Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
Captain of US aircraft carrier with growing coronavirus outbreak pleads for help
Capt. Brett E. Crozier, the Navy captain who was removed from command of the coronavirus-stricken aircraft carrier U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt, has tested positive for Covid-19, according to two Naval Academy classmates of Crozier’s who are close to him and his family.
A Navy spokesman declined to comment on Crozier’s Covid status.
The commander began exhibiting symptoms before he was removed from the warship on Thursday, two of his classmates said. Crozier was fired following a leak to The San Francisco Chronicle of a letter he had emailed to Navy leaders that detailed the failures on the service’s part to provide the necessary resources to swiftly move sailors off the carrier and disinfect areas on board as the virus spread through the ship.
The Trumpster is grossly politically incorrect. Uncle Geo. Patton was politically incorrect. So am I, often, with what I say and write. Political incorrectness is a non-issue. What matters are one's actions. (Uncle George slapped those soldiers. The Orange Abortion screws people every day with his decisions, his actions.) Captain Crozier acted to SAVE his crew. That is quite a different thing. Just the OPPOSITE, in fact.
"On Saturday, President Trump weighed in, saying, “I thought it was terrible what he did.”
What exactly is it that he did that you found terrible? Please do go on ... "To write a letter? I mean, this isn’t a class on literature."
I'm sorry, I'm still not quite clear here. Was it terrible that he wrote a letter per se, or that writing a letter was a poor choice of medium to communicate an urgent problem to his superiors?
“This is a captain of a massive ship that’s nuclear-powered and he shouldn’t be talking that way in a letter. He could call and ask and suggest.”
So it was terrible that he didn't call and ask and suggest? But that's what he did, at least according to this Foreign Policy story:
A source familiar with the matter told Foreign Policy that Capt. Brett Crozier had multiple conversations with the chief of staff to acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly on Monday, just hours before his plea for help leaked in the San Francisco Chronicle.
It begins to look like what you found so terrible was the mere fact that Captain Crozier wrote a letter. That he left a paper trail.
---
Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly said that he "had set up a direct line to [Captain Crozier] ... way before his letter was written." But as the article points out, making such a call would have violated chain of command protocol.
[A] former official who spoke to Foreign Policy said that Modly’s contention that he gave Crozier his personal contact information went around a chain of command that would normally go through the U.S. 7th Fleet in Japan and invited retribution against the skipper even before the letter was sent.
“If he uses that number and calls the secretary, his career is dead that instant,” a former high-ranking naval official told Foreign Policy. “Either you want to be shot or you want to be hung.”
Thanks, @msf. This thing totally stinks, all the way up the command chain, to and including the "commander-in-chief". There's a number of contradictory stories, but that's to be expected, as they haven't yet had time to synchronize their damned lies.
@Old_Skeet- Perhaps there's hope after all. I came across this small article in a current section of the San Francisco Chronicle:
3:27 p.m. Trump says he ‘may get involved’ over dismissal of Capt. Brett Crozier: President Trump was asked about Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly suggesting Capt. Brett Crozier was “too naïve or too stupid” to command the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt after Crozier brought public attention to an outbreak of coronavirus on the ship. “I haven’t heard it exactly,” Trump said. “I heard they had a statement that was made. If that were the statement, it’s a strong statement. Look, the letters shouldn’t have been sent and certainly they shouldn’t have been leaked. This is a military operation. I must tell you I’ve heard very good things about the gentleman — both gentlemen by the way. I will say this about both gentlemen. And I may look into it only from the standpoint that something should be resolved because I’m hearing good things about both people.” Asked what action he might take, Trump repeated he “may just get involved.” Trump continued: “You have two good people and they’re arguing. And I’m good, believe it or not, at settling arguments. I’m good at settling these arguments. So I may look into it in detail. And I’ll be able to figure it out very fast. But that was the statement. It’s a rough statement. But look, the letter should not have been sent to many people, unclassified. That was a mistake. It’s a mistake that shouldn’t have been made. Because it’s unfair to the families of the people on the ship because they get nervous. And it shows weakness. And there’s nothing weak about us now, not anymore. We have the strongest military we’ve ever had. And we’re not going to be showing weakness to anybody. Because that ship is incredible, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. And we don’t want to be doing writing letters. We don’t want to have letter-writing campaigns where the fake news finds a letter or gets a leak. We don’t want that. So, the letter shouldn’t have been sent. With all of that said, his career prior to that was very good. So I’m going to get involved and see exactly what’s going on there, because I don’t want to destroy somebody for having a bad day.”
