XJEEPER
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Highland Springs
An interesting listen. I trust the insight and opinions of former SS Agents, Navy Seals, Army Rangers over the current DHS, USSS, FBI and CIA admin.
Political So now what
- Thread starter 4x4_Welder
- Start date
Political discussions within
Tonkaman
Well-Known Member
- Location
- West Jordan
I love Shawn Ryan’s show. He has some absolute nut jobs on there sometimes, but most of the episodes are unbelievable
Houndoc
Registered User
- Location
- Grantsville
Honestly curious what your reason is for who trust, especially since former special forces members don't have access to classified information.
XJEEPER
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Highland Springs
Multiple former SS Agents who still have contacts inside the agency which they will not divulge, have spoken out about the fundamental security lapses by the SS on 7/13. Basis fundamentals were not followed. The local LEO's who were pulled in to support the event are now speaking out regarding the security lapses, including no pre-event briefing/planning session, non-existent comms between the USSS and their SWAT teams who were responsible for overwatch on the extended perimeter, multiple failures to communicate the threat when there was ample lead time to keep the stage empty until the known threat was neutralized/cleared (standard protocol).
When military snipers are questioned about the event, the first thing they note is the lack of anti-sniper assets on the water tower, which had perfect line of sight visibility to the rooftops and why weren't security drones being used before/during the event?
Last edited:
glockman
I hate Jeep trucks
- Location
- Pleasant Grove
If the director (with top secret clearance) won't answer questions and when she does, she flat out lies with statements like "the roof was too sloped". At what point do you no trust someone who tells you obvious and immediately provable lies? I'll take people who are no longer vested in the system but who have intimate working knowledge of the processes any day over currently employed bureaucrats.
- Location
- Stinkwater
But not when they're cherry picked by the guy who made the video in order to support the opinion he wants you to have.
Not saying they're wrong, I don't know. Just saying I don't trust that hand chosen sample of "experts" to be any more accurate than anything else.
anderson750
I'm working on it Rose
- Location
- Price, Utah
Honestly curious why you think former members of special forces and secret service would not have contacts withing the organization that would tell them what went wrong........let alone their ability to assess what went wrong based on public knowledge.
Houndoc
Registered User
- Location
- Grantsville
There is nothing in that information that I did not already learn from "main stream media" covering hearings before congress by the head of SS (who has since resigned over said lapses).
Houndoc
Registered User
- Location
- Grantsville
Hit the nail on the head when people don't trust "the media" or 'officials' but then form opinions from podcasts or other often ideologically biases sources.
- Location
- The Land Northward (Bountiful), Utah
Biden is proposing term limit for supreme court justices.
What do we think?
The Judicial branch is supposed to hold the Executive branch in check. When in reality only the Supreme Court has much sway over the the Executive since lower courts decisions dealing with the Executive are very quickly bumped to the top.
The Executive branch holds the Supreme Court in check by appointment and by doing so holds future presidents in check by the Branch's prior appointments.
I think we should propose term limits on the House of Representatives and Senators long before the Supreme Court justices.... It's well past due. But what say you?
What do we think?
The Judicial branch is supposed to hold the Executive branch in check. When in reality only the Supreme Court has much sway over the the Executive since lower courts decisions dealing with the Executive are very quickly bumped to the top.
The Executive branch holds the Supreme Court in check by appointment and by doing so holds future presidents in check by the Branch's prior appointments.
I think we should propose term limits on the House of Representatives and Senators long before the Supreme Court justices.... It's well past due. But what say you?
Last edited:
- Location
- Stinkwater
I don't know what to think about any of that. I would almost prefer fixing the way Supreme Court Justices are nominated over adding term limits.
They're supposed to be bipartisan, and we've gotten away from that. Every time there's an opening, every time there's a major ruling, we openly talk about how the "conservative" justices did this and the "liberal" justices did that, and I believe that's because a series of Presidents and Congresses for a long long time have been clearly nominating and confirming Justices that fit their political agenda instead of Justices that are qualified and willing to sit in impartial review instead of justifying ways to vote with their own bias.
It gets back to our screwed two-party political system in general. And it won't get fixed until that does, anything Biden or anybody else does about it is at best a bandaid, if not actively harmful. All this talk of term limits and codes of ethics and packing the court won't fix anything for anybody.
