Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[EnigmaticHat]

That brings up an interesting question. If she divorces Trump, what happens to her Secret Service detail? Hell, what if she doesn't divorce him but just leaves and starts living off her personal accounts? I have to wonder what recourse Trump would attempt.

I'm looking at precedent where the president is unmarried or a widower (no divorces yet but I suppose they'd work similarly?) and the First Lady title seems to pass to female relatives in that case, such as sisters, daughters-in-law... and daughters too.

First Lady Ivanka Trump: it's different when you're President!

Dear god please no

[RedKing]

I'm trying to dig into whether a WH Chief of Staff has ever come from the ranks of the military. It seems like....not a natural fit.

EDIT: Ah. Right. Nixon made Gen. Alexander Haig his chief of staff....because his first chief of staff, H. R. Haldeman, was under investigation as part of Watergate. I'm sure the Watergate thing is just a coincidence, the 432nd in a completely random chain of coincidences....

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Between Kelly and Mattis we are getting a serious knife hand overdose in this administration.

[Frumple]

Dunno about natural fit, but a general of particular merit would probably have a decent amount of experience corralling subordinates and relative peers to get something or another done, either directly or by knowing what sort of critter to tell to do it for 'em. Stuff's admin and logistics and politics as much as anything to do with combat.

Chief of staff really wouldn't be too distant from that, conceptually. 'Course, there's something of a difference between the sort of enlisted military admin would be regularly dealing with and what that poor bastard's getting saddled with stepping into the WH.

[smjjames]

I'm trying to dig into whether a WH Chief of Staff has ever come from the ranks of the military. It seems like....not a natural fit.

EDIT: Ah. Right. Nixon made Gen. Alexander Haig his chief of staff....because his first chief of staff, H. R. Haldeman, was under investigation as part of Watergate. I'm sure the Watergate thing is just a coincidence, the 432nd in a completely random chain of coincidences....

Well, before it became a formal role, I'm sure there have been a few with miltary experience of some sort or another.

Looking at the wiki list of Chiefs of Staff:

Wilton Persons had a stint during WWI and fought in WWII. He served Eisenhower.

Keith O'Donnell fought in WWII as a bombardier, left atfer the war ended. Served as JFK's chief of staff.

James Robert Jones, was in the reserves during the 60's, had a brief stint in the army intel corps. Don't think he actually saw battle. He worked under Lyndon Johnson.

MSH already mentioned Halderman.

Jack Watson was in the Marines for a while. Was in the Carter admin.

Donald Regan fought in the Pacific theatre of WWII, chief of staff under Ronald Reagan.

Howard Baker had some sort of Naval service during WWII. Chief of Staff under Ronald Reagan.

Samuel Skinner had a REALLY BRIEF stint in the army as a tank commander, like, a year or less, barely counts here. Chief of Staff under Ford.

Leon Panetta joined the army for two years during Vietnam. Chief of Staff under Bill Clinton.

So, having military experience (WWII mostly) isn't unusual, the fact that he chose a General seems a bit unusual.

Dunno about natural fit, but a general of particular merit would probably have a decent amount of experience corralling subordinates and relative peers to get something or another done, either directly or by knowing what sort of critter to tell to do it for 'em. Stuff's admin and logistics and politics as much as anything to do with combat.

Chief of staff really wouldn't be too distant from that, conceptually. 'Course, there's something of a different between the sort of enlisted military admin would be regularly dealing with and what that poor bastard's getting saddled with stepping into the WH.

Personally, I think a drill sergeant would be a better fit for Trump's White House, lol.

Also, who's going to be the Secretary of the DHS now? I wouldn't be surprised if Trump left the top position vacant.

[Frumple]

Don't think anyone knows, yet.

Though I'd probably wager decent money a drill sarge would go astoundingly poorly, unless they have something else going on, too. Their skill set doesn't quite lend itself to the sort of power dynamics and personalities you'd be dealing with in the position.

[smjjames]

Don't think anyone knows, yet.

Though I'd probably wager decent money a drill sarge would go astoundingly poorly, unless they have something else going on, too. Their skill set doesn't quite lend itself to the sort of power dynamics and personalities you'd be dealing with in the position.

I just think it'd be funny, that's all.

[Frumple]

That, it probably would be. If observed from a distance... and wasn't happening in relation to the WH staff et al, heh.

E: One of those things that could make for a pretty good sitcom, but makes for a much, much less amusing reality :V

E2: Ah, though re: the DHS secretary, it looks like their next down will be acting secretary for... a while. Sometime in fall, probably. Next batch of congressy mess.

[martinuzz]

So why exactly did Priebus get fired? Is it because Scaramuchacho accused him of being a paranoid schizophrenic?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Officially, Rinse Wash voluntarily resigned because Trump wanted to "go in a different direction". He also continued to verbally fellate the Don, talking about how happy he was to hear the decision.

Unofficially, the Mooch's rant strongly suggests Priapism has been suspected of being a witch the alleged leaker.

Man, is it just me or is it really McCarthy in here?

[Baffler]

Unlike McCarthy's Communist infiltrators, we can say with absolute certainty that someone (or more likely many someones) is leaking all kinds of things out of the White House - what with all this information being leaked out of the White House. The administration being unhappy about that isn't exactly a surprise.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I mean, there were actual Soviet infiltrators in America. McCarthy just didn't have any idea who they actually were and went around accusing known liberals and socialists instead.

There are actual leakers in the White House, but I'm not convinced that the administration knows who they are. Anthony "Stone Fishes" Scaramucci's promise to "fire everyone" if necessary does not suggest to me that they even have a lead. Trump's interpretation of what loyalty means is also likely to skew matters badly. I wouldn't be surprised if it factored into the events surrounding Sessions and Spicer either.

[Baffler]

Well yeah, that's why I said McCarthy's infiltrators. Though as places to look for them go you could do far worse than known Socialists.

[RedKing]

Unlike McCarthy's Communist infiltrators, we can say with absolute certainty that someone (or more likely many someones) is leaking all kinds of things out of the White House - what with all this information being leaked out of the White House. The administration being unhappy about that isn't exactly a surprise.

Admittedly, there are probably a LOT of leakers in the WH these days. Can you imagine being a low-level staffer in this clusterfuck?
Every day is "Holy shit, you won't believe what <insert name here> just said!"
And as the factionalism intensifies, each faction is gonna spill the beans on the others. It's a beautiful thing.

But hey, the Mooch is in town now, and he's gonna clean this shit up, alright? He's going to fucking kill all the leakers, and then watch Bannon suck his own cock.

The good thing is, all the Dem candidate in 2020 has to do is go, "Really? Do you REALLY want another four years of this?" They don't even have to have a platform.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

But what if Bannon is one of the leakers (not like that(I mean, if you want it to be like that it's cool but it's not like that))? Where's your master plan now, Mooch?