How do you feel about veterans or Soldiers criticizing our President?

I was thinking about this back when Tulsi Gabbard was running for president. I liked her stance on some of the issues. Right up to the point that she started badmouthing Trump. Now I'm the first to admit Trump had left the door open to be criticized not because of the job he was doing as much for his Twitter posts. No active duty personnel, reserves, or national guard should run their mouth or post negative things about the chain of command. Tulsi Gabbard went even one step worse. You are really screwing the pooch by using your status as a member of the military to get votes while talking trash about the chain of command. Once your out talk all you want as long as you don't talk about your chain of command when you were in.

I have no issue with criticizing the President by Veterans. Any president or anyone else, by their actions, violates the oath took do not and will not get any respect from me. In my opinion, by doing so, that makes them Traitors. There are far too many that by their actions / inactions have violated the oath or abetted those that have. Free speech is that, Free Speech and guaranteed by the Constitution. Within the ranks, that could be a bit dicey as you most likely would find someone who liked the sitting CinC that you did not. The VFW magazine, in an election year doesn't take a stand. They introduce the candiadates and then you are on your own as it should be. They endorse none. Being a Veteran doesn't mean I gave up my rights to speak out and criticize a sitting President.

I’m retired so, I don’t work for the POTUS anymore. He is supposed to be working for me but, this one seems to be “broken” because he isn’t working at all. His failed policies have cost the lives of 13 service members and countless Afghan allies during his poor excuse for a pull out. We’ve had two MILLION ILLEGAL aliens pour across our southern border in the last year along with over four tons of Fentnyl. Oil is over $90 a barrel for the first time since 2014. Shelves at the grocery store are empty. China and North Korea are laughing at us and Russia is getting ready to invade Ukraine. Someone please name ONE thing he’s done right. I’ll wait.

When your on active duty you have to abide by the oath you took "follow thr orders or those appointed over you.," as a veteran out of the service you have the right to.

I have little respect for all democrat presidents in my life time except Truman. There have been 6 since '32.

The regs says service members and retires (those drawing pay) must refrain from publicly criticizing the chain of command including the President. Fine with that. The military serves the US Constitution and should not bear allegiance to a political party. We should not have political officers.

However, the enforcement of this rule has been asymmetrical. Active and retired military members publicly attacked President Trump and got promoted (example COL Alexander Vindman who falsely testified against Trump) while anyone criticizing Obama or Biden got a court martial or chaptered out.

Not only that there has been a purge to get rid of anyone not aligned to the Democrat Party and it’s politically correct woke mandates. So now we do have de facto “political officers”.

As for a veterans not much one can say; other than I would prefer you show more respect when speaking with me. As for serving military. I thinknit is inappropriate in a public setting. I do bwliwve that healthy political discussions using a professional tone and reference is a good thing.
Officers cannot and Senior NCOs are wise to follow the same guidance as do officers.

There are many gaps between US Code and UCMJ even though they overlap. Officers for life, but free speech is supreme, except in severe cases. Vets in general can fire for effect.

Commissioned officers are bound by UCMJ Article 88 which prohibits "contemptuous words" against the President, Vice President, and other civilian leaders. An officer could also be charged under Article 133.

For other service members, there is no clear and specific legal prohibition.

Depending on the circumstances, a charge under Article 134 could be a possibility, but I think the circumstances would have to be rather extreme to sustain such a charge.

I suppose a commander could interpret some remarks as "insubordination" but I doubt such a charge would be sustained if the remarks were simply about the president rather than TO the president.

For those not covered by Article 88, we are really talking about professionalism rather than adherence to law or regulation.

Professionalism dictates that a service member ought to avoid disrespectful language, especially of an ad hominem nature. Still, a service member can respectfully disagree with a President's decisions and policies, and can respectfully criticize such decisions and policies.

For retired service members, the UCMJ still applies, but there needs to be a nexus for the military to exert jurisdiction. Clearly there is a difference between, for example, some random Facebook user who happens to be retired military and who shares a disrespectful meme versus a press conference by a retired general officer appearing in uniform.

Finally, the original question includes "veterans," which is really stretching the point. A veteran certainly has at least the same right to criticize the President as any other individual -- one might argue that a veteran has an even greater moral right to criticize the President based on the fact that the veteran has demonstrated his or her willingness to sacrifice for the good of the nation.

As with almost everything in the real world, Ecclesiastes Chapter 3 applies. There is a time and a place for every thing. A remark that is perfectly acceptable in one time and place may be completely inappropriate in another time or another place.

while still in the service absolutely not. While retired or discharged that is your constitutional right.