Davin News Server

On 2025-02-25 15:00, AlleyCat wrote:
> 
> Can Presidents "Fire" Senior Military Officers? Yes
> 
> A journalist recently asked me whether a President could "fire" a
> general. The answer - pardon the pun - is generally, yes.

Except it was never about whether a president COULD fire someone.

YOU were trying to pretend that firing CJCSs was the norm when a 
president takes over from a member of the other party.

And it isn't.

What's more, Brown was Trump's PICK for Chief of Staff of the Air Force.

> 
> The context we are addressing is not one involving criminal
> misconduct, per se, but rather a situation where the President has
> lost confidence in the leadership of a particular general or even a 
> group of generals.
> 
> Frankly, it is literally unthinkable that any officer these days,
> and particularly a general officer, would not acquiesce to a
> President's request to retire under such circumstances, but let's 
> consider the options if one or more refused to go.
> 
> Here's the easy part: can the President relieve any officer from any
> command or, for that matter, any particular position in the armed
> forces?
> 
> Yes. THE POWER TO DO SO IS INHERENT IN THE PRESIDENT'S COMMANDER-IN-
> CHIEF AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLE II, SECTION 2 OF THE CONSTITUTION, and
> it cannot be fettered by Congress. For example, the controversial
> relief from command of General Douglas MacArthur by President Harry
> Truman during the Korean War was, according to the conclusions of
> the Congressional committees that examined the case, "within the
> constitutional power of the President."
> 
> It is also important to note that the most senior generals - that
> is, the three and four star generals - only hold those grades during
> the period in which they occupy positions designated as being ones
> of "importance and responsibility" per 10 U.S.C. § 601.
> 
> Accordingly, if the President chooses to terminate that assignment,
> and the officer does not apply for voluntary retirement, then he or
> she will typically revert to their permanent grade, usually as a two-
> star major general. There are very significant financial
> implications to the reversion to the lower grade (by military pay
> standards that is; even after decades of service most two-star 
> generals make less than first-year associates at big law firms).
> 
> In any event, if an officer (especially one who had been a three or
> four-star general) is relieved from his or her position and reverts
> to the lower rank of major general and still refuses to request 
> retirement, the President may be able to dismiss the officer from
> the armed forces entirely.
> 
> A little history: up until the end of the Civil War, the President
> exercised virtually unconstrained power to dismiss military
> officers. However, in 1865 Congress passed legislation which
> purports to limit that power. That legislation was essentially the
> same as that found today codified in 10 USC § 1161(a).
> 
> The legitimacy of Congress imposing statutory restrictions on the
> authority of the President to remove military officers was initially
> "subject of doubt and discussion." It remains controversial even 
> today, particularly since there doesn't seem to be a case precisely
> on point as to the constitutionality.
> 
> Nevertheless, the better view does seem to suggest that Congress has
> the power to set some limits on the President's dismissal authority
> - at least in times of peace. That power would be properly founded
> in Congress" Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 authority to 'make
> rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval
> forces." Still, the "President's power of dismissal in time of war
> [is something] Congress has never attempted to limit."
> 
> So what does 10 U.S.C. § 1161(a) provide? Here is the text:
> 
> (a) No commissioned officer may be dismissed from any armed force
> except-
> 
> (1) by sentence of a general court-martial;
> 
> (2) in commutation of a sentence of a general court-martial; or
> 
> (3) in time of war, by order of the President.
> 
> Are we currently in a "time of war" as used by this statute?
> Although the phrase "time of war" is used in many U.S. statutes,
> there is no universally accepted definition of precisely what it
> means. Some court decisions indicate it means war when declared by
> Congress, and some statutes do use the phrase the "time of war
> declared by Congress." (Italics added.)
> 
> However, the absence of the 'declared by Congress" language may in
> and of itself mean that "time of war" is not limited to declared
> wars. There certainly is plenty of authority for the proposition 
> that a "war" can exist without a formal declaration thereof,
> beginning with the Supreme Court's decision in the 1800 case of Bas
> v. Tingy.
> 
> The Manual for Courts-Martial (itself authorized by law) defines
> "time of war" in its Rules for Court-Martial (RCM) Rule 103 (19) to
> mean: "a period of war declared by Congress or the factual 
> determination by the President that the existence of hostilities
> warrants a finding that a "time of war" exists... ." However, this
> particular RCM provision is "for purposes of RCM 1004(c)(6) and 
> implementing the applicable paragraphs of Parts IV and V of this
> Manual only."
> 
> In other words, that definition is not necessarily controlling for
> the purpose of interpreting 10 U.S.C. § 1161(a)(3). Thus, whether we
> are at a "time of war" for purposes of a dismissal is best analyzed
> via the functional approach set forth in United States v.
> Rivaschivas,74 M.J. 758 (ACCA 2015), pet. den. 2015 CAAF LEXIS 911
> (C.A.A.F., Oct. 15,2015) and discussed here. Suffice to say, the 
> court found that there was a time of war for purposes of the statute
> of limitations under military law (10 U.S.C. § 843).
> 
> Moreover, given that the Supreme Court in Hamdan v Rumsfeld has
