On the heels of President Donald Trump’s declaration that the United States must “start winning wars again,” CNN’s Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr revealed military leaders have a different opinion.
“There are a lot of questions about what the president means,” Starr told Wolf Blitzer. “He said he was taking this from watching the military during his days back in high school and college in his words when perhaps it was a much more clear time for military victories.”
Trump was in high school in the early 1960’s, following World War II and the Korean War. After Trump turned 18, he was eligible to fight in the Vietnam War but received four draft deferments for bone spurs and one deferment for an unknown reason.
Starr said that those wars had “major tank battles” and “major air battles” that delivered “overwhelming firepower.”
“That is not the way the world exists today,” Starr explained about the modern military. “The fight against ISIS, the fight against Al Qaeda is a fight against a spreading ideology that, indeed, has spread across many countries. The president has this new plan sitting on his desk today about options for defeating ISIS, and it includes diplomacy at the very time he is cutting the State Department. It includes financial options. It does include some military options, but you’re not going to bomb ISIS out of existence. I don’t know a single U.S. military commander that thinks that’s feasible.”
Watch her full explanation below:
Trump’s claim impeachment ‘nullifies’ 2016 election blown up in new House Judiciary Committee report
On Saturday, the House Judiciary Committee released their report outlining the offenses committed by President Donald Trump, and the legal framework for impeachment — which clears the way for Congress to write and approve articles of impeachment against him.
One of the key issues examined by the report is the claim, repeatedly made by the president and his supporters, that impeachment would "nullify" the 2016 presidential election and the popular will — which is already a weak claim given that Trump never won the popular vote, and that impeaching Trump would still install Mike Pence as president. But the report more broadly rejects the entire claim that an election result immunizes a president from punishment for official misconduct.
READ IT: House Judiciary Committee releases report defining Trump impeachable offenses
On Saturday, the House Judiciary Committee released a report outlining the impeachable acts committed by President Donald Trump.
"Our President holds the ultimate public trust," said the report, titled "Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment," in its introduction. "A President faithful only to himself—who will sell out democracy and national security for his own personal advantage—is a danger to every American. Indeed, he threatens America itself."
The report clarifies the procedures for impeachment, analyzes whether president can be "impeached for abuse of executive powers," and "whether it is preferable to await the next election when a President has sought to corrupt that very same election."
Devin Nunes likely under federal investigation over foreign contacts after Parnas phone call revelation: ex-FBI official
On MSNBC's "AM Joy," former FBI Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Frank Figliuzzi speculated that Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) may already be under FBI investigation for his secret calls with indicted Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas.
"What do you make of the fact that the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, who participated in the Adam Schiff portion of the impeachment hearings, never said anything to anybody about the fact that he was not just the guy who's sitting on the dais, he was involved in some way with one of the players?" asked host Joy Reid.
"Well, it says a lot on two levels," said Figliuzzi. "It says a lot about Devin Nunes as an individual, his ethics, his integrity, and what he's all about. And then on a larger level, it's just a huge, ironic development that we're hearing all of this about — the Republicans are defending allegations that the president lacks integrity and ethics, and they're sitting there overseeing this and they're not recusing themselves, and they're not saying anything about their colleague, Devin Nunes. So, you know, the hypocrisy is loud and clear here. And eventually when the dust clears, Joy, I wouldn't be surprised if ethics investigations and perhaps even criminal investigations really point the finger at Nunes as someone who should have recused himself and is much deeper into this than we know now."