Snc's Meeting Summary

Beto explains what advocacy means in town meetings and mentions that money is deeply corrosive to policy, outcomes and our democracy. Not everyone that serves in congress is seen as dependable with the 10% approval rating from citizens but when he was sworn in, he found out that they turned out to be hard working and service oriented. The reason for it having a low approval rate was that every single decision is driven by money which influences the way that congress vote on the 2,000 legislations that comes before them. At the end of the day, money won’t change people’s issues and Beto promises that it will never even change his. Beto asked to be on the Veteran affair committee which is seen as an unpopular undertaking and claims to be one of two people who do not take a dime of money from special interest groups. He assures that the public doesn’t have to worry if he is voting for something with ulterior motives. Beto and Ro Khanna from California are the two congressmen that don’t take PAC money and want to generate a bill that removes PAC money from politics. From his organizations findings, they were able to

SNC gave a detailed brief that outlined a precise plan that was coherent and directed towards mission accomplishment. SNC contradicted a well thought out plan of action with a monotone voice and his use of filler words, such as, uh and um, coupled with a lack of passion. The lack of passion was seen in his sense of urgency as SNC spent 80% of his time briefing his 5 paragraph order that adversely affected his sense of urgency. SNC was able to secure the objective quickly, but loss situational awareness of his surroundings and enemy position that initially created confusion when engaged by the enemy. SNC was able to make clear and concise decisions in an appropriate amount of time that efficiently utilized his fellow candidates. This expedited

SNC conducted an above average analysis of what he expected the enemy to do upon contact. SNC’s scheme of maneuver was vague and could not be executed without significant oversight. SNC’s tasking statements were weak and lacked a purpose. SNC’s formations, particularly his squad column fire team column while in the open area, did not provide effective security en route to his objective. Upon enemy contact SNC stood and began talking to his squad but did not use the ADDRAC format; SNC spoke at just over a conversational tone. SNC directed his squad to suppress the enemy sniper and continue to move to the objective; SNC’s squad laid still while one of the fire team members openly questioned SNC’s decision. SNC changed his mind and directed the

Candidate Davis delivered his 5 paragraph order covering most of the key points associated with the order. SNC’s orientation was confusing; SNC briefed that the current location was where the cache was located, then proceeded to state that the fire team needed to advance to the second set of grid points to complete the objective. This information is confusing and is proof that the fire team leader did not fully comprehend the order briefed to him. SNC stuttered consistently, displaying his uncertainty of the information that he was relaying. SNC improperly stated his TCM’s and informed his team they would utilize a column formation from the “assault to attack” and a column from the “attack to assault”. Upon reaching the objective, the fire

Candidate Hays' attempt to brief the initial five paragraph order and take charge of his fire team did not work in his favor. There were times when SNC reiterated certain briefing points which displayed a lack of confidence rather than a sense of clarity. Other than the Mission, SNC failed to brief all the key points of the order. SNC seemed unclear on the mission and what needed to get done although, SNC did verbally address an initial plan of how to attempt negotiation of the obstacle, prior to the actual execution. SNC made the vital mistake of not briefing nor posting security. Upon execution of the problem, SNC's initial plan did not appear to be well thought out and unsafe as he attempted to have his fire team along with himself

SNC did not calculate the correct distance to the objective. SNC tasked fire team members to set up the terrain model, but failed to verify and correct the mistakes they had made. SNC made eye contact with his squad members during the brief. SNC had poor vocal control, stumbling over his words and using filler words such as “uh” and “um” throughout the brief. SNC also briefed information in the wrong order and repeated information that he had already mentioned. During the execution, SNC had excellent control over his squad, making decisions quickly, giving commands clearly, and moving his subordinates with a sense of urgency. After the squad neutralized the enemy, SNC had the casualties brought to the objective location. When SNC attempted

Candidate Merritt briefed all the necessary requirements for his five paragraph order. While briefing, SNC had his entire fire team take a knee conducting security looking away from him and the obstacle while he briefed. Because of this, his fire team was not truly oriented to the problem. SNC did not conduct any type of leader's recon and came up with a plan that was severely lacking in detail and was more of a check in the box. While executing the mission, SNC got stumped and could not figure out how to adapt his plan. He paused for a minute while he tried to figure out a new plan, losing crucial time. While SNC addressed security, he did not enforce it. The candidate on security spent more time watching the problem be executed as