> characterized the current conflict as a noninternational armed
> conflict under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, it
> appears that our present circumstance would qualify as a "time of
> war" for purposes of the statutory authority of the President to
> dismiss officers.
> 
> However, our inquiry is still not over. Under Article 4 (10 U.S.C. §
> 804) of Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) a dismissed officer
> has the right to demand a trial by court-martial. Although the UCMJ
> has a fairly wide variety of uniquely military offenses from which
> to draw charges, it is quite possible - even likely - that dismissal
> based on a loss of confidence would not constitute a criminal
> offense, even under military law.
> 
> So what happens then? The President can simply wait out the officer
> because 10 U.S.C. § 804 also provides "[i]f the President fails to
> convene a general court-martial within six months from the 
> presentation of an application for trial under this article, the
> Secretary concerned shall substitute for the dismissal ordered by
> the President a form of discharge authorized for administrative 
> issue."
> 
> The substitution of an administrative discharge for a 'dismissal" is
> significant because a dismissal is a punitive discharge for an
> officer (it's the equivalent of a dishonorable discharge for an 
> enlisted person). A dismissal would extinguish almost all veterans"
> benefits, as well as rights to military retirement pay. An
> administrative discharge ordinarily will make some or all of those 
> benefits possible.
> 
> There is also one other matter worthy of a brief discussion, and
> that is the words of the officer's commission (DD Form 1) that is
> the President's exclusive prerogative to issue. The commission 
> states in relevant part:
> 
> This commission is to continue in force during the pleasure of the
> President of the United States of America, for the time being, under
> the provisions of those Public Laws relating to Officers in the 
> Armed Forces of the United States of America and the component
> thereof in which this appointment is made.
> 
> Although I would bet that most officers believe that they serve at
> the "pleasure of the President" in the sense that the President
> could remove them at any time, the actual words of the commission 
> appear to loop in the current statutory framework that provides some
> limits on the President's prerogative.
> 
> In short, although the process is somewhat tangled, it is currently
> possible for the President to dismiss officers from the armed
> forces, even in the absence of criminal misconduct. That said, the 
> incentives are such - not to mention professional propriety - that
> it's extraordinarily unlikely that any President in the modern era
> would be obliged to force officers out, as almost all would retire
> if asked. But if it became necessary to compel an officer to leave
> the military, the Constitution and the law provide a way to make
> that happen.
> 
> ===============================================================================
> 
> 
> What Happens When You Ignore A Narcissist Like Alan "Ski Bunny"
> Baker and Why He Hates Being Ignored?
> 
> The Connection Between Narcisism and Ego
> 
> Narcissism is closely related to an inflated ego and an exaggerated
> sense of self-worth. Narcissists often have a grandiose view of
> their own abilities, and their need for admiration from others fuels
> their inflated sense of self.
> 
> It is well-known that narcissists hate being ignored. But why do
> they detest it so much, and how do they react when faced with being
> disregarded? Navigating a relationship with a narcissist can be 
> challenging, but understanding their behavior and how they respond
> to being ignored can be vital in maintaining your own boundaries and
> mental health.
> 
> This article will discuss why narcissists have such a strong
> aversion to being ignored and the potential risks and benefits of
> utilizing this strategy in dealing with narcissistic individuals in
> your life.
> 
> When they're being ignored, a narcissist's ego is threatened,
> undermining what's called their "narcissistic supply" - the
> attention and validation they crave.
> 
> This can cause them great distress and lead to a variety of
> unpleasant reactions.
> 
> 
> Craving Admiration and Validation.
> 
> Narcissists constantly seek admiration and validation from others to
> maintain their self-image. They need constant attention and
> reassurance of their worth, which is why they can't stand being 
> ignored.
> 
> When you don't give them the attention they want, they feel their
> sense of self slipping away. Ignoring a narcissist can be a powerful
> way to diminish their impact on your life and regain control over
> your own emotional well-being.
> 
> 
> The Threat on their Sense of Self.
> 
> A narcissist's sense of self is intricately tied to how others
> perceive them. When they are being ignored, they feel as if they are
> losing control over their image and self-worth. This perceived loss 
> is extremely distressing for the narcissist, as it threatens the
> very core of their identity. This is one of the main reasons why
> narcissists react so strongly to being ignored.
> 
> Is Ignoring a Narcissist the Best Approach?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> Benefits of Ignoring the Narcissist
> 
> Ignoring a narcissist can be an effective way to distance yourself
> from their manipulative behavior and regain control over your life.
> 
> By not responding to their text messages, calls, or other attempts
> to gain your attention, you are asserting control over the
> relationship and potentially diminishing the narcissist's ability to 
> manipulate you. This can lead to a sense of empowerment and personal
> growth. Potential Risks of Ignoring a Narcissist.
> 
> While ignoring a narcissist may seem like a straightforward way to
