Posted on Nov 20, 2019
Should President Trump provide credibility back to UCMJ by charging to start with: Admiral Green, Adm Gilday, Secretary Spencer?
71.9K
2.7K
1.09K
389
389
0
For dereliction of Duty, Insubordination, and whatever else fits for their efforts to work around the Commander in Chiefs wish for the military.
In my opinion Green should immediately face the maximum reduction in Rank and be dishonorably discharged by President Trump.
In my opinion Green should immediately face the maximum reduction in Rank and be dishonorably discharged by President Trump.
UCMJ
Toxic Leadership
Senior Leaders
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 188
3
3
0
I don't think President Trump should provide anything except a resignation and/or a "guilty" plea to charges against him.
(3)
(0)
4
3
1
It's a shame, POTUS overruled Commanders, pretty much trampled on the UCMJ. I'm definitely getting out.
(4)
(1)
AN Sam Moring
AN Sam Moring
enjoy the VA hospitals that are doing much better, no thanx to obama/biden 8 yrs, how was it then?
enjoy the VA hospitals that are doing much better, no thanx to obama/biden 8 yrs, how was it then?
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
Let’s all remember the determination of guilt or innocence in the UCMJ is “preponderance of the evidence” which means more than 50% likely one way or the other. Even with all the prosecutorial malfeasance, they were still not able to effectively present their case on all but one BS charge and didn’t even charge the others present in the same photo.
The conduct of the senior Navy leadership in the wake of the verdict and POTUS’s decision to reinstate Chief Gallagher’s rank is abhorrent and should be punished accordingly. The military has become a petri dish for whatever PC, social justice nonsense fringe extremists and partisan zealots are pushing for at any given point in time; readiness, morale, and retention have all suffered because of it. Senior officers need to quit with knee-jerk policy decisions that undermine those three things and start saying “no“ to blind civilian outrage over tactics, techniques, and procedures they don’t fully understand.
The conduct of the senior Navy leadership in the wake of the verdict and POTUS’s decision to reinstate Chief Gallagher’s rank is abhorrent and should be punished accordingly. The military has become a petri dish for whatever PC, social justice nonsense fringe extremists and partisan zealots are pushing for at any given point in time; readiness, morale, and retention have all suffered because of it. Senior officers need to quit with knee-jerk policy decisions that undermine those three things and start saying “no“ to blind civilian outrage over tactics, techniques, and procedures they don’t fully understand.
(3)
(0)
SFC Benjamin Varlese
No the only reason he wasn’t convicted was the prosecution failed to make its case proving he committed the crimes by a preponderance of the evidence. An individual is presumed innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. My perspectives and opinion play no role in the determination of his guilt or innocence nor do yours. Regardless of your beliefs stemming from your personal understanding of the details of the case, he was found not guilty of all but a BS charge which he was later pardoned for. Common sense dictates for the acknowledgement of those simple facts and is representative of sound judgment; emotional vitriol and personal attacks based on one’s cognitive and perceptual biases denies them and demonstrates irrational ignorance. That being said, it would appear that the former is more professional and in line with the Army Values whereas the latter sets a poor leadership example runs counter to the standards established by the Officer Corps. Have a good day
(1)
(0)
SP6 Christopher Haydon
The eyewitnesses make a different statement, and they also don't have the trust or respect for Gallagher needed to be effective in their mission. CPT McGowan is correct - Gallagher is a sociopath, and is using the SEALS to satisfy his pathological needs. His men don't trust him. How could an Article 32 Court be more objective than that? I can answer that question with the same words I learned about military justice over 50 years ago - the system is an imperfect search for the truth. In Vietnam he would be removed from command, as was Calley, and would be lucky to survive at all.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
10 USC 851:
(c) Before a vote is taken on the findings, the military judge shall, in the presence of the accused and counsel, instruct the members of the court as to the elements of the offense and charge them—
(1) that the accused must be presumed to be innocent until his guilt is established by legal and competent evidence beyond reasonable doubt;
Standard in a court martial is the same as civilian court - beyond reasonable doubt.
(c) Before a vote is taken on the findings, the military judge shall, in the presence of the accused and counsel, instruct the members of the court as to the elements of the offense and charge them—
(1) that the accused must be presumed to be innocent until his guilt is established by legal and competent evidence beyond reasonable doubt;
Standard in a court martial is the same as civilian court - beyond reasonable doubt.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
The way I see it is President Trump did the same thing President Obama did when he pardoned Bergdahl and Manning.
