Taken from JRE #1467 w/Jack Carr: https://youtu.be/Ra4522ikFoU
Video Source
25 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Taken from JRE #1467 w/Jack Carr: https://youtu.be/Ra4522ikFoU
Video Source
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Another great Rogan interview. The fact that he has become the questioning soul of US common sense should give us all confidence.
What was the motivation for the redacted info? Punish the author? or make sure field personnel are safe in highly dangerous operations where lives hang in balance and casualties happen every day ?
With great and due respect, While you were in the field sir would you be happy to see professional procedures (that cost lives to learn in the first place) shared with your current enemy?
In football how would you feel if the leaving class from your high school just turned over the playbook to the coach across town? Not everything of course but enough to change the way you set up your defense.
The assumption that every enemy completely understands the US military inner workings always surprises me (as a foreigner). Intelligence around morale, logistics and procedures is just like giving them night vision equipment. Your lawyers appear unconcerned that they would concentrate difficult to find but publicly available intelligence like that in one source. There used to be a mystique to the US military and, like a home crowd for a football game, that adds an element and that intimidates people.. You will say that it sheds light on things that may need improvement, but what about the plight of the guy in a remote place the day after you publish?
If I were a parent of an active duty US military member I would be much happier with six months of due diligence than 45 days. Your motivation is to sell books sir, theirs is very different from that and you don’t seem keen to acknowledge that
PS presumably you signed very deliberate documents regarding disclosures when you were granted elevated military clearances? The fact that you can find lawyers to circumvent the intention of those documents does not detract from your extraordinary service to your country sir, but surely you should spend media time also acknowledging your conflict of interest??
Jack Carr is bad ass and his books awesome!
Coming back after watching terminal list, listening to this is fun.
You can have constitutional rights as long as you’re not in the military.
Everybody needs to pay attention to Carr's description of statutory standards at about the 7:15 mark in the video. That standard was explained to me in some of my first law enforcement courses in college back in 1989/90. For a law to be valid, it had to be evident to the average person what it meant. Interpretations outside of that or additional so-called, "implied intent" was not allowed. The "spirit of the law" was only used in a person's defense, not in their prosecution. One of the reasons that the US Supreme Court has been smashing so many gun control statutes lately is due to this recent tendency. They are too broadly stated, not clearly defined and intentional ignore previous Constitutional legal precedent. While I'm no huge fan of Ayn Rand as a person, the line "laws aren't meant to be followed, just selectively enforced" is a great description of the current standard for legislation. This includes the attempts to retroactively trap you by creating a new interpretation that create a crime where a previous interpretation said it was legal. The BATFE is only the most obvious perpetrator of this tactic, but most federal agencies and quite a few States do this now as a form of control. The brace-ruling is an excellent example. The only thing we should be paying attention to are the original statutes that the BATFE are basing their opinions and NOT on the opinions themselves. Those opinions are being used by people within the agency to create conflict.