Note: this article may be found in the link given above by scrolling down to the 3:27 PM entry.
@Old_Joe ... Captain Crozier might not get his ship back; but, he just might get promoted! As Trump says ... I'll look into it ... review it ... and go from there. I'm glad to learn that Trump recanted.
I've got a minority, and more cynical, view of Modly's "recant".
Modly's remark (for which he flew at least 4,000 miles - the distance from Hawaii to Guam - to deliver in person), was that either Captain Crozier was stupid to think that his letter would not be leaked or Captain Crozier intended to have the letter leaked.
I read that as way of phrasing his accusation that the Captain deliberately leaking the letter without directly saying so. Of course he wasn't saying that Captain Crozier was stupid, else he'd have been impugning the integrity of the Naval Academy that graduated Captain Crozier.
Modly's "recant" merely made clear what he was saying in the first place. He was accusing Captain Crozier of deliberately leaking the letter. And he said as much:
“I believe, precisely because he is not naive and stupid, that he sent his alarming email with the intention of getting it into the public domain in an effort to draw public attention to the situation on his ship”
OTOH, Modly must himself be naive or stupid. Or as the American Conservative put it in a piece calling for Modly to resign:
Modly criticized Crozier for being either “too naive” or “stupid” for circulating his letter to maybe 20 people, and then he delivers a speech to a crew of thousands and somehow doesn’t think it was going to leak the minute after he finished.
@msf- Yes, that's exactly the way that I interpreted Modly's comments also. What I don't know is if Modly's "clarification" was specifically directed by Trump, or merely an attempt to mollify Trump and cause him to lose interest. If directed, that may be all that Trump intends to do.
My personal suspicion is that Captain Crozier had initially reported the situation through channels, and had reason to believe that the naval command, for whatever reason, was not likely to be responsive in a timely manner. He then forwarded the information to his family in Santa Rosa. From here, it's total speculation, but it seems conceivable that the family forwarded that information to the San Francisco Chronicle. If that is so, it's hard to believe that the family of a Navy captain would be so naive as to do that without the knowledge and implied consent of Captain Crozier.
With respect to Captain Crozier's judgement regarding the response of the upper command, it's reasonable to believe that a naval captain is experienced enough to be able to read between the lines of official communications, and is quite capable of detecting bullshit when he sees it.
The only remaining hope is that Trump feels enough heat to ease up on Captain Crozier.
Note: The original wording of this post has been edited, because upon re-reading it was evident that I had presented certain assumptions as facts that are not actually in evidence.
From the timeline (see timeline page for embedded links/citations):
March 26: TR begins testing entire crew for COVID-19. In Washington, Acting Navy Secretary Modly and other Navy officials say the carrier will pull into port in Guam, fulfilling plans for a second port visit there, and that no TR sailor will be allowed to leave the pier, save those being treated at Naval Hospital Guam.
March 27: TR is pierside in Guam for the second time in its deployment.
March 28: Eight sailors have been sent to Naval Hospital Guam for treatment for COVID-19.
Saturday, March 29:
Modly tells his chief of staff, Bob Love, to contact Crozier, and the two exchange emails.
Crozier and his superior officers are “struggling to reach a consensus on a plan of action, according to three people familiar with the discussions,” the Washington Post reported. “Among them were [Crozier's immediate boss] Rear Adm. Stuart Baker, who was embarked on the ship as its strike group commander, and Adm. John Aquilino, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. Both admirals favored smaller mitigation efforts than Crozier wanted because of concerns about taking the carrier out of action and jeopardizing the mission.”
Monday, March 30
Love talks with Crozier by telephone, according to Modly, who said his staffer made it “very clear that if [Crozier] felt that he was not getting the proper response from his chain of command that he had a direct line into [Modly’s] office…The CO told my chief of staff that he was receiving those resources and he was fully aware of the Navy’s response, only asking that he wished the crew could be evacuated faster.”
Later: Crozier sends an unclassified 4-page memo via unclassified email to 20 or 30 Navy leaders, including his staff and people inside and outside his chain of command.
Speaking of facts which are not in evidence (at least to my knowledge) is the charge that Captain Crozier forwarded his letter to "20 or 30" navy leaders. It seems to me that if that information were the result of an accurate investigation, there would be no speculation as to the exact number of copies.
Speaking of facts which are not in evidence (at least to my knowledge) is the charge that Captain Crozier forwarded his letter to "20 or 30" navy leaders. It seems to me that if that information were the result of an accurate investigation, there would be no speculation as to the exact number of copies.
The timeline giving the 20 to 30 figure does cite its source. No, it wasn't from a Trump press briefing where Trump pulls "facts" out of thin air. It was from a Modly press briefing where he announced that Rear Admiral Baker relieved Captain Crozier of command at Modly's direction.
Modly acknowledged that Captain Crozier had sent the letter up the chain of command, but he said that the letter was also emailed to a "broad array of other people". To whom we may never know.
When asked to clarify whether the letter had been sent up the chain of command, Modly seemed to pull the 20 or 30 figure out of the ether: "and you’re right, it did go to his – to the task group commander, to Admiral Aquilino, to the air boss. But it was copied to 20 or 30 other people, OK?"
Also worth noting from that briefing session was Modly's response to the question: "Do you believe that he leaked the letter? " Modly answerd: "Well, I have no information nor am I trying to suggest that he leaked the information." Emphasis added.
"We learned that the trip of former acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly to Guam on Monday to harangue the sailors of the USS Theodore Roosevelt, there to clean the ship of coronavirus and to help the crew infected with it, cost taxpayers $243,151.65, according to estimates by a Navy official. He flew in a modified Gulfstream jet that costs $6,946.19 an hour to fly. The flight time to and from Guam was 35 hours."
Comments
"To write a letter? I mean, this isn’t a class on literature."
I'm sorry, I'm still not quite clear here. Was it terrible that he wrote a letter per se, or that writing a letter was a poor choice of medium to communicate an urgent problem to his superiors?
“This is a captain of a massive ship that’s nuclear-powered and he shouldn’t be talking that way in a letter. He could call and ask and suggest.”
So it was terrible that he didn't call and ask and suggest? But that's what he did, at least according to this Foreign Policy story: It begins to look like what you found so terrible was the mere fact that Captain Crozier wrote a letter. That he left a paper trail.
---
Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly said that he "had set up a direct line to [Captain Crozier] ... way before his letter was written." But as the article points out, making such a call would have violated chain of command protocol. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/03/navy-blindsided-by-coronavirus-plea-carrier-captain-crozier-theodore-roosevelt/
Modly's remark (for which he flew at least 4,000 miles - the distance from Hawaii to Guam - to deliver in person), was that either Captain Crozier was stupid to think that his letter would not be leaked or Captain Crozier intended to have the letter leaked.
I read that as way of phrasing his accusation that the Captain deliberately leaking the letter without directly saying so. Of course he wasn't saying that Captain Crozier was stupid, else he'd have been impugning the integrity of the Naval Academy that graduated Captain Crozier.
