vic Eldred  replied to  MUVA @4.2.4    3 weeks ago

We need to smack down on the ideologues like the former Navy Secretary Ray Mabus.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
4.2.6  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.2.3    3 weeks ago
He was only convicted of posing with a corpse. Acquitted on all other charges.

Not entirely.  He also sniped civilians and had a group of other Seals actively resisting him. 

Witnesses: Eddie Gallagher shot civilians in Iraq

Gallagher, overall comes out as a total asshat, the other Seals in his own team, were actively opposed to him.

Why Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher was found not guilty of murdering Iraqi captive

An interesting read, but I am sure you WON'T read it because it doesn't tell you what you want to hear.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.2.7  MUVA  replied to  Ozzwald @4.2.6    3 weeks ago

You are wrong the truth will come out.

 
 
 
PJ
4.2.8  seeder  PJ  replied to  MUVA @4.2.7    3 weeks ago

The truth has come out.  At least as much as the Navy wants us to know.  I suspect he's been unhinged for quite some time.  That's why his brothers took the stand against him.  He's probably done some pretty messed up stuff for 8 of his brothers to come out against him.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.9  XDm9mm  replied to  PJ @4.2.8    3 weeks ago
I suspect he's been unhinged for quite some time. 

Many of them are.   I've had the distinct honor of working with many SpecOps types from all branches.  I'll posit that many, not all of course, but many are for lack of a better description, controlled sociopaths.   It's hard not to be when one does what they do for a living and even compartmentalizing your entire life is going to eventually take it's toll.

Some eventually realize it themselves and pull the plug and go into other, albeit similar, lines of work like security.  Some never recognize (or do they?) the rabbit hole they're falling into and wind up making mistakes (intentional??) that get them killed.

 
 
 
PJ
4.2.10  seeder  PJ  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.9    3 weeks ago

And for the points you made, its even more important that there aren't outside influences undermining what little control our military branch have established. 

What Trump is doing is WRONG.  I guarantee our military personnel do not appreciate that he is attacking their institutions and their traditions.   

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.11  XDm9mm  replied to  PJ @4.2.10    3 weeks ago
What Trump is doing is WRONG. 

Trump only supported the people that the REMFs sent to those places.   It's easy to be brave sitting behind a desk in the Pentagon. 

I guarantee our military personnel do not appreciate that he is attacking their institutions and their traditions.  

You can guarantee whatever you want.   I know better.   The operators I've been dealing with were feeling hamstrung by Obama and the BS ROE he had his legal weenies in DC conjure up.  They recognize that Trump has taken those shackles off and is allowing them to do what they have trained to do and do better than anyone anywhere.

 
 
 
PJ
4.2.12  seeder  PJ  replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.11    3 weeks ago

Jesus Fucking Christ.  We're talking about this situation under this President.  Go find a "I hate Obama" article and then you can rag on him all you want.  Obama has NOTHING to do with Trump interfering with THIS situation.  

God damn - one excuse after another to protect Trump.

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
4.2.13  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.2    3 weeks ago

If you are in the service, Trump is your daddy.

It's simple, you should know this.

This is why I personally had no interest in the military. Plus living with a bunch of dudes is super weird.

Some men need to be told what to do. Some don't.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
4.2.14  FLYNAVY1  replied to  MUVA @4.2.4    2 weeks ago

Bullshit.... It's about discipline! 

The Chief is a loose cannon, and as a leader of men he should be acting in our highest traditions and adhering to established ROE's and to the rules of the Geneva Convention we were BOTH drilled on!

The Chief was "Hot-Doggin" it in the worst way with the photos with the dead enemy soldier.   

 
 
 
MUVA
4.2.15  MUVA  replied to  PJ @4.2.8    2 weeks ago

You don't know this but I worked at SDV and seal team 18 and have been  to the navy seal foundation at little creek for talks about supporting chief Gallagher.The truth will come about the prosecutors misconduct.I want to make sure everyone knows I was never a  a team member I repaired boats drove trucks and  acted in a support role.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.2.16  Greg Jones  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.2    2 weeks ago

He was only found guilty of appearing in a picture, with eleven other soldiers. None of them were prosecuted.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.2.17  Greg Jones  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.2.14    2 weeks ago

Why was he the only one out of 12 people prosecuted?

 
 
 
Freefaller
4.2.18  Freefaller  replied to  Greg Jones @4.2.17    2 weeks ago

Idle curiosity, was the Chief the highest rank there?  That may be part of reason he is being prosecuted, leadership does have it's downsides.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.3  Tessylo  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @4    3 weeks ago

This 'president' has earned no ones' respect, no ones'.  

