Without evidence, Trump claims Russia ‘will be pushing very hard for the Democrats’ in 2018...

CPT Gregory Hafera Sir I’m not sure that’s one stat I’d want to be number one on. Not a slight on Trump being you could be right (i personally believe you are), but it reminds me of the ‘body counts’ from Nam. They were inflated to make it seem we were waxing the floor with the VC when it wasn’t totally the case. he’s got two years of the GOP keeps both houses to find something better to be #1 in, and is the Dems take it, they’ll find something for him to be #1 in.

CPT Gregory Hafera Probably not. More than likely that distinction still belongs to Woodrow Wilson courtesy of the 339th Infantry Regiment.

https://ss.sites.mtu.edu/mhugl/2016/10/14/detroits-own-polar-bears-in-northern-russia/

"It’s even bad the Russian (Czar) President actually admitted he wanted Trump in office"- Actually, at the Helsenki press conference, the reporter asked Putin two questions in one sentence: Did you want Donald Trump to win, and did you order interference in the election? His immediate answer through the interpreter was "Yes I did, Yes I did". Sounds to me like he answered yes to both questions, but try convincing a Trump supporter of that.

SFC J Fullerton - Another solid post. No president is perfect. For the three I served under, each one had personal and policy issues I didn’t agree with, but there was some redeeming factors that made each one successful to me. After almost two years in, I’m seeing both personal and policy issues, but they’re much more amplified than even more so than when Clinton had his infedility issues, Bush and the “intel” for the war/Katrina response, and Obama with a litany of policy. I’m noticing a blind sense of loyalty beyond the professional bordering on a cult like sense with Trump. Not from all. There are some of his supporters here who can call it as it is, yet make intelligent and point driven arguments for Trump....not many, but enough to make it interesting. Each of those presidents took the time to travel the country and world (Bush and the shoe is a classic), but even if it was uncomfortable, they went there. Like em or not, they traveled the 50 states and the territories to favorable or unfavorable crowds. Past presidents have done rallies but where they differ is they were there at the pleasure of the crowd. Obama and Bush Jr, took some hellacious questions, but didn’t tuck tail and run. Neither of them used the crowds to fuel their own egos. You don’t see that now. The rally is a tool to use to validate your performance to yourself. Was there enough people? Did i talk about me enough? Can the gaffe i made be explained by others or openly dismissed because those who are supposed to make sure they are, cannot because they’re clueless as to why it was said? I do not recall any of the predecessors demeaning any of their staff publicly even though there are loads of stories of that being done in the WH (aka privately). I believe I don’t have to like the man in office (but I clearly recognize if I were still serving, I wouldn't dare mention him in any light good or bad. Gotta remember those regs), but there is a certain level of decorum expected with the position. Not a dumbing down of the role, being seen as a”rouge”, “tough guy”, “maverick”, doing away with “tired traditions”, or openly calling for rivals to be locked up. “Lock her up” does not make us look strong, it makes us look like a third world country where it’s “expected” for something like that to be said by a dictator. America isn’t run by any dictator and never will. There is NO leader on RP that would openly sanction some of the acts past presidents and Trump have done in their commands or by NCO’s of any rank. You’d be light in the pockets, and on your collar. It’s a vicious cycle, where for a good while I saw liberals catching hell, and now before the election, conservatives complaining of sensorship by RP itself (RP didn’t do it, the discussions themselves went a certain unprofessional way that RP had to get involved). It’s about to happen again with midterms, and the year following.

SSG Warren Swan - I would love five minutes to have a conversation with POTUS...maybe that's too long but I just wonder what he would say about anything.

SFC Kelly Fuerhoff - With the previous three, I’d like to do the same. Bush would be my first choice being he’s earned some respect points from me after he left office with some of the deeds he’s done, and the reflections he’s made that aren’t even flattering to himself. He seems able to recognize his mistakes and talk openly about them.
Of course Obama would be next, and my question to Clinton would be how did he turn the economy around in such a short time to where he left with a surplus for Bush Jr. I don’t think I’d want to speak to Trump right now. I’ve heard all about him, from him, and when a man believes he can do no wrong, I can’t learn anything from you being I’ve done a lot of wrong, and you can’t give me pointers I don’t already know.

SSG Warren Swan - I just want to see how he acts with no cameras on him, no spectacle, none of that. I want to say "What the hell is wrong with you? What goes through your head before you talk? Do you think about things before you talk?" Something like that. I don't want to learn anything from him - it would just be a fascinating five minute study of a person lol.

I could see Bush and Obama as someone to hang out with, have a beer. Chill. Clinton - yeah I don't want to be alone with him anywhere. I'm not taking any chances.