SNC stated all of the required components of the five paragraph order maintaining a calm, confident demeanor with minimal use of filler words. The first two negative points arose immediately after SNC completed the brief. Although he understood what was required to accomplish the mission he failed to develop a plan of execution. Because of his lack of planning and before he made an attempt to do anything, the first words out of the candidate’s mouth after his brief were “Do you have any suggestions for what to do?” He posed this question to the two fire team (FT) members not posted as security. Once one of the FT members gave the first suggestion SNC immediately jumped back into his role as the FT leader. This was most evident when SNC recognized

SNC failed to accurately calculate the azimuth with in standard. SNC confidently issued a well-organized five paragraph order in a clear, authoritative tone void of filler words. SNC’s Scheme of Maneuver was clear, concise, and illustrated SNC’s use of sound tactical judgment and ability to consider future requirements. SNC issued tasks to each fire team which were consistent with the mission and addressed potential casualties. SNC moved his squad with a sense of urgency and displayed the ability to rapidly make decisions when faced with enemy contact and maneuver as required. However, SNC’s decision to assault through a lone enemy’s fighting position was inconsistent with the mission; the mission was to resupply a desperate squad with

Candidate Kautz briefed a detailed orientation with confidence and clarity. His five paragraph order was complete and briefed thoroughly to his fire team. Candidate Kautz was not the first one on the platform and stood in the back attempting to control his fire team. This caused him to lose control of members and not fully understand the points of friction. Candidate Kautz failed to display a sense of urgency and make decisions quickly when asked by his fire team. Though he maintained confident, his decision making ability lacked. Once he identified his solution would not work, there was a pause of over two minutes in which he stopped to create another solution to the problem. His fire team appeared to respect SNC and he was clearly

Candidate Goff immediately addressed security before briefing his order. SNC briefed in a rushed manner using many “ums” and “uhs,” showing he lacked confidence in his plan. When briefing, he referred to the scenario as an obstacle instead of treating it as a tactical situation. His fast brief was difficult for his fire team to follow, evident by their confusion at the beginning of the mission even though the initial plan was well developed. SNC had to direct his fire team’s actions he had just briefed in order for them to execute. This candidate lost his tactical and situational awareness, evident by his loud instructions throughout the task and the fire team dragging their weapons through the sewer tunnel making the execution extremely loud.

Candidate Huff did not brief the admin/logistics and command/signal paragraphs of his order. The rest of his order was briefed with shaky confidence involving heavy use of "ums." SNC did not establish security during his brief or during execution. SNC demonstrated inefficient use of his time by spending nearly sixty seconds re-slinging the teams rifles in the beginning of execution. Due to a lack of an initial plan following the brief, the team had to begin execution whileconducting reconnaissance and orienting to the problem. Once oriented, SNC was hesitant in deciding how to engage the problem. Once a scheme of maneuver was developed, he was able to communicate his guidance to the team members and begin driving his team toward mission

SNC delivered a complete five paragraph order addressing all required paragraphs. SNC stumbled over SNC’s own words at several times during the order but conveyed the majority of the information in an acceptable manner. SNC’s confidence was lacking during the delivery of the order which was evidenced by SNC’s lack of eye contact and unassertive tone. SNC asked the subordinates questions at the end of the order to ensure understanding. SNC briefed an initial plan. When SNC’s fire team received enemy contact SNC froze for several seconds before delivering the ADDRAC. SNC’s hesitation illustrated a weak ability to make decisions in a timely manner. SNC did not control the fire team during contact, rather the fire team moved on its own and

Candidate Smith only briefed what she was briefed by the instructor, completely failing to brief either admin and logistics or command and signal. Candidate Smith then brought her candidates on the objective, where the three who were not on security stared at the objective and suggested ways to traverse it. At no point was a coherent plan to complete the mission proposed. Candidate Smith immediately sought the advice of her fellow candidates without proposing an initial plan or creating guidelines of any kind. Candidate Smith was the tallest candidate in her fire team, but she delegated reaching the beam to shorter candidates, a misuse of the physical attributes she had at her disposal. Candidate Smith also failed to notice that one side of the obstacle had more clearance to utilize the rope than the other until nine minutes had already passed. Failing to take into account basic mission limitations was a trend, as Candidate Smith also did not account for the use of the rope, or how many candidates would be required to move the 55 gallon drum. Ultimately, no candidate traversed the obstacle, the first step to solving this

The previous week saw AT&T call the Justice Department to request a meeting between top antitrust officials and CEO Randall L. Stephenson. The November 6 meeting featured Stephenson, AT&T general counsel, David McAtee, new assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's antitrust division Makan Delrahim, and other Justice Department officials.