Fox Military Affairs Commentator Quits

[RED]

What's with these ad hominem attacks ? An LTC who gets "passed over" is suspect. And David "Your Cheatin' Heart" Petraeus is a paradigm of military and personal virtue, no ?

For the record, Petraeus was a 4 star General and Peters was a LtCol. To compare their service, you would have to understand the difference between private Gomer Pyle and Gunnery Sgt. Vince Carter.

And then there is Bolton... his daddy was a fire fighter and Bolton worked his butt off to get into college and was smart enough to make his way into Yale University where he graduated Summa Cum Laude.

[blackhawknj]

Peters was a "mustang", started as an EM, went through OCS, served honorably. Petraeus was a West Point graduate, joined that alumni association, rose to the highest rank, hailed as our "best" military leader in a generation-then we learned who he really was.
What was it Oliver Cromwell said when he was rebuked for having officers who were competent but "lowborn" ?
"I would rather have a plain russet-coated Captain that knows what he fights for, and loves what he knows, than that which you call a Gentleman and is nothing else."

[Vern Humphrey]

Note that Lieutenant Colonel Peters is retired.

Under Article 2 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he (like myself) remains under military law for the rest of his life.

Under Article 88 of the UCMJ, Contempt Toward Officials is a crime. And he committed that crime when he referred to "a destructive and ethically ruinous administration."

If he wants to play that game, he has to submit his unqualified resignation and give up his retired pay first.

[togor]

Note that Lieutenant Colonel Peters is retired.

Under Article 2 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he (like myself) remains under military law for the rest of his life.

Under Article 88 of the UCMJ, Contempt Toward Officials is a crime. And he committed that crime when he referred to "a destructive and ethically ruinous administration."

If he wants to play that game, he has to submit his unqualified resignation and give up his retired pay first.

Did he? That would seem to be Constitutionally-protected speech aimed at the civilian government. What does precedent say?

[Vern Humphrey]

You're perfectly free to visit the Supreme Court and tell them the UCMJ is unconstitutional -- in your opinion.

[leftyo]

togor never having served probably doesnt understand that service members dont have the same "rights" as others.

[Roadkingtrax]

Did he? That would seem to be Constitutionally-protected speech aimed at the civilian government. What does precedent say?

Like all things, this requires further examination. The gentleman could certainly resign his commission and retain his retirement.

Here's the grey area: "If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article." Are the good Lt. Col's statements personally contemptuous? We certainly know they are not sycophantish, which is what Trump and his state news channel viewership requires.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2010/6/24/878961/-

[togor]

togor never having served probably doesnt understand that service members dont have the same "rights" as others.

I asked a question. Something you need not do because of your extensive knowledge base in everything.

[Richard Turner/Turner Saddlery]

From Article 88 of the UCMJ:

Any commissioned officer [and, under Article 2, this includes any retired officer] who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present, shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

First, in its elaboration of Article 88, the manual states:

It is immaterial whether the [contemptuous] words are used against the official in an official or private capacity.

Second, the manual notes:

Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article … aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.

The Military Judges Benchbook defines that "Contemptuous" means insulting, rude, disdainful or otherwise disrespectfully attributing to another qualities of meanness, disreputableness, or worthlessness.

In particular to the U.S. Army:

"Under Article 2 of the UCMJ, the Army maintains court-martial jurisdiction over retired personnel. Army Regulation 27-10, Military Justice, states “Retired members of a regular component of the Armed Forces who are entitled to pay are subject to the provisions of the UCMJ . . . and may be tried by court-martial for violations of the UCMJ that occurred while they were on active duty or while in a retired status.” Department of the Army policy, however, does limit these trials to cases where extraordinary circumstances are present. The Army normally declines to prosecute retired Soldiers unless their crimes have clear ties to the military, or are clearly service discrediting. If necessary to facilitate courts-martial action, retired Soldiers may be ordered to active duty.

The regulation adds that “Retired Reserve Component Soldiers are subject to recall to active duty for the investigation of UCMJ offenses they are alleged to have committed while in a Title 10 duty status, for trial by court-martial, or for proceedings under UCMJ, Article 15.” Forfeitures imposed under the UCMJ, Article 15 may even be applied against a Soldier’s retired pay".

[togor]

Is calling Presidident Obama a pu__y on TV sufficiently contemptuous?

[Roadkingtrax]

Is calling Presidident Obama a pu__y on TV sufficiently contemptuous?

Beat me to it. No doubt a quick search will show it was lauded.

[leftyo]

I asked a question. Something you need not do because of your extensive knowledge base in everything.

so you dont like it when people point out things to you? ha, why the heck do you do it to others then?!!!!