Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, November 21, 2019

President Trump on Thursday reversed a decision by the Navy seeking to oust Navy SEAL Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher from the elite commando force.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Chief Gallagher has been at the center of a high-profile war crime case and was granted clemency by the president on Friday. He was notified on Wednesday that the Navy planned to start the process to remove the Trident pin that symbolizes membership in the SEALs.

On Tuesday, multiple Navy and Defense Department officials said the Navy had cleared the decision to review Chief Gallagher's Trident with the White House.

Well, I expect to see some high profile resignations coming down the pike in short order. Trump is gutting the US military just like he's gutted State and Justice. Putin couldn't be any happier.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-11-21 09:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I hope his fellow Seals take care of the problem and he'll voluntarily resign.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2019-11-21 11:16 AM | Reply

#2 You clearly don't know where other SEALS stand on the original charge.

#3 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-11-21 11:33 AM | Reply

#3 you mean the ones that reported him?

#4 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-21 01:01 PM | Reply

Guy is going to drop retirement papers ASAP. He was months away from hitting 20 when he got in trouble.

#5 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2019-11-21 05:49 PM | Reply

you mean the ones that reported him?

#4 | POSTED BY JPW

For each of the 4-6 junior SEALs who reported him for allegations, there were dozens of other community members who stood by the chief.

#6 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2019-11-21 05:50 PM | Reply

"For each of the 4-6 junior SEALs who reported him for allegations, there were dozens of other community members who stood by the chief."

Link, please?

#7 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-21 05:56 PM | Reply

Link, please?

#7 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2019-11-21 05:56 PM | FLAG:

Who was the troll/jokester who always said "no citation necessary?"

#8 | Posted by cbob at 2019-11-21 06:40 PM | Reply

Who was the troll/jokester who always said "no citation necessary?"

#8 | POSTED BY CBOB

That was Bradford Winston. He was a Moder8 sock-puppet creation and some of the most entertaining posts I've ever read on this site. Right up there with 101Chairborne. Hall of Fame stuff.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-21 06:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Text messages and other digital conversations involving Gallagher can appear damning at times, but they've been described by the chief's supporters as dark humor, the talk of rough men who have experienced a great deal of combat, maybe the voice of an exasperated SEAL who believes he's being railroaded by juniors.

So Gallagher's trial ultimately will ask a panel of officers and senior enlisted sailors to weigh the credibility of witnesses " mostly junior SEALs " testifying about what they allegedly saw or heard, and then evaluate their possible motives for expressing their recollections that way.

Motivation for his juniors to complain about him:

Some SEALs wanted to derail Gallagher's advancement to senior chief.

Others were angry that he had been recommended for a post-tour combat valor award " the Silver Star " an honor they thought he didn't deserve.

At first, they say, the anti-Gallagher campaign by the alleged whistleblowers appeared to succeed. Gallagher's SEAL Team 7 superiors in California junked the Silver Star application and he wasn't going to make senior chief before his planned retirement after 20 years of service.

If many of the allegations of the witnesses were untrue or embellished to depose Gallagher, they still worked " "The problem is, once they get what they wanted, the process doesn't stop. It escalates and Warpinski is now on the case."

www.navytimes.com

Supporters: navy-seals-fund.networkforgood.com

Also found in social posts by ex-SOF on Instagram, but you probably don't have instagram..

#10 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2019-11-21 07:58 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

When the witnesses took the stand, their sworn testimony was radically different than the initial complaints they started with, which began the allegations... likely because they were embellishing or lying to those who would listen to derail their senior's retirement/awards. There were no resulting perjury chargers against the witnesses, so what's to be made of that?

#11 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2019-11-21 08:02 PM | Reply

^That they weren't lying under oath, and evidence corroborated them?

#12 | Posted by e1g1 at 2019-11-21 08:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

When the witnesses took the stand, their sworn testimony was radically different than the initial complaints they started with, which began the allegations... likely because they were embellishing or lying to those who would listen to derail their senior's retirement/awards. There were no resulting perjury chargers against the witnesses, so what's to be made of that?

#11 | POSTED BY GONOLES92

Grab some popcorn and continue watching....

#13 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-11-21 08:29 PM | Reply

The pardon was "presidential", this is micro-management.

#14 | Posted by fresno500 at 2019-11-21 11:33 PM | Reply

"Micro-management"?

Occasionally, there are times when the president of a large company, who himself has vast prior experience in lower-level management of a particular sub-unit therein, just has to step in down there to correct the errant decision of that sub-unit's management. Particularly if that company president is a stable genius with unmatched wisdom.

#15 | Posted by nimbleswitch at 2019-11-22 10:34 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

For each of the 4-6 junior SEALs who reported him for allegations, there were dozens of other community members who stood by the chief.

#6 | POSTED BY GONOLES92

Means nothing if they weren't there to witness the events.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-22 02:18 PM | Reply

Means nothing if they weren't there to witness the events.

#16 | POSTED BY JPW

They were brought on as witnesses who were there. The prosecution also gave the lead witness immunity, and then that witness said he killed the ISIS kid. So there's that, too.

#17 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2019-11-23 03:25 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort