How Mattis Betrayed His Fellow Marines at the Behest of the Deep State

American Greatness ^ | 14 Jul, 2022 | Fred Galvin

[MtnClimber]

How the Pentagon’s top-brass generals burned the careers of subordinates but then pivoted to lucrative careers all while losing the wars they were supposed to be winning.

My new book, A Few Bad Men, details the mendacity and mad dishonesty of retired Marine General James “Mad Dog” Mattis. The fact that it was written by a Marine once under his command, whom he betrayed for the sake of politics and getting to slap on another star, says volumes about this once-lionized figure.

It all goes back to an incident in Afghanistan in 2007, and the Court of Inquiry trial of innocent Marines that followed, which Mattis himself instigated.

Lt. Colonel Steve Morgan, USMC (retired) and jury member of the 2008 Marine Special Operations Command’s Court of Inquiry says in the foreword to A Few Bad Men, “This is a case of a perfect storm of toxic leadership.”

The most legendary Marine of all time, Lieutenant General John A. Lejeune, the 13th commandant of the Marine Corps, laid out clearly how to effectively nurture and lead Marines: “Make every effort by means of historical, educational, and patriotic addresses to cultivate in their hearts a deep abiding love of the Corps and Country” and “the key to combat effectiveness is unity and esprit that characterizes itself in complete irrevocable mutual trust.”

If only General Mattis had taken this to heart.

On February 3, 2005, when Lieutenant General Mattis was attending the Armed Forces Communications and Electronic Associations forum in San Diego, he said: “You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right up there with you. I like brawling.”

He also likes hearing the sound of his own voice.

During this same time, Mattis partnered with General David Petraeus to develop the joint counterinsurgency doctrine of winning hearts and minds. Mattis hijacked the phrase from the Hippocratic oath for his Marines to follow, “First do no harm.” This sounded good to the media and politicians in Washington, but Marines are not physicians and Afghanistan was no sterile operating room. It was a hellscape in which Marines constantly faced threats and the possibility of betrayal from 360 degrees. Mattis’ Marine Hippocratic oath sent mixed signals for his Marines, who had it on his good authority that “It’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot . . . some people.”

Just over two years later, I led the First Marine Special Operations Task Force. We landed in Afghanistan on February 12, 2007. Before long the First was involved in a complex ambush near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, on March 4, 2007. We were attacked by a suicide car-bomb, waves of Taliban fighters on both sides of the road, a sniper, and a mob that placed an obstacle to trap us in an ambush kill box. We successfully counterattacked, killed the Taliban terrorists, avoided civilian casualties, and returned to base within 20 minutes, where we learned of the Taliban’s swift information operations campaign that was already underway, accusing us of mass-murdering Afghan civilians. The Taliban’s version of events went out within 20 minutes through the BBC followed by countless others. Ultimately, the president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, condemned our actions and the Army generals kicked us out of Afghanistan within five days. Crushing the Taliban in battle morphed into a PR victory for the extremists in the media and a weakening of the allied forces in country. Due process went right out the window.

Ironically, Mattis was assigned as the convening authority by the commandant of the Marine Corps in August 2007, to be responsible for the investigation and a Court of Inquiry into our March 4 battle. Mattis received the results of my polygraph test and the sworn testimony of all the Marines involved in the firefight, confirming that on that morning no Marines said they killed any civilians or saw any civilians killed.

Unlike Lejeune’s comments of “cultivating a deep abiding love of Country and Corps in the hearts of your Marines and that the key to combat effectiveness is unity and esprit that characterizes itself in complete irrevocable mutual trust,” Mattis unleashed an unprecedented 45 criminal investigators and four prosecuting attorneys against the seven Marines falsely accused by the Taliban of mass murder. It would become the longest war crimes trial in Marine Corps history.

Mattis placed a “protective order” (a.k.a. gag order) prohibiting the two Marine officers who he named as codefendants from making any statements to the press or face punishment. Our attorneys would face disbarment. The already unlevel playing field was tilted hard against the Marines who had won a battlefield victory under fire.

Additionally, Mattis’ prosecution team found perceived vulnerabilities in the Marine commandos and commenced “ethnic targeting” of two Hispanic Marines. Mad Dog’s prosecutors continuously interrogated one of them, and the government manufactured a statement from him that our fire was out of control during the March 4 ambush.

The prosecution then threatened to deport the Marine’s mother back to Mexico unless he signed the statement. That Marine testified he was coerced into signing the prosecution’s false statement. Another Hispanic Marine also testified he was repeatedly threatened by the prosecution to take a polygraph, which was not a legal order, but the prosecution ordered him to anyway. None of the other Marines were subjected to these strongarm Gestapo tactics.

Mattis turned the prosecution over to his successor in the fall of 2007 as he received his promotion with a fourth star. The following year, the trial acquitted all of us. No thanks to Mad Dog Mattis. He got his star. A few bad prosecutors under his watch cost the Marines a few good men, and diminished America’s position in Afghanistan at a time when that war might still have been won.

Mattis went on to serve as the commander of all U.S. Forces in the Middle East at U.S. Central Command in Tampa, Florida. As I detail in A Few Bad Men, there he came under the influence of Elizabeth Holmes, founder and CEO of Theranos. Holmes had a device she claimed could detect all kinds of disease in a few drops of blood. It would change the world, if it worked. Holmes contacted Mattis in August 2012 and wrote Pentagon officials requesting, “How do we overcome this new obstacle? I have tried to get this device tested in theater asap, legally and ethically. This appears to be relatively straight-forward yet we’re a year into this and not yet deployed.”

The main problem Mattis was willing to overlook was that the FDA had not approved Theranos’ blood testing technology to be used on our troops in Afghanistan, but Mattis was hoping he could push it through, right or wrong.

Mattis retired and went on to make a fortune serving on four corporate boards, including Theranos and military contractor General Dynamics. Theranos’ technology would not only be denied FDA approval, but it was proven to be a fraud. During the Elizabeth Holmes trial, Mattis, who had served as a Theranos board member for several years, testified that he was unaware of any of Theranos’ scandalous actions. This seems unlikely, given Mad Dog’s legendary tenacity, and the fact that he had a fiduciary duty to know what was going on.

Holmes’ device never worked. She is now a convicted fraudster. Was Mattis her gullible mark or a greedy participant?

Mattis’ disgraceful actions are laid bare in A Few Bad Men. He used his position as secretary of defense to bottle up the Freedom of Information Act requests to get our testimony in that March 4, 2007 ambush exposed. Our shocking testimonies have now been released and tell a terrible story of betrayal by a Marine against other Marines. They reveal why the Pentagon’s top-brass generals who burned the careers of subordinates but then pivoted to lucrative careers with every defense contracting company lost their forever war in Afghanistan, and really, haven’t won a war in decades.

[Albion Wilde]

Mattis and John Kelley and “Tex” Alles showed their incompetence when they were given senior positions in the Trump team and then promptly turned against him.

John Kelly ripped it with me forever when he did this at the U.N in front the the entire world community viewership at Trump's incredibly brilliant first address (when DJT tore Kim Jong-Un a new one):

Source of photos:
Here was John Kelly's reaction during Trump's big UN speech

Donald Trump went on to forge a great understanding with Kim, who desisted from his constant missile test threats during the rest of Trump's admin. Trump was the first sitting U.S. President to cross over North Korea's border:

[Chainmail]

I knew John Kelley when we were both battalion commanders. He was arrogant as hell back then and he doesn’t seemed to have changed since then. He can be gracious when he feels like it but the way acted when he worked for President Trump was disloyal, something no Marine should ever be.

[Albion Wilde]

God bless you, truthteller, and thank you for your service.

[minnesota_bound]

Paraphrasing: Trump said in his recent rally in Alaska that General Mattis said it would take 3 years to defeat ISIS. Trump did not think it should but Mattis said it would. When Trump visited Iraq he asked the general in charge there how long as he knew the people there knew what it would really take. The general answered 3 weeks or less. Trump said he would call him soon. He did after getting back to the White House and made the call and asked again how long. He was told 3 weeks or less and Trump gave the go ahead.

It took less then 3 weeks to kill I think Trump said around 98% or there about. He was told where the remaining ones were hold up and was asked permission to kill the rest and Trump said he was hesitate and said do we really need to kill them, maybe ask them to surrender and he was told they do not surrender. Back and forth a bit but he finally said go ahead and ISIS was defeated.

Now you know why the backstabber Mattis hates Trump.

As for Operation Linebacker, it was the the people in the know knew what to do to defeat the communists and showed just how quick it could be done.

The democrats and the rinos back then and the backstabber military officers in the Pentagon threw it all away which led to the South Vietnam being defeated and the killing of millions of people all over ego and pride and vindictiveness.

[Howie66]

“Chihuahua Mattis” would have been appropriate, too.

[Howie66]

Same MO as in Vietnam.

[x]

Generals, like politicians, are more likely to be jerks and @holes than not. The question is, are they effective in battle.

[AmericanInTokyo]

Some people would just love an Augusto Pinochet. And further, would scrap the Constitution and make him president for life.

[AmericanInTokyo]

Free Republic has been around I think for nearly 25 1/2 years now, and outside of a six-year spin with Trumpism, has never ever been particularly in favor of Trump and in fact, has been pretty strongly CONSERVATIVE, CONSTITUTIONAL and pro-Bush 2, Cheney, Reagan, Rumsfeld, all along the line, Trump polled pretty low here anecdotally, even Giuliani I think had more support for President. (very anti-communist I might add, such as against the Kim Jong Un regime).
I think it is an aberration that is starting to run its course. Particularly if indictment occurs.

[Ultra Sonic 007]

has been pretty strongly CONSERVATIVE, CONSTITUTIONAL and pro-Bush 2, Cheney

"Conservative, Constitutional" and "pro-Bush 2, Cheney" are contradictions in terms.