Sua Sponte
-
Posts
1,262 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
19
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Sua Sponte
-
-
Looks like the committee got it right with FSU.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Stop rewarding social activism in the military. If that isn't done, then the service academies will continue down this wokeness path. Oh yeah, the dipshit former Macdill Wg/CC who wrote that "Dear White Colonels" article is at USAFA, figures.
-
16 hours ago, Lawman said:
You very obviously didn’t watch that game.
Ohio State showed up with literally no offensive starters but 2 guys (one injured) from the season and lost their Quarter Back on the second drive. The defense held Missouri to literally no first downs until the second half.
That game was awful to watch but to somehow act like its validation of OSU being a bad team or Day being a bad coach is a joke.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkHe's 2-4 against ranked teams in bowl games, 1-3 against Michigan, 0-3 against SEC teams, and 1-6 against Top 5 teams. In case you didn't know, college and pro football are results-based professions. If you don't produce positive results, then they'll find someone who can.
-
25 minutes ago, HeloDude said:
If you receive anything other than an LOC, you record is reviewed to set one your rank at retirement. I’ve personally known commanders who were fired, given paperwork, and retired with a lesser rank.
I have also seen the same thing happen via a board of inquiry. However, said BOIs were assembled due to a court-martial or NJP while at said senior rank. If the dipshit who was the 19 AF/CC is acquitted of the serious charges in his GCM, but found guilty of the minor infractions, he won't be retiring a two-star. However, I've seen that the odds of a BOI being assembled only go up depending on how public the accusations become.
-
Damn, fired to be retired in a rank that most officers never reach. Thoughts and prayers.
-
3
-
-
Ryan Day probably should find new work.
-
1 hour ago, VMFA187 said:
We have to move. We won't be able to compete with schools in the B1G and SEC who have marketing deals that pay them twice as much. The judge who has been assigned to the court case is an FSU grad for his bachelor's and law degree.
No other sports bring in money, only football does. If our football team can't compete because we are in the ACC, then the other sports will suffer as well.
I hope we go to the B1G. I despise ESPN and their affiliation with the SEC.
Chip Kelly has an interesting idea of how to structure CFB.
-
9 hours ago, Biff_T said:
2001-2007
Bro of mine I went to BIQ with in the -135 was in the 9th before going to the -135 (Ray).
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Danger41 said:
It’s not even the way of the future as much as it’s the way of the now in all aspects of life. As everything has become more networked, it gives access to so many things that we wouldn’t have had access to before and is one of those inflection point type things they mentioned in PME. It can do everything from ISR to SEAD/OCA (why send the gorilla package to clear the lane when you just turn off the fuel pumps at the base?) to nearly every other core function of the military. If you have a chance, look at the SOCOM budget allocation for cyber compared to airborne ISR compared to 10 years ago.
Our cyber enterprise has a hell of a retention problem similar to pilots because of what you can make on the outside, especially with a clearance.As someone with a masters in cybersecurity from a T-25 school, go into cybsercurity policy if you do that. There's a big shift into having AI do more of the blue-collar cybersecurity stuff.
-
7 hours ago, Biff_T said:
Some guy's USAF life in patches.
What years were you in the 9th?
-
-
18 minutes ago, ViperMan said:
I predict SCOTUS disagrees.
If/when they do, I'll re-engage with another "I was right and you were wrong" post.
The question I have is how can a former president be disqualified via the Insurrection Clause if said person was acquitted by the Senate during an impeachment trial charged with “Inciting an Insurrection?”
-
With NIL and the portal you’re going to start seeing players transfer at halftime.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:
It is a desperate move by far left lunatics that are scared and it likely opened Pandora's box as California is now exploring doing the same thing California lieutenant governor calls for exploring options to take Donald Trump off the presidential ballot
It’s going to cause a “trigger effect” like the repeal of Row with some red states. If the SCOTUS agrees with the CO Supreme Court, Trump’s 2024 campaign is done due to all blue states disqualifying him (subject to their state’s election laws) via the insurrection clause. If the SCOTUS disagrees, then he won’t have to be worried about being disqualified in any state over the insurrection clause.
-
7 hours ago, Swizzle said:
Interesting read and interpretation. However not convincing. The follow-on rulings will be interesting to watch.
Key reasons/keywords: Oath, 'support', officer, offices mentioned...and words mean things, also lack thereof.
First, the Insurrectionist clause starts at banning, or 'disabling', at the Congressional level and then under the United States to individual states. Note the primacy writing style used. This undoubtably means officers APPOINTED by public authority as mentioned in your citation's para 130-132 who are found guilty of insurrection, yes? These same insurrectionist must have sworn to "support" the Constitution, while POTUS' oath does not. References follow.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C8-1/ALDE_00001126/ (might have to cliffnote more this website after all this...)
&
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-2/section-1/clause-8/
Second, The Office of the President is filled chiefly by an election & electors. POTUS is not an appointed officer in that sense, despite the position being an office, that is the Office of the President of the United States.
Third, and back to that primacy writing style, why would "an officer of the United States" which is written after "member of Congress" include the POTUS when Congress is written out expressly and POTUS is not?
