DONE: Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis Resigns in Protest

DONE: Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis Resigns in Protest December 20, 2018

Well, I wondered who would be the next to go, but I didn’t expect this.

That’s right, folks,  with Nikki Haley out as our ambassador to the United Nations and John Kelly leaving at the end of the year, we’ve almost cleaned all the adults out of this clown car of an administration.

So let’s make it final.

President Trump announced today that his Secretary of Defense James Mattis will be bailing by February.

“General Jim Mattis will be retiring, with distinction, at the end of February, after having served my Administration as Secretary of Defense for the past two years,” Trump tweeted.

So is it retiring, or is it something else?

Well, it depends on if you believe the ridiculous spin put on the situation by the president, or if you can read between the lines in Mattis’ resignation letter (as well as the precipitating events from the last couple of days).

Mattis has kept a relatively low profile for the last couple of years. He kept his head down and attended to those issues that involved our national defense. He rarely put himself up front and allowed Trump to take the spotlight.

I guess he understood how much Trump needs his ego stroked by attention.

On Wednesday, Trump outraged everybody – except isolationists and Vladimir Putin – when he announced that he would be pulling American troops out of Syria, leaving our allies in a lurch, and creating a power vacuum.

In Trump’s estimation, we’ve defeated ISIS in the region.

Others, such as South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, disagree.

Graham skewered Trump’s announcement, pointing it out as a very bad idea, and asking the president to reconsider.

Let’s face it: Trump needs the news to change, because he’s had a bad couple of weeks.

Now, it appears he is considering a significant draw down in troops in Afghanistan, as well.

This is another move that is alarming those who see the danger in allowing others to take the lead in the region.

And Mattis would be one of those who has a problem with it.

“Because you have the right to have 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,” he wrote.

That’s right. This isn’t just retiring. This is quitting in protest.

“One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances & partnerships. While the U.S. remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO’s 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.

Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model – gaining veto authority over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security interests – to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.”

He is as disgusted with the path the president is leading the nation down as anyone, and no, this was not a planned retirement.

I said from the beginning that allowing this slow-witted,  ego-driven con artist to take up residence in our White House would lead to ruin.

So did many others.

Now, we countdown to the point where Trump’s  faithful cult refer to Mattis as the “Deep State,” rather than the decorated Marine Corps general that he is.



"I think he meant it's not like the Catholic Church of one huge power base ..."

Franklin Graham Thinks Partisan Politics Will ..."
"A quick google shows at least 4 churches calling themselves an Evangelical church in my ..."

Franklin Graham Thinks Partisan Politics Will ..."
"Well, when you bring up "70 percent Christian," that's just the blanket of Christianity. You ..."

Franklin Graham Thinks Partisan Politics Will ..."
"Bingo. You can find people of evangelical leanings all over various Christian beliefs. Not as ..."

Franklin Graham Thinks Partisan Politics Will ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • JASmius

    Trump needs the news to change, because he’s had a bad couple of weeks. So the way he changes the news is by creating new stories that make him look even worse AND overlap with the previous awful stories to multiply the awfulness logarithmically. Maybe this should be named “The Clown Car Effect”.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if he nominated Rand Paul as Mattis’s replacement. But only because Ron Paul is probably too old.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I think you mean “multiply the awfulness exponentially“. “Logarithmically” is the inverse of “exponentially”, but I otherwise agree with your statement.

    As Trump loses the last of the adults in and around the WH and now that he’s also being abandoned by some of his previously vocal supporters (such as Ann Coulter and Mark Levin), his administration should start getting more and more chaotic and his anti-Constitutional impulses will be less-and-less checked by the adults that are no longer there, leading to a more complete meltdown until the GOP has no choice but to vote for impeachment.

    If there were only an acceptable 3rd party option with other than loony-tunes candidates such as the “rent-is-too-da***-high” party, the Green Party the Democrat (Socialist) Party, the Communist Party (CPUSA), the Libertarian Party (free drugs anyone ?) etc. to vote for in 2020….. — I sure as heck won’t be voting for Republicans in 2020.

  • Brian Orion

    Not a fan whatsoever of the Israel hating Mattis but it’s hard to see where he is wrong here.

