Yet another idiot Democrat!

[SmokethatGreen]

*




Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., called for Defense Secretary James Mattis to testify before Congress regarding the reasons behind his resignation.


Her comments came in two tweets posted after his resignation.



Duckworth, an Army veteran,wrote: “Secretary Mattis should testify before Congress and answer questions about the alarming contents of his resignation letter.”



And in another tweet, she added: "Congress should use its power to check this president, defend our alliances and hold our adversaries accountable when Donald Trump refuses to.”


In his letter of resignation to Trump, Mattis had written he believed it was right to resign.



“We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances,” he said.



“Because you have the right to a secretary of defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position."

The most important part of the Mattis letter is what liberals seem least to understand. In short Mattis made it clear he serves under the authority of the President, and when they are at odds perhaps the President should have someone else in that office.

“Because you have the right to a secretary of defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position."

What part of the Constitution evades the dopey liberal mind?

Here we have some fool in the Congress who thinks the opinion or concerns of Mattis are a weapon against a President he is sworn to serve?

 

[Cardinal]

 

[beefheart]

 

[justabubba]

 

[Xelor]

The most important part of the Mattis letter is what liberals seem least to understand. In short Mattis made it clear he serves under the authority of the President, and when they are at odds perhaps the President should have someone else in that office.

What part of the Constitution evades the dopey liberal mind?

Here we have some fool in the Congress who thinks the opinion or concerns of Mattis are a weapon against a President he is sworn to serve?

 

[Idiometer]

The most important part of the Mattis letter is what liberals seem least to understand. In short Mattis made it clear he serves under the authority of the President, and when they are at odds perhaps the President should have someone else in that office.



What part of the Constitution evades the dopey liberal mind?

Here we have some fool in the Congress who thinks the opinion or concerns of Mattis are a weapon against a President he is sworn to serve?

Perhaps you need to smoke some better green, my friend, if that's what you think Mattis was trying to convey.

Cabinet secretaries do not swear to serve the president. There oath of b office is:

"I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

The word "President" does not appear in that oath. The president can fire them at any time for any reason, or no reason, but their loyalty should be to we the people and our constitution, not to the president.

 

[OscarLevant]

The most important part of the Mattis letter is what liberals seem least to understand. In short Mattis made it clear he serves under the authority of the President, and when they are at odds perhaps the President should have someone else in that office.



What part of the Constitution evades the dopey liberal mind?

Here we have some fool in the Congress who thinks the opinion or concerns of Mattis are a weapon against a President he is sworn to serve?

Oh, I dunno, you mean the current president who was wondered out loud why the National Enquirer didn't get a pulitzer prize on the article that pinned the JFK murder on Ted Cruz's dad and also wondered any other news outlets didn't pick up the story?


You mean the current president who once sued Bill Maher for $5 million because Maher refused to pay him that much given that Maher said he'd would give $5 million to the hair club for douche bags if Trump could prove he wasn't the lovechild of an orangutan? When Trump instructed his lawyer to send to Maher his birth certificate, which proves who his father and mother were, he demanded payment, totally ignoring the fact that comedy does not make a valid contract, notwithstanding the added fact that one doesn't need a birth cert to prove one is not the spawn of a primate, since interspecies offspring is impossible. The judge threw the lawsuit out, and chided Trump for wasting the court's time. When asked about it, Trump said he didn't realize Maher was joking, which interesting because Maher is a COMEDIAN.


You mean the current president who once asserted that climate change was a Chinese Hoax?

I could go on, but I'm certain this will go right over your cuckoo's nest, so there is no point.

 

[OscarLevant]

The most important part of the Mattis letter is what liberals seem least to understand. In short Mattis made it clear he serves under the authority of the President, and when they are at odds perhaps the President should have someone else in that office.



What part of the Constitution evades the dopey liberal mind?

Here we have some fool in the Congress who thinks the opinion or concerns of Mattis are a weapon against a President he is sworn to serve?

Were you born a troll, or is this a recent development?

 

[Saladin4]

troll Bull****...Best ignored

 

[RaleBulgarian]

The most important part of the Mattis letter is what liberals seem least to understand. In short Mattis made it clear he serves under the authority of the President, and when they are at odds perhaps the President should have someone else in that office.
What part of the Constitution evades the dopey liberal mind?
Here we have some fool in the Congress who thinks the opinion or concerns of Mattis are a weapon against a President he is sworn to serve?

 

[Roadvirus]

Duckworth is just looking for a reason to gain a few popular soundbites and up her street cred with the Anti-Trump Brigade.