I don't believe Schlesinger.https://twitter.com/senwhitehouse/status/920844618455019526 …
-
-
That sounds specific enough to be real, and aligns with my understanding of how this might actually work. I have a FOIA out (good luck...).
-
I remain skeptical. It would be more persuasive if the story came from the author or a recipient of the order, rather than someone shown it.
-
I'm always skeptical. But it's the first "solid" thing I've seen on this, beyond rumors. I'm still pursuing it...
-
If it is true, it implies that there are probably other people who saw said order, or that — potentially — one could get paper evidence.
-
This needs to be verified beyond Jeffrey Smith's undocumented recollection, but I know smthg of him and he strikes me as a reliable source.
-
I agree. We need a new sustained, serious historical/policy study of Presidential nuclear use capability. And this needs to be part of it.
-
We need a symposium with all the relevant scholars, and recent former SecDefs. We need to all be working from the same set of facts.
-
Agree 100%. Need to know what we really know, where areas of legitimate uncertainty are, etc.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Not clear to me why RN would call an Army JAG lawyer to the Oval Office to show him a document. Does WH visitor list show him?
-
He isn't saying Nixon showed it to him, I don't think — he's saying his boss (Dept. UnderSec of Army for International Affairs) did.
-
Then it's written very poorly. The last "he" refers to RN. I also wonder what IA would have to do with such a memo. IA has no link to CoC.
-
That's one of many reasons I find it dubious. A shows B an order from C to D.
-
Seems like an awfully weird thing to fabricate whole cloth though.
-
Age and memory do funny things to people.
-
Robert F Ellsworth was AD, died 2011. Without diary or papers no way to prove author's claim. Security violation to show JAG the order. 1/2
-
The story say Deputy Under Secretary of the Army for International Affairs.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Also, it should be noted that 1) it is not clear this was legal, 2) whether this was "responsible" is sort of in eye of beholder, and,
-
3) relying on ad hoc possibly illegal actions by military to subvert bad leaders is... not a good system. We can do better.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks, Alex. I saw and tweeted about that last week (incl. to
@armscontrolwonk) but didn't get much of a response:https://twitter.com/AtomicAnalyst/status/919071384789241856 … -
Its the ongoing challenge of oral history.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.