We do this one yet? Mattis stepping down...

[BehindBlueI's]

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/18/77120...he-battlefield

"I earned my spurs on the battlefield ... Donald Trump earned his spurs in a letter from a doctor," he said in a reference to a medical deferment for bone spurs that kept Trump from serving in the military during the Vietnam War.

Although Trump's nickname for Mattis was "mad dog" — a nickname the former general despised — Mattis said these days he feels more like "an emotional support animal. And that's really great, because now the airlines allow me to fly for free," he said.

I like this guy.

[blues]

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/18/77120...he-battlefield



I like this guy.

How could you not? He's got spurs that jingle, jangle, jingle...to spare.

[wvincent]

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/18/77120...he-battlefield



I like this guy.

Really? Mattis and Mcraven https://www.breitbart.com/national-s...er-the-better/ should familiarize themselves with Article 88 of the UCMJ. Then again they should already know it, with one of them being a "Patron Saint" and all.

[blues]

Really? Mattis and Mcraven https://www.breitbart.com/national-s...er-the-better/ should familiarize themselves with Article 88 of the UCMJ. Then again they should already know it, with one of them being a "Patron Saint" and all.

When the president flaunts the law, established rules and precedent he can and often does appear despotic. Yet he gets a pass for his behavior. (Because the opposition is so distasteful to us for any variety of well established reasons.)

When those who have served their countries honorably criticize a man who doesn't mind tearing down everyone around him, (former) friend and foe alike, they're expected to take the high road.

Don't get me wrong, wv, I respect both you and your point of view...but at a certain point...what goes around comes around, Article 88 or not.

[BehindBlueI's]

Really? Mattis and Mcraven https://www.breitbart.com/national-s...er-the-better/ should familiarize themselves with Article 88 of the UCMJ. Then again they should already know it, with one of them being a "Patron Saint" and all.

Mattis is retired. I don't know nothing about nothing, but from a law blog that purports to:

...former members of the armed services occupy a legal status somewhat distinct from that of ordinary citizens. Even as retirees, they remain bound by codes of military behavior that restrict the political participation of service members......Article 88 of the UCMJ criminalizes “contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State ...”

...Although the armed forces could employ this prohibition to restrain retirees’ political speech, the government has only initiated court-martial proceedings against one retired service member—nearly one hundred years ago in United States v. Salvagno. And the retiree in question—a former Army musician—was acquitted.

Moreover, military prosecutors have limited discretion to proffer charges against retirees for violations of the UCMJ. For example, AR 27-10, Military Justice, states, “Army policy provides that retired Soldiers ... will not be tried for any offense by courts-martial unless extraordinary circumstances are present. Prior to referral of courts-martial charges against retired Soldiers, approval will be obtained from the Criminal Law Division ... of the Assistant Secretary of the Army.”

Seems like he probably doesn't have much to worry about.

[revchuck38]

Really? Mattis and Mcraven https://www.breitbart.com/national-s...er-the-better/ should familiarize themselves with Article 88 of the UCMJ. Then again they should already know it, with one of them being a "Patron Saint" and all.

In theory, you're correct. But that assumes an emotionally and intellectually mature adult in the White House, and I'm not sure it would cover a response to a gratuitous personal attack from the President.

I googled it, and only one person has ever been charged under that article...and he was acquitted.

ETA: Shoot, I go out to pick up pizza and return to find the Blues Brothers beat me to it.

[wvincent]

Mattis is retired. I don't know nothing about nothing, but from a law blog that purports to:



Seems like he probably doesn't have much to worry about.

Did you even read what you so hastily did a cut and paste job on?
Nothing in that precludes it.
Senior Officers should gracefully retire, and not disparage the acting CIC.
Granted, the remarks by Mattis are chump change compare to McCray calling for the removal of the President.

[BehindBlueI's]

Did you even read what you so hastily did a cut and paste job on?

Yeah I read the whole thing with my mommy helping me sound out the big words. Then I got to pick out my own cookie.

After eating my cookie I reflected that it's pretty unclear that a retired general officer counts as a "commissioned officer" for the purposes of the particular article and if that prong fails there can be no conviction. I then reflected on the fact that it's been used exactly once for a retired officer, and that ended in a loss for the gov't. I then, based on the above facts and information, concluded that Mattis "probably doesn't have much to worry about."

I'm not sure how you got that " probably doesn't have much to worry about" means "precludes it." But I hope this sets your mind at ease that I did, in fact, read what I posted. I didn't time how long it took me to do the cut and paste or to look up a few sources to see if there was something to worry about. I apologize sincerely if you took it as "hasty" and will try to read and to do my editing of copyrighted material down for posting at a more leisurely pace so as not to further offend.

Oh, I also tried to find the 1918 case of United States v. Salvagno to see what the issue was causing the gov't loss, but couldn't find it free online.

Now you owe me a cookie, too.

[jrm]

Really? Mattis and Mcraven https://www.breitbart.com/national-s...er-the-better/ should familiarize themselves with Article 88 of the UCMJ. Then again they should already know it, with one of them being a "Patron Saint" and all.

.... land of the free (unless you retired from the military) and the home of the brave (except for the president he’s a chickenshit draft dodger). Play ball!

[blues]