Lastly, perhaps most importantly, the preposition 'under' versus the use 'of'. Under meaning that which is below or beneath or lower-than. Section 3 says to disable any insurrectionist from holding any office under the United States. So clarify for us, is it the President of OR under the United States? I await your answer curiously because a new adjudged interpretation of this matter by you and SCOTUS could change the big guy's business card to PUTUS! Which sounds wrong... (and likewise SCUTUS)
“However not convincing.” Well, no one cares if it’s convincing to you (or anyone else other than a superior court). You would agree with me that a commander at the military level is an officer, correct? Is the president not the “Commander-in-Chief?”
-
7 hours ago, ViperMan said:
Your state did.
When your state's Supreme Court unilaterally determined that your states' electoral votes were going to de facto be given to Joe Biden - thereby undermining the very purpose of our national election system and usurping other states' (and the national) election processes. Just try this though experiment: imagine Arizona and Wisconsin "disqualified" Joe Biden from their ballots "according to their state election laws"...blah blah blah. You know as well as I do there would be absolute pandemonium from the MSNBC crowd...which should tell you something is sideways.
So, the CO GOP couldn’t put another candidate on the ballot because Trump was disqualified via CO election laws? If Arizona, Wisconsin, or any state wanted to disqualify a candidate base on their state election laws, that’s well within their right to do so. If done, which is what happened here, then it’ll be appealed to the SCOTUS for an interpretation against the Constitution.
The CO Supreme Court issued a stay for their decision until 4 Jan for Trump’s attorneys to file an appeal to the SCOTUS, which they’ll do. It’s a Constitutional interpretation that’s never happened before with the 14th Amendment, the CO Supreme Court just set it up. It was also a 5-4 opinion, so it wasn’t without dissent within the court.
-
3 hours ago, ViperMan said:
The solution I'd like to see is CO electoral votes just get tossed. Sorry...you don't want to participate in the election? Fine, your 10 votes are null. See you in 4 years.
Who said we don’t want to participate in an election? The CO Supreme Court just held to disqualify a candidate via our state election laws.
-
8 hours ago, Swizzle said:
Is POTUS an officer, Congressman, and/or state legislator/judicator sworn to the constitution per 14th Amendment, SEC. 3?
// ...member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state...//
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv#
I'd say several on this forum are officers (clearly), one to two are/were congressman, and who knows the last category....but POTUS fitting those categories, likely no. So why was it brought in the first place against #45?
You doing think someone that swears in via the Oath of Office isn’t some type of officer?
Their analysis on the topic starts on PDF Pg. 70 to 89.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, HeloDude said:
I would be very surprised if this isn’t overruled by SCOTUS. The left hates him so much that they’re all about removing him from the ballot under the 14th Amendment without him being charged, and much less, not convicted. So for someone who says they’re all about democracy, etc they sure hate due process.
He was charged with “incitement of insurrection” during his second impeachment, which he was acquitted of. He’s literally receiving due process by being able to appeal to higher level courts. The interesting focus I believe the SCOTUS look at is can one be disqualified via the Insurrection Clause of the 14th Amendment after being acquitted either in a criminal trial or impeachment trial? The clause just has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof” and doesn’t say “convicted of insurrection.” However, to me, that’s foolish to disqualify someone due to something when they had due process via a jury of their peers or the Senate and acquitted of it.
-
He’s still on the ballot if he appeals to the SCOTUS (which he’ll do) before 4 Jan 24.
-
3 hours ago, RASH said:
Is McPeak advising them?
Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile appNo, he is.
-
What a fucking idiot. Hopefully, his line number disappears and he can go cry into retirement.
-
2
-
-
On 12/12/2023 at 10:10 AM, Clark Griswold said:
Anybody roll their TSP to their 401k and any tips/gotchas?
Seems straightforward but before I pull the handle any advice is appreciated
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkPretty straightforward.
-
On 12/5/2023 at 8:13 AM, VMFA187 said:
Yes, I do.
Tate would have been back - He was 20/27 for 247 yards if I recall in the game he played. Our defense has had 38 offensive possessions played against them since Jordan Travis went down, a single TD was scored, and that was due to a false penalty that is now being used to train CF referees on what not to call.
Washington has struggled with teams most of the season. Alabama got beat at home by two scores and barely beat USF and an Auburn team who got beat by New Mexico State. Texas has also looked suspect and lost to a slightly above average OU.
So yes. I do. Our defense has been lights out.
By "struggling" do you mean by not having big double-digit wins against ranked opponents like Oregon, Oregon State, and Utah? I guess? They beat ranked opponents Oregon twice, USC, Utah, and Oregon State. Florida State dominated LSU, beat Louisville by nine points, and beat Clemson, the only ranked opponents they've played. Florida State's strength of schedule is 55th while Washington's is 11th and Alabama's 5th. Florida State almost blew a 21-point lead on Boston College, needed overtime against Clemson, and trailed at home in the second half to Duke before Riley Leonard exited with an injury.
Texas also beat Alabama. Alabama beat the reigning two-year champion, Georgia. Ultimately, the committee wasn't going to let Alabama, who just beat the #1 team in the SEC Championship, or an undefeated Washington team who beat a Top 10 Oregon twice to include the PAC-10 Championship, sit at home and give it to an ACC team who played weaker opponents. Why? Too much money left on the table and the people didn't want to see an FSU team just boat-raced by a stronger SEC, Big 12, PAC-10, or Big 10 team.,
-
1
-
The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)
in Squadron Bar
Posted