(3)
(0)
SFC David Xanten
SP6 Christopher Haydon - You're right, They Committed Treason and Deserting in the Face of the Enemy. and Gallagher was found guilty of having his picture taken with a dead enemy combatant. big woop. And what happened to the others in the picture?.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
The President should leave this matter to the Navy's leadership. His "wish for the military" is contrary to order and discipline. Mr. Trump does not have the authority to dishonorably discharge any military service member, although he might be able to reduce a four-star admiral or general in rank to his or her permanent grade. And, of course, Secretary Spencer is not under the UCMJ. CPO Gallagher acted irresponsibly and was appropriately punished, but was afforded an honorable retirement at his rank. He has been treated more than fairly.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
My opinion is the President. should have not stuck his nose in something he dies not understand. And leadership like Spencer know better to follow the chain of command, rather than playing games. The military can only function properly when they followh the riles and laws and are committed to the Constitution,even when that means defying an illegal order. I dont get a pass if I kill someone and. neither should a military officer. its not gamesmanship its life or death consequences.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Even though from WIKIPEDIA, a good article on civilian control of the military.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_control_of_the_military
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_control_of_the_military
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
Is truly sad that this entire case is serving the purposes of our true enemy only. To divide the military by politicizing it. Isn't doing that supposed to be illegal? The reasons for keeping the military out of politics is as plain as the nose on your face. A politically divided force is a weak force, which is exactly what our enemies want. It's exactly what our enemies are currently doing to the civilian population. Our enemies are dividing us so that they can conquer us, plain & simple. If you can't see it, count yourself among the many who are already blinded by the enemy.
(2)
(0)
SP6 Christopher Haydon
That's the basis of my original comment. "Good order and discipline" is not just a bumper sticker. It has real meaning.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
I agree, he should be charged with insubordination. It makes no difference if the military member knows more than the Commander in Chief, it’s the fact that the constitution says the President is the final authority and the senior Navy leadership tried to do an end around on the President.
I’m sure MacArthur knew more than Truman BUT when the President says this is the way we are going, that’s the end of the story.
Truman was correct to fire MacArthur and Trump should take action against any military commander who doesn’t follow the letter and the spirit of the President’s lawful orders.
I’m sure MacArthur knew more than Truman BUT when the President says this is the way we are going, that’s the end of the story.
Truman was correct to fire MacArthur and Trump should take action against any military commander who doesn’t follow the letter and the spirit of the President’s lawful orders.
(2)
(0)
SP6 Christopher Haydon
Going outside the chain of command as Trump did does nothing for the good order and discipline of the military. His understanding of the military is nil.
(0)
(0)
CW3 Brian Litton
SP6 Christopher Haydon President Trump’s understanding of the military is completely irrelevant. By the Constitution, he’s the Commander in Chief so as long as he gives a lawful order, it must be followed. Presidents have made plenty of stupid lawful orders but officers below him must follow, it’s up to the people to vote him out if they don’t like it, not for military personnel to question it.
Also, the Commander in Chief cannot go outside the chain of command. He’s at the top and he has the authority to move down the chain anyway he pleases. Like any other Commander, President Trump, as Commander in Chief, has Command Authority. That means he has full authority to organize and employ orders however he considers necessary to accomplish the assigned task. Anyone under him (all US military personnel) who does not follow his orders is insubordinate. So the way any President decides to issue an order is, under the Constitution, the right way as long as it is lawful. Period.
Also, the Commander in Chief cannot go outside the chain of command. He’s at the top and he has the authority to move down the chain anyway he pleases. Like any other Commander, President Trump, as Commander in Chief, has Command Authority. That means he has full authority to organize and employ orders however he considers necessary to accomplish the assigned task. Anyone under him (all US military personnel) who does not follow his orders is insubordinate. So the way any President decides to issue an order is, under the Constitution, the right way as long as it is lawful. Period.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Read through most of the comments over this issue and it would seem that the site is turning more to politics rather than addressing military issues. One may be the CIC, but that doesn't mean I have to like him, respect him, or KHA. I DO need to follow lawful orders, even ones I don't like, to the best of my ability. That's the rules I agreed to when I "Upped and Re-Upped". I'll move on to another "political site" to express my opinions of the current person who occupies the Oval Office and wears the CIC hat.
(2)
(0)
SP6 Christopher Haydon
CPT Chris McGowan - Exactly. And encouraging that kind of behavior is sinister and is a black mark against our military.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google