Modly's "recant" merely made clear what he was saying in the first place. He was accusing Captain Crozier of deliberately leaking the letter. And he said as much: OTOH, Modly must himself be naive or stupid. Or as the American Conservative put it in a piece calling for Modly to resign: Full timeline of events with copious links:
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/04/timeline-battle-uss-theodore-roosevelt/164408/?oref=d-river
My personal suspicion is that Captain Crozier had initially reported the situation through channels, and had reason to believe that the naval command, for whatever reason, was not likely to be responsive in a timely manner. He then forwarded the information to his family in Santa Rosa. From here, it's total speculation, but it seems conceivable that the family forwarded that information to the San Francisco Chronicle. If that is so, it's hard to believe that the family of a Navy captain would be so naive as to do that without the knowledge and implied consent of Captain Crozier.
With respect to Captain Crozier's judgement regarding the response of the upper command, it's reasonable to believe that a naval captain is experienced enough to be able to read between the lines of official communications, and is quite capable of detecting bullshit when he sees it.
The only remaining hope is that Trump feels enough heat to ease up on Captain Crozier.
Note: The original wording of this post has been edited, because upon re-reading it was evident that I had presented certain assumptions as facts that are not actually in evidence.
March 26: TR begins testing entire crew for COVID-19. In Washington, Acting Navy Secretary Modly and other Navy officials say the carrier will pull into port in Guam, fulfilling plans for a second port visit there, and that no TR sailor will be allowed to leave the pier, save those being treated at Naval Hospital Guam.
March 27: TR is pierside in Guam for the second time in its deployment.
March 28: Eight sailors have been sent to Naval Hospital Guam for treatment for COVID-19.
Saturday, March 29:
- Modly tells his chief of staff, Bob Love, to contact Crozier, and the two exchange emails.
- Crozier and his superior officers are “struggling to reach a consensus on a plan of action, according to three people familiar with the discussions,” the Washington Post reported. “Among them were [Crozier's immediate boss] Rear Adm. Stuart Baker, who was embarked on the ship as its strike group commander, and Adm. John Aquilino, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. Both admirals favored smaller mitigation efforts than Crozier wanted because of concerns about taking the carrier out of action and jeopardizing the mission.”
Monday, March 30And then magically, so long he won't be missed.
Acting secretary of the Navy resigns after calling ousted aircraft carrier captain 'stupid'
April 2 Press Briefing.
Modly acknowledged that Captain Crozier had sent the letter up the chain of command, but he said that the letter was also emailed to a "broad array of other people". To whom we may never know.
When asked to clarify whether the letter had been sent up the chain of command, Modly seemed to pull the 20 or 30 figure out of the ether: "and you’re right, it did go to his – to the task group commander, to Admiral Aquilino, to the air boss. But it was copied to 20 or 30 other people, OK?"
Also worth noting from that briefing session was Modly's response to the question: "Do you believe that he leaked the letter? " Modly answerd: "Well, I have no information nor am I trying to suggest that he leaked the information." Emphasis added.
At least not until he flew to Guam.
230 cases so far (April 7), with 1/5 of the crew yet to be tested.
https://navylive.dodlive.mil/2020/03/15/u-s-navy-covid-19-updates/
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/491236-esper-faces-tough-questions-on-firing-of-navy-captain
transcript: https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/06/politics/thomas-modly-transcript/index.html
Modly resigns: https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/07/politics/modly-resign-crozier-esper-trump/index.html
Resignation letter: https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/07/politics/thomas-modly-resignation-letter/index.html
"We learned that the trip of former acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly to Guam on Monday to harangue the sailors of the USS Theodore Roosevelt, there to clean the ship of coronavirus and to help the crew infected with it, cost taxpayers $243,151.65, according to estimates by a Navy official. He flew in a modified Gulfstream jet that costs $6,946.19 an hour to fly. The flight time to and from Guam was 35 hours."
Your tax dollars at work.