> regain control, it is not without its potential risks.
> 
> An ignored narcissist may feel threatened and become more aggressive
> or vengeful in an attempt to regain attention.
> 
> This can result in escalating tensions and the potential for
> emotional or even physical harm. It's critical to weigh the
> potential benefits and drawbacks before deciding whether to ignore a 
> narcissist in your life.
> 
> 
> Context Matters: When to Use This Strategy.
> 
> The decision to ignore a narcissist should not be taken lightly, as
> each situation and individual is unique.
> 
> In some cases, it may be the most effective way to regain control
> and distance yourself from their manipulation. In other cases, it
> could exacerbate the situation and put you at risk.
> 
> Carefully consider the context and dynamics of your relationship
> with a narcissist before deciding if ignoring them is the best
> course of action.
> 
> 
> What Happens When You Start Ignoring a Narcissist!
> 
> Initial Attempts to Get You Back. PLEASE COME BACK!
> 
> Narcissists cannot bear the thought of being disregarded, and once
> they realize you're ignoring them, they will likely ramp up their
> efforts to regain your attention.
> 
> This may include text messages, phone calls, or showing up
> unannounced at your home or workplace. They may also try to reach
> out through mutual friends or family members, attempting to re-
> establish contact and regain their source of narcissistic supply.
> 
> 
> The Enraged Narcissist: Confrontations and Retaliation.
> 
> If ignoring the narcissist does not bring about the desired
> response, they may become increasingly angry and confrontational.
> 
> At this point, the narcissist will often engage in retaliatory and
> vindictive behavior, such as spreading lies, attempting to damage
> your reputation, or in extreme cases, behaving aggressively or 
> violently.
> 
> 
> Long-Term Effects of Ignoring the Narcissist.
> 
> Although the short-term effects of ignoring a narcissist can be
> challenging, the long-term effects may prove rewarding. Once a
> narcissist recognizes that their attempts to regain your attention
> are unsuccessful, they may eventually grow tired and move on,
> seeking validation elsewhere.
> 
> However, this is not guaranteed and may greatly depend on the
> specific individual and circumstances.
> 
> 
> How Narcissists Try to Manipulate You When Ignored
> 
> Hoovering: Sucking You Back In.
> 
> When ignored, some narcissists will employ a tactic called
> "hoovering" to try to lure you back into their sphere of influence.
> This can involve sudden displays of affection, apologies, or
> promises to change - all aimed at sucking you back into the
> relationship and reestablishing their control over you.
> 
> 
> Triangulation: The Narcissist's Divide and Conquer Strategy.
> 
> Another manipulative tactic narcissists use is triangulation,
> wherein they attempt to create tension and conflict between two or
> more people to suit their own agenda.
> 
> When you ignore a narcissist, they may try to manipulate others
> against you or force you into situations where you must compete for
> their attention and validation.
> 
> 
> Flying Monkeys: Enlisting Others to Do Their Bidding.
> 
> In an effort to regain control, a narcissist may enlist the help of
> others or "flying monkeys" to pressure you into engaging with them.
> 
> This can manifest as friends, family, or coworkers relaying messages
> from the narcissist or pressuring you to 'make amends." It is
> important to stand firm in your boundaries and refuse to allow 
> others to serve as conduits for the narcissist's manipulation.
> 
> 
> Will a Narcissist Leave You Alone If You Ignore Them?
> 
> Context-Dependent: Varying Responses and Timelines.
> 
> There is no one-size-fits-all answer to whether a narcissist will
> leave you alone if you ignore them. The response and timeline can
> greatly vary depending on factors such as the narcissist's level of 
> attachment, the balance of power in the relationship, and their
> access to alternative sources of narcissistic supply.
> 
> 
> Dealing with a Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD)
> 
> If you're dealing with someone who has a diagnosed or suspected
> Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), it's important to remember
> that their reactions to being ignored may be more intense, 
> unpredictable, and potentially dangerous. Seeking professional
> support and guidance in navigating these relationships can be
> essential for your own emotional and physical well-being.
> 
> 
> Maintaining Your Boundaries: Strategies for Continued Success.
> 
> Ignored narcissists may persist in their attempts to regain control,
> but with determination and strong personal boundaries, it is
> possible to maintain your distance and protect yourself from their 
> manipulation.
> 
> Maintaining open communication with supportive friends and family,
> seeking professional help when needed, and developing your own self-
> awareness can ensure your continued success in navigating 
> relationships with narcissistic individuals.
> 
> 
> Final Thought
> 
> Narcissists hate being ignored due to their inflated egos and need
> for admiration. Ignoring them can be an effective way to distance
> yourself and regain control, but it may also provoke aggressive or 
> vengeful behavior.
> 
> The decision to ignore a narcissist should be based on context and
> the dynamics of the relationship. When ignoring a narcissist, be
> prepared for manipulative tactics, such as hoovering, triangulation,
> and flying monkeys.
> 
> Responses to being ignored vary, and dealing with someone with
> Narcissistic Personality Disorder may require professional support.
> Maintain your boundaries and seek support to protect yourself from 
> manipulation.
> 
> If you have found your answer in this article then you may also find
> can narcissist every truly be happy.
>