 
 
 
PJ
5  seeder  PJ    3 weeks ago

This was another avoidable crisis and situation had Trump stayed out of it.  Had he let the military handle the situation then this would never have happened.   Trump, like Rudy, fucks everything up when he gets involved.  

 
 
 
charger 383
6  charger 383    3 weeks ago

Truman fired MacAuther

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
6.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  charger 383 @6    3 weeks ago

MacArthur exceeded/violated his orders, and showed contempt of his civilian leaders.  Being relieved of his command was justified.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @6.1    3 weeks ago

That's what we were all taught in school. While it is true that the President is the Commander-in-Chief and has the final say over the military ( equally true for Truman AND Trump), one could argue that MacArthur was right. We had the Bomb then and China didn't. Think of how different the world would have been today if we had rid it of Mao's regime?

The President has the final word over the military. It's that simple. 

As MacArthur used to call them these temporary occupants of the White House!

 
 
 
XDm9mm
6.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.1    3 weeks ago
one could argue that MacArthur was right.

Another was Patton....   He wanted to continue passed the Elbe and wipe out the Soviets (Russians).  Had he been permitted to do so, how much different would the world look today?

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.3  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.1    3 weeks ago
one could argue that MacArthur was right. We had the Bomb then and China didn't. Think of how different the world would have been today if we had rid it of Mao's regime?

Thankfully cooler heads prevailed in this. 

First off the power of the atomic bomb in 1950/51/52 wasn't the powerful deterrent that it became later on. The geographical size of China an the population would have made the use of it, other than killing a lot of civilians, a political disaster for the US. 

How would we deliver it. If you believe that we had complete control of the air over NK you should read the book ''Mig Ally''...We could have lost a huge number of bombers. 

If you think that dropping atomic bombs (we had a very limited number at the time) would have forced China or Mao to quit/surrender I would say that you're badly mistaken. The history of the Chinese fighters is well documented. The book, ''The Long March'' is the perfect example of the determination of the Chinese Army. 

There is an old adage, ''Never engage in an Asian land war''...We have had two examples to look at. The Korean War and Vietnam. Neither of those is something that we should repeat. 

I will add a personal note. The fighting in Vietnam was close combat, down and dirty. If, for one minute, anyone believes that the Asian (Chinese/Vietnamese/Japanese/Koreans) are not great fighters and will fight to the end I would suggest that they have never faced them in combat. 

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.4  Kavika   replied to  XDm9mm @6.1.2    3 weeks ago
Another was Patton....   He wanted to continue passed the Elbe and wipe out the Soviets (Russians).  Had he been permitted to do so, how much different would the world look today?

At the end of WWII, it's true, Patton wanted to cross the Elbe river. IMO, there is no way that he/US would have wiped out the Russians. We would be fighting on their territory and at the end of WWII, Russia had a very powerful army/air force. They would be defending Mother Russia. Understanding the Russian (Slavic) mindset on the motherland is very important. Both Napoleon and Hilter found out the hard way...At the Battle of Stalingrad, the Russian held on for a year against the Nazis. They lost more soldiers, actually double what the total US losses were in all of WWII, in one battle..

If Patton had gotten his way the number of American dead would have been unacceptable to the Amerian population. 

There is an old Russian (Slavic) saying.

можете Вы умирать с вашей винтовкой на стене

Translation, ''May you die with your rifle on the wall''. This is a huge insult and explains the Russian mindset.  Never/ever quit, die fighting. This is something that the US faced in both Japan in WWII and Vietnam.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
6.1.5  XDm9mm  replied to  Kavika @6.1.4    3 weeks ago
IMO, there is no way that he/US would have wiped out the Russians.

Actually, there is a very good possibility that he would have succeeded.   You need to remember that Russia was at that point in the war pretty dependent on us for essentially all of their war fighting materials.  About the only thing they had left were the bodies to throw at anything.   

And that old saying, that was about all they had to fight with.  Bodies.

It would have been ugly as we would have been essentially fighting unarmed people, but eventually even the die hard Russians would have recognized the futility of continuing.  Sticks and stones only go so far against an M1 Garand or M1 Carbine.

As to Japan, that was an entirely different situation.  They had already had years to dig in for the fight and would have fought not only for Japan, but remember the Emperor was considered by the Japanese to be a God. 

As to Vietnam....   that was a cluster of a FUBAR since it was entirely political from the get go.   And we were never tasked to win it, we simply had to help the South hold off the North and China and even failed at that.

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.6  Kavika   replied to  XDm9mm @6.1.5    3 weeks ago
Actually, there is a very good possibility that he would have succeeded.   You need to remember that Russia was at that point in the war pretty dependent on us for essentially all of their war fighting materials.  About the only thing they had left were the bodies to throw at anything.   

Actually, that isn't correct. Stalin moved his factories east of the Ural mountains and started producing heavy weapons. Tanks/Arty/Planes. 