  • chemical

    Upvote for correct math.

  • Marcion

    It’s amazing that this was the red line for Mattis. Not the Muslim ban, not family separation, not calling the Charlottesville nazis “very fine people,” not stoking the migrant caravan panic that inspired the Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, and not spending the entire administration helping the Saudis murder Yemenis. The though of hiss boss fighting fewer wars in the middle east was what he considered unacceptable. Adult In The Room indeed.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I think your characterization is wrong.

    More like the thought of Trump withdrawing from Syria and Afghanistan with the war NEARLY won at the request of Turkey and Russia and against the advice of his own generals, military staff, National Security Council, Congress and Intelligence Communities — all of which see the damaging and dangerous parallels with Obama’s abandonment of the war in Iraq that was actually won under Bush but still needed a treaty signature and then a “stabilizing occupation” for a period of time to insure the newly-trained military and police forces established new traditions of honorable service and did not fall back into their historical habits of mutual persecution for past generations of “wrongs”.

    None of the social-engineering feel-good nonsense you mentioned has any bearing on the day-to-day job of the military. When Trump made it impossible for Mattis (or anyone else) to serve with honor, those with honor were required BY THEIR HONOR to leave – which is what Mattis did.

    Just looking at the man and watching his actions or listening to one of his speeches clearly indicates that Mattis values his honor and his duty to honorable service above a mere job and when Trump made that impossible, he resigned rather than betray his duty to his country and to the military or to betray his honor to himself or before his country.

  • Marcion

    Mattis was on the board of the fraudulent company Theranos and tried to get the military to use their bogus technology. After he left Theranos and became secretary of defense he spent his whole time in the administration helping the Saudis as they blew up school buses full of Yemeni kids. I don’t think he cares much about honor.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I don’t think you know the definition of honor in the context of military service or personal honor if you think being on the board of a company is dishonorable or if you believe the military would consider buying product from a fraudulent company. Clearly you’ve been listening to way too much propaganda.

    As one that has been involved in military procurements, there is no way a fraudulent company could sell fraudulent product to the military. There are FAR too many requirements for demonstrations of performance throughout the acquisition lifestyle for a “fraudulent” company to be able to slip trough.

    Now if you mean a company that you (or the people you listen to) don’t like or that don’t like the products being sold or that are unable to compete with, then accusations (fraudulent accusations) of fraud are often lodged out of envy, spite, or just a desire to punish a company for having internal policies you disagree with. That does not make the company fraudulent – only the claim that that company is fraudulent is fraudulent.

  • Marcion

    You’re right that the military didn’t use Theranos’ blood testing technology, because Theranos’ technology literally didn’t work. Their blood tests were done on older machines from other companies, not their own technology. The CEO, Elizabeth Holmes, was charged with “Massive Fraud” by the SEC. But Mattis really did push for the technology to be used:

    “I would very much appreciate your help in getting this information corrected with the regulatory agencies,” Holmes wrote in the e-mail to Mattis. “Since this misinformation came from within DoD, it will be invaluable if this information is formally corrected by the right people in DoD.”

    Within hours, Mattis forwarded the exchange to military officials, asking “how do we overcome this new obstacle.”

    “I have tried to get this device tested in theater asap, legally and ethically,” Mattis wrote. “This appears to be relatively straight-forward yet we’re a year into this and not yet deployed.”

    The field demonstration Mattis was seeking never took place.

    In late July 2013, two months after he retired from the Marine Corps, Mattis asked a defense department ethics official about future employment with Theranos’s board of directors.

    It’s one thing to push for the fraudulent technology from the outside. It’s another to be on the board and stand by it even after it turns out to be a fraud. That’s why I think his time with Theranos shows he’s not an honorable guy. Here’s the SEC’s summary if you want an idea of what Theranos was up to:

  • IllinoisPatriot

    So you now admit (but only when challenged) that your original post was “fake” and intended to sow discord and disinformation as well as to damage the reputation of Mattis for nothing other than political partisanship. That is shameful and disgusting – not to mention dishonorable.

    When making accusations in the future, political partisanship / emotion / personal hatred should NEVER play a part of your choice of words or in your posting as it only degrades your own credibility.