- Location
- West Bountiful, UT
I instinctively reject anything the Executive wants to foist on the Judicial just on General Principles. It's like letting the cat make new rules for the dog.
- DAA
- DAA
- Location
- Never Far From Nowhere
I don't think term limits for SCOTUS is really the right way to go. If you look over the history of the court, overall it's always been quite neutral and textualist (ie, if it's not explicitly in the Constitution it's not going to pass muster). It's really only in the last 75 years broadly and the last about 50 years specifically that the court has gotten away from that. So in a lot of ways, what we're seeing now from the court is a return to normal operating procedures.
But hey, if Biden can get a Constitutional amendment through in the next six months in between naps, so be it!
But hey, if Biden can get a Constitutional amendment through in the next six months in between naps, so be it!
anderson750
I'm working on it Rose
- Location
- Price, Utah
Don't term limits for the Supreme Court need to be legislated like any other law? Am I wrong that the President cannot do it by executive decision? So for the most part, this seems to be a campaign position for Kamala to run on.
I am not in support of term limits, but I would be in support of bolstering ethics rules in regards to reporting. I know Alito has been in the news lately, but I think people on both sides of the court are just as vulnerable to being influenced. Here is where I think there needs to be major ethical reform.
x.com
I am not in support of term limits, but I would be in support of bolstering ethics rules in regards to reporting. I know Alito has been in the news lately, but I think people on both sides of the court are just as vulnerable to being influenced. Here is where I think there needs to be major ethical reform.
x.com
x.com
Pike2350
Registered User
- Location
- Salt Lake City
I think there should be term limits on every government official. Why is it that the SCOTUS has a lifetime appointment yet members of Congress and the Senate have to fight to be reelected every X years?
Make term limits for all of them. SCOTUS is the only entity to have this, and there is no reason for it. I think the term limits could be longer, but still term limits seem to make sense. Keep those in charge of making and upholding the laws rotate to better fit the views of society, and have a better chance of younger, fresh blood more often.
I see nothing wrong with it...but as said, ALL of those on the national level should have term limits.
Make term limits for all of them. SCOTUS is the only entity to have this, and there is no reason for it. I think the term limits could be longer, but still term limits seem to make sense. Keep those in charge of making and upholding the laws rotate to better fit the views of society, and have a better chance of younger, fresh blood more often.
I see nothing wrong with it...but as said, ALL of those on the national level should have term limits.
Tonkaman
Well-Known Member
- Location
- West Jordan
Wasn’t the original intent so that judges don’t have to fear making a controversial decision and risk not getting re-elected (fired)? It was supposed to keep them immune from outside influence.
- Location
- Eagle Mountain, Utah
That is exactly the reason.
johngottfredson
Threat Level Midnight
- Location
- Alpine
I’m on board for judicial term limits - right after term limits for everyone else, along with an immediate disqualification for re-election for anyone that doesn’t pass a balanced budget, and jail time for legislative insider trading.
Supreme Court ain’t the problem here.
Supreme Court ain’t the problem here.
Houndoc
Registered User
- Location
- Grantsville
Ethical reform especially in regards to conflict of interest (or appearance of it) is absolutely needed.
No justice should be hearing cases involving a friend or their business, especially a 'friend ' who gives you expensive gifts or travel.
And same goes for cases a spouse is involved with politically.
Term limits on the other hand I have a hard time supporting. 2016 was the first election cycle I am aware of when a candidate made campaign promises to appoint SCOTUS judges with a specific case outcome in mind. SCOTUS should not be that blatantly political.
With term limits candidates would know which justices are ending their term and thus court appointments could easily become even more political.
No justice should be hearing cases involving a friend or their business, especially a 'friend ' who gives you expensive gifts or travel.
And same goes for cases a spouse is involved with politically.
Term limits on the other hand I have a hard time supporting. 2016 was the first election cycle I am aware of when a candidate made campaign promises to appoint SCOTUS judges with a specific case outcome in mind. SCOTUS should not be that blatantly political.
With term limits candidates would know which justices are ending their term and thus court appointments could easily become even more political.
- Location
- Stinkwater
Yeah, he was just saying the quiet part out loud though. They all do it, for the past several decades at least.