Talk grows of Trump firings at Pentagon, CIA

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: The Hill

Talk is picking up that President Trump could fire members of his Cabinet, including Defense Secretary Mark Esper, even as the presidential election goes uncalled.

Esper has long been seen as out-the-door regardless of who wins the election, including the possibility that he would resign during the transition period if Trump loses.

But firing him would give Trump a chance to flex his executive powers as it appears increasingly likely he could lose to Democratic nominee Joe Biden. It would also raise questions about the military chain of command during a fraught time in the United States.

Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin reported Friday that multiple sources tell him Esper could be fired as early as this week.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/talk-grows-of-trump-firings-at-pentagon-cia/ar-BB1aLt3L?li=BBnb7Kz

---

Why now?

[soothsayer]

1. Just to be a prick? Or to try to foment violence?

I’m thinking no one is gonna follow ol’ bone spurs

[fleur-de-lisa]

11. Change the narrative 2.1111111111

That’s his signature move when he doesn’t like the news coverage.

[soothsayer]

12. Of course

[NoMoreRepugs]

2. A desperate ignoramus might do anything - ANYTHING to try and save himself.

[ScratchCat]

3. A Few things:

First, if he fires anyone, a replacement will not be confirmed before 01/20/2021. Secondly, the interim head does not have the power to do the things the previous heads wouldn't do, that Trump wants. This would just be him flailing in the wind.

[getagrip_already]

4. wrey is also on the block.....

Heck, he could just fire everyone at the fbi and cia.

His parting gift to putin.

[Thekaspervote]

5. He will never get the military to go against their oath...never

Link to tweet

?s=21

[shotten99]

8. It's obscene that it is even necessary for this to be said openly

[TomSlick]

17. I agree. But Trump and many here to not know the military will not get involved

The leadership of the US military will stay true to their oaths.

[shotten99]

21. In retrospect, it's an easy oversight. Members of the military are/were predominately Republicans.

There might be some bitching about the person in the White House, but they have never gone against the political leadership AFAIK in any significant way.

[paleotn]

19. Agreed.

[rainin]

6. I wonder if the dems were to cue up another article of impeachment

the republicans could immediately vote to remove him if he starts to burn down the country. They protected him to keep their jobs. What possible reason would they have now to protect him. They're already distancing themselves from his claims of fraud.

[BKDem]

7. There needs to be a serious breakdown in internal communications.

Kind of like what happened to the Postal Service...

[3catwoman3]

9. Beat him to it...

...and just quit/resign.

[Hekate]

10. Mad King Trump wants to burn it all down and dance in the ashes

No reason beyond that

[VA_Jill]

13. I understood

that Esper had already drafted his letter of resignation. "You can't fire me, I fvcking QUIT!"

[kimbutgar]

14. Can mf45 fire all the joint chiefs of staffs in the military and install his military people

And do a coup?

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

15. Query: How much damage can an insane president do in two months?

As much Putin and Fox snooze tells him to.

[Javaman]

16. Less people to question his use of nukes. nt

[LudwigPastorius]

20. Trump has certainly always had a hard-on for "the nuclear".

Perhaps in the fetid recesses of his cranium he believes that the American people would be loathe to change leadership after a nuclear strike.

I would hope that the chain-of-command could block him from launching an unprovoked attack, but...

I wouldn't want to be anywhere near Tehran right now.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

18. Secretary of Defense is a "safe guard" for nuclear...

... launch orders, from what I read in the past about nuclear football protocols.

If the SOD is unavailable to confirm or deny such orders, military personnel are supposed to obey the Presidential order anyway.

I DOUBT that's the reason, but take no chances with that maniac!!

Edit:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_football
Before the order can be processed by the military, the president must be positively identified using a special code issued on a plastic card, nicknamed the "biscuit".[7] The United States has a two-man rule in place at nuclear launch facilities, and while only the president can order the release of nuclear weapons, the order must be verified by the secretary of defense to be an authentic order given by the president (there is a hierarchy of succession in the event that the president is killed in an attack). This verification process deals solely with verifying that the order came from the actual president. The secretary of defense has no veto power and must comply with the president's order.[7] Once all the codes have been verified, the military would issue attack orders to the proper units. These orders are given and then re-verified for authenticity. It is argued that the president has almost sole authority to initiate a nuclear attack since the secretary of defense is required to verify the order, but cannot veto it.[8][9][10]

[Sgent]

22. While everything written is true

The SecDef can't veto the order, but he is required by law ignore an illegal one. Short of an ally being actively invaded (NATO, S Korea, Taiwan) there is no way it could be a legal order without congressional action.

[ck4829]

23. Kick