TexasCHLforum.com

mojo84 wrote:Jusme,
I agree. I was just sharing my surprised Patraeu is as involved in gun control efforts. Considering this, I would hate to see him as SOS whether or other cabinet postion whether or not Trump is actually considering him or not.

Also, I am disapointed in Trump's selection of McConnell's wife for a cabinet position. Just because I voted for Trump over Hillary, doesn't mean he isn't going to make some decisions with which I disagree or find disappointing. I consider McConnell one of the leaders of the swamp and appointing his wife to a cabinet position is contradictory to Trump's "drain the swamp" promise.

This doesn't mean I am trashing Trump or dissing his entire body of work as the president before he is even sworn in.

I had read, maybe on here, about Patreus, joining with the Giffords some time back. I'm sure there will be a lot of decisions Trump will make that will not completely fall in line with my views either. I just keep in mind that the "draining of the swamp" will be a slow process, along with undoing all of the damage caused by BHO over the last 8 years. Trump will not be able to kick out elected congress members who will fight tooth and nail to keep their positions of power. He won't be able to push through every piece of legislation he may want. But cabinet posts are assigned and he can replace them whenever he wants, so if the people he selects, don't live up to his expectations, or start undermining what he wants to do, they will, more than likely be gone.
This is also a learning time for Trump. He has no experience as an elected public servant, so he will have to rely on those with more experience, until he gets his feet wet.I believe that is why he is meeting with so many people, at this time, some may be in consideration for posts, and others may just be a brain trust for information. JMHO

General Patreus is entitled to his position on guns. That is not a disqualifier for SOS. However, Trump should only nominate pro 2nd amendment candidates because of his pro-2nd amendment stance.

General Patreus is NOT entitled to share state secrets with his girlfriend. He is guilty. Convicted. NOT qualified to be SOS. Period. He should enjoy the retirement he is lucky to not have taken away.

gljjt wrote:General Patreus is entitled to his position on guns. That is not a disqualifier for SOS. However, Trump should only nominate pro 2nd amendment candidates because of his pro-2nd amendment stance.

I agree that he has his right to his views, however when running with the 2nd Amendment being a major plank of your platform, this does disqualify someone who holds those views opposite to your platform. Technically, it doesn't disqualify him, but politically it should.

ETA: http://danaloeschradio.com/why-general- ... t-position

gljjt wrote:General Patreus is entitled to his position on guns. That is not a disqualifier for SOS. However, Trump should only nominate pro 2nd amendment candidates because of his pro-2nd amendment stance.

General Patreus is NOT entitled to share state secrets with his girlfriend. He is guilty. Convicted. NOT qualified to be SOS. Period. He should enjoy the retirement he is lucky to not have taken away.

This sums it up for me too..

General Patreus has been convicted. Guilty but that doesn't look like e constitutional bar to serving as Secretary of State.

General Patreus is entitled to his position on guns but that disqualifies him for Secretary of State. Acts to undermine the bill of rights is inconsistent with an oath to defend the constitution.

Whenever I hear "common sense gun control" my first thought is repealing all federal gun laws that infringe the right to own or carry weapons, then using the DOJ to go after states and cities that violate the 2A rights of citizens, much like they go after voting rights violations.


Then I realize who is speaking.

This is my opinion, and only that...

General Petraeus is a political animal.

His rise to the Director of the CIA in the Obama Administration should demonstrate that.

That he forgot the oaths of Marriage and of his office to engage in a sordid affair with his "biographer" should also indicate that he has flaws which should prevent him from reaching the pinnacles of power. In these areas, there is no doubt, David Petraeus has failed himself, his family and his country.

To go a bit further, I (as a retired officer of the US Army) would like to know if the General has EVER rated a subordinate officer poorly for, Ethics, Morals or Judgment. If so, I would submit that the General was untrue to the Nation, the United States Army and his family in not resigning his commission when he committed adultery and divulged classified materials to his "biographer".

He's a fraud.

Talks the talk, but can't or won't walk the walk.

To heck with him and McChrystal and their WWG elitist views. (Throw McRaven in there too...)

Jeff B.

I guess I'm not getting something. What sway or part does the SoS play in the making and or implementing of OUR laws? I'm just wondering what effect he, as SoS if he were, could have on the 2A.

The fact that we're even talking about Patreaus for Secy of State is a little bothersome simply because of his conviction for sharing classified information. Just having Petraeus as a candidate is sending a message that mishandling of classified information is not nearly as bad as what he had said it was all throughout the campaign against Hillary Clinton.

allisji wrote:The fact that we're even talking about Patreaus for Secy of State is a little bothersome simply because of his conviction for sharing classified information. Just having Petraeus as a candidate is sending a message that mishandling of classified information is not nearly as bad as what he had said it was all throughout the campaign against Hillary Clinton.

No one but the media has indicated that Patreus is a candidate for SOS. Trump has met with a lot of people, and the media is camped out by Trump tower and speculating on everyone who walks in. As I said, I think Trump is just picking the brains of a lot of people. Who better to find out how "not" to do something than from someone who has been there and done that? I'm also sure that Patreus, despite his flaws, and mistakes can offer some insight, on other potential appointees.JMHO

allisji wrote:The fact that we're even talking about Patreaus for Secy of State is a little bothersome simply because of his conviction for sharing classified information. Just having Petraeus as a candidate is sending a message that mishandling of classified information is not nearly as bad as what he had said it was all throughout the campaign against Hillary Clinton.

No one but the media has indicated that Patreus is a candidate for SOS. Trump has met with a lot of people, and the media is camped out by Trump tower and speculating on everyone who walks in. As I said, I think Trump is just picking the brains of a lot of people. Who better to find out how "not" to do something than from someone who has been there and done that? I'm also sure that Patreus, despite his flaws, and mistakes can offer some insight, on other potential appointees.JMHO

C-dub wrote:I guess I'm not getting something. What sway or part does the SoS play in the making and or implementing of OUR laws? I'm just wondering what effect he, as SoS if he were, could have on the 2A.

Direct control? Probably not much. Having that aura in the cabinet when one of your major planks was being Pro-2A? Unacceptable.

There's also the whole UN Arms Treaty thing, but I don't know enough about that to beat on that drum.

C-dub wrote:I guess I'm not getting something. What sway or part does the SoS play in the making and or implementing of OUR laws? I'm just wondering what effect he, as SoS if he were, could have on the 2A.

If I were to overlook his other transgressions including recent adultery, sharing classified materials and being convicted, I still would not want a person with anti-2nd Amendment attitudes and opinions to be that close of an advisor to the president.

It's not always direct control that matters. Sometimes it's the people of influence that have the most sway.

C-dub wrote:I guess I'm not getting something. What sway or part does the SoS play in the making and or implementing of OUR laws? I'm just wondering what effect he, as SoS if he were, could have on the 2A.

https://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/att/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty

The ATT is an attempt to regulate the international trade of conventional weapons for the purpose of contributing to international and regional peace; reducing human suffering; and promoting co-operation, transparency, and responsible action by and among states

I sometimes think that Trump is deliberately dragging in all sorts of people to throw the press and media off the track. The media has a small mob of people camped outside of his elevators at his Trump building in NYC. So basically the media knows everyone who is coming and going. They even use cameras to zoom in and try to read any documents the people might be carrying too.