At the Battle of Kursk, the Russian deployed 1.3 million men, 20,000 arty pieces, 2400 planes and 3600 tanks. It is considered the largest tank battle in history. The German Army was destroyed there.

During WWII the Russian produced 35,120 T34/76 light tanks. 48,950 T34/85 heavy tanks. Plus thousands of tank destroyers, and various other armor. 

They also produced tens of thousands of planes. 

Indeed the US and to some extent Britan supplied weapons at the beginning of the war to Russia. 

1,676 M3A1 light tanks. 443 lost at sea.

4,102 M4 Sherman tanks.

At the end of WWII the Russian army was over 6 million strong with a large amount of armor and aircraft. 

The cost of taking on Russia in an all-out assault would have been catastrophic in terms of Americans KIA/WIA. 

As to Japan, that was an entirely different situation.  They had already had years to dig in for the fight and would have fought not only for Japan, but remember the Emperor was considered by the Japanese to be a God. 

That is correct but the Russian mindset was much the same. Also the Russian had years to concentrate and dig in so to speak. 

As to Vietnam....   that was a cluster of a FUBAR since it was entirely political from the get go.   And we were never tasked to win it, we simply had to help the South hold off the North and China and even failed at that.

My point on this was that the Asian armies and fighters are first class. They don't quit and their endurance is in the extreme. 

I'm sure that you head that we'll bomb them back to the stone age. Well, that didn't work out so well. The mistake of underestimating our enemy has cost us untold number of casualties. 

 
 
 
bbl-1
6.1.7  bbl-1  replied to  Kavika @6.1.3    2 weeks ago

Agree.  I was there.  68-69.

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.8  Kavika   replied to  bbl-1 @6.1.7    2 weeks ago

61/62 and 64/65 for me.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.9  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kavika @6.1.4    2 weeks ago
the number of American dead would have been unacceptable to the Amerian population. 

Thus we have this standard of coexistence with these brutal regimes out of necessity.

In other words if Hitler's Germany had developed the bomb in the early 40's we would have the same relationship with Nazi Germany.

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.10  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.9    2 weeks ago
Thus we have this standard of coexistence with these brutal regimes out of necessity.

The U.S. has coexisted with many brutal regimes over the years. In fact, we've been supportive of some of them. 

 In other words if Hitler's Germany had developed the bomb in the early 40's we would have the same relationship with Nazi Germany.

You are aware that the US didn't declare war on Germany. We could have long before Japan attacked us but we didn't. The US was very much an isolationist nation at the time. In fact, there were a number of prominent Americans that sympathized with Germany. (Germany declared war on us)

The Bund was quite popular in the northeast  just before we entered the war. 

So, you tell me, what would we have done if Germany had the bomb first?

 

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.11  Kavika   replied to  Kavika @6.1.10    2 weeks ago

Here is an interesting article on how the Norwegian underground stopped the Nazi's development of the bomb when they destroyed the Nazi's heavy water plant in Norway.

https://theconversation.com/operation-gunnerside-the-norwegian-attack-on-heavy-water-that-deprived-the-nazis-of-the-atomic-bomb-90360

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.12  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kavika @6.1.10    2 weeks ago
You are aware that the US didn't declare war on Germany. We could have long before Japan attacked us but we didn't. The US was very much an isolationist nation at the time. In fact, there were a number of prominent Americans that sympathized with Germany. (Germany declared war on us)

Very much aware. Germany declared war on the US after their ally (Japan) attacked Pearl Harbor. Had they not done that FDR would have had a hell of a time explaining to the American people why he would send send most of the US military might off to Europe while assigning the US Navy the task of defeating Japan - and YES, I believe he would have done that with or without the German declaration.


So, you tell me, what would we have done if Germany had the bomb first?

I was trying to get your opinion on that, but since you put it to me, I believe we would have had the exact same relationship with Nazi Germany that we now have with Communist China, the brutal regime in North Korea, the new Russian menace and the religious fanatics who control Iran. I listed them in order of importance.

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.13  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.12    2 weeks ago
I was trying to get your opinion on that, but since you put it to me,

Sorry, I should have put in what my thought was before I asked you for yours.

Actually my opinion is exactly the same as yours. IMO, there is no way that US would have tried to attack Nazi Germany if they had the ''bomb''...We would live with it.  

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
7  Paula Bartholomew    3 weeks ago

I hope the Admiral realizes that there is still room under the Trump bus.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Tessylo
Snuffy
Sunshine
Gordy327
JohnRussell
Wishful_thinkin
jungkonservativ111
Ozzwald
Ronin2
SteevieGee

bccrane
Freefaller
Just Jim NC TttH
Texan1211


39 visitors