How do we "police up" our recruiters?

Recruiters are policed in a variety of ways. The first step is the station commander, who reviews all the paperwork and talks to a potential recruit. The next step is the MEPS, where a recruit has to take the ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) and a physical. If they qualify on the ASVAB, and pass the physical (not guaranteed) they see a career counselor. The career counselor is the one who actually draws up the enlistment contract. This is a legal document explaining the length of service (to include individual ready reserve time after active duty), the recruit's Military Occupational Speciality, and, if there is a choice, where the recruit will be stationed after advanced individual training. This session is usually where the problems start. A lot of recruits don't actually read the contract. So, when they find out that the Army is not for them (usually in Basic Training), they say the "recruiter lied to them." Now the real policing starts. A recruiting company commander (not the commander of the company of the recruiter) is assigned to investigate the entire process from recruiter to MEPS. This has the same force as a pre-court martial investigation. Once it is done, the investigation goes through the recruiting battalion commander (a lieutenant colonel) and on to the recruiting brigade commander (a full colonel.) Either one of them can pull a recruiter out of a station, and do anything from a written letter of reprimand up to demotion. If the offense is bad enough, there may even be a court martial. That's pretty rare. Over the years, a series of scandals- from recruiters coaching recruits on the ASVAB, for example- have forced the Army Recruiting Command to really tighten up on standards- and quite often, the Company Commander and First Sergeant of a "bad" recruiter will also catch a reprimand. Physical standards also have been tightened up- it used to be that a recruit could lie about things like asthma, even schizophrenia (don't laugh- I saw it happen and the kid went to Iraq for two tours). Football players were notorious liars- they would deny ever having a concussion (name one football player who didn't take a hit that cleaned his clock) or deny having problems with their knees. The physical is awfully hard to catch problems- and the docs assume the recruit is telling the truth.

Remove the mission, no incentive to lie.

I dont know how you police up people being dishonest. How is it policed up in life in general? As you mentioned when you joined you had people lie to you about options which I would doubt, no offense, but recruiters don't choose options they will let you select whats available theres no incentive not to. Now the problem is many people know people who have joined or who are in or were in the military and somehow believe that makes them a subject matter expert. Basically unless the person your advice is coming from has availability to updated recruiting regulations and messages they have no idea what can get you disqualified and what makes you qualified. Now as far as your friend losing his MOS if he/she is losing their MOS I guess thats a good thing in the end because as you said we want the best men and women in the MOS's that they are qualified to be in. Now I believe that the recruiter should have been honest as well but Im not ready to blame just that recruiter when the applicant your friend had many chances to reveal accurate information. Not trying to lash out at you but it just seems that we are painting recruiters with broad strokes not all recruiters lie and the ones that do generally get found out.