    Now that you’ve been challenged on your (false) accusations against Mattis, you backtrack because you KNOW you cannot back up your original claims. That makes the original claims fraudulent because you knew they were fraudulent at the time you made them.

    The chances of someone at the board-level knowing the technical details of some new blood-related technology are next to non-existent. For a board member to know enough to second-guess the scientists employed by their own company is ridiculous. Honor has nothing to do with Mattis pushing what looked to him (and would have been presented to him complete with (maybe) manufactured proof) as new ‘science’. Your expectation that Mattis can see into the future is ridiculous. Your assumption that because he pushed a new “science” that proved to be wrong in the longer term that he is somehow dishonorable is rejected.

    Unless you are accusing Mattis of knowing the science behind his company’s product did not work and attempting to bilk billions (or even millions) from the military anyway, your entire use of the word “fraudulent” is fraudulent and borders on “propaganda” or “false allegations” – certainly past the point of “mere rumors” or “internet partisan propaganda”.

    If you are going to allege fraud, you must demonstrate that Mattis KNEW the technology was fraudulent, had proof of the fraud in hand and participated anyway. It looks like the fraud was not proven until AFTER Mattis took his action. It appears that AT THE TIME Mattis was only interested in accelerating new (promising) technology into the DOD. You have done no such thing. You’ve only shown that Mattis responded to a request from a company CEO that was reporting obstruction to new technology within the DOD and asked someone to look into what was obstructing the new technology. You have NOT shown what response he got or what he did with the response.

    I’ll bet you’re still pushing the fraudulent concepts of “global cooling / global warming / climate change” as somehow being a danger to the US. As a conspiracy theorist that would believe any unsubstantiated reports of fraud without question or challenge, “climate-change” fraud would be right up your ally. So would the entire concept that a person can change “gender” with a mere surgery or that mixed-sex bathrooms are somehow emotionally “healthy” for children.

  • Marcion

    Theranos wasn’t even using their own machines, they used other companies’ machines and lied about it. If Mattis didn’t realize the company he helped run was a giant scam, the nicest thing I can say is that he was incredibly lazy and negligent.

    But to me the biggest reason I think he’s not an honorable guy is because he spent 2 years running the military as it was helping the Saudis in their war in Yemen. The Yemeni war is a pointless slaughter. The Saudis can’t beat their enemies, the Houthi rebels, so all that happens is that the Saudis murder Yemenis in airstrikes while killing thousands more through starvation and disease from their blockade. They’ve been getting American weapons and assistance from the beginning of the war, and Mattis ran the defense department as it carried out the war. Continuing the Yemeni war didn’t make Mattis resign, but leaving Syria and Afghanistan did. There’s nothing honorable about contributing to one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes on earth.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Again, you are intentionally misconstruing the concept of honor as it applies to the military.

    Military honor is served when one obeys lawful orders even when one does not agree with them. What kind of military would we have if individual soldiers got to pick and choose which orders they want to follow ? While there appears a chance that Mattis could (using his position as SecDef change the mind of the President to correct the issues and injustices he saw Trump committing, his honor demanded that he stay in the fight and attempt to do so. To lambaste him for finally (perhaps after taking too much time for your impatience) recognizing that his fight to protect the country and our allies from Trump’s corruption and his fight to teach and train Trump in military customs and traditions is a total waste of time is just ridiculous. What you SHOULD be doing is recognizing that when Mattis finally acknowledged that Trump will not listen to him or anyone else besides our foreign opponents concerning US foreign policy that Mattis had the good sense, the courage, the honor and the integrity to resign rather to continue to enable Trump’s treasonous actions and commands.

    Of course a liberal like you would never acknowledge the honor or courage of our military or anyone else that does not think exactly like you and that does not hold the same prejudices and lack of common sense that you do.

  • disqus_KjVsuvFVLd yes

  • Marcion

    “Only following orders” isn’t much of a defense, especially when the lawful orders you’re talking about are to help the incredibly dumb prince of a terrorist supporting monarchy murder Yemenis. Mattis had no objections to doing that for almost 2 years. What finally made him resign was the prospect of fighting fewer wars. If this is military honor then military honor is a blight on humanity.