GOP congresswoman brings a marine in UNIFORM to participate in GOP event.

[MissMarple]

Who else is doing this?

Just when you think they really can't be THAT stupid and conniving. The marine is in potential trouble, not the congress critter. Remember when the general did this? Was his name Boikin or something? He spoke at a church in uniform promoting his beliefs.

I found this at www.coloradopols.com

"A story making the rounds among liberal bloggers that originated at Talking Points Memo wonders whether a law was broken when Rep. Marilyn Musgrave introduced Marine Sgt. Brandon Forsyth at the Larimer County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner."


Apparently it is against the law for a member of the military to appear at a partisan function. The purpose of the law -- to separate the military from political matters -- is sound, so should this appearance be taken seriously as a "crime?"


Here is a link to their source at Josh Marshall's Talking Points.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007805.php

"I've heard from a number of active duty and retired members of the military, including a number of JAG lawyers, and unless there's something very different about Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) event in Colorado than the description of it that appeared in her local paper, it clearly violated the law.

There's another little detail one retired JAG officer brings up, however.

The uniformed member of the military who appears at such an event can be court-martialed for the violation. It's not some technicality in UCMJ terms. But there's no law against a politician or party leader putting them up to it or facilitating it. So there's no risk for them.

So Musgrave and whomever else organized the event is putting this guy's career on the line as well as encouraging this misconduct for their own partisan gain."


And to a reference on it at www.MetroDenverGreens.org

"This is an example of the unethical and manipulative behavior of the radical Republicans here in Colorado.

At the right is a photograph from the Larimer County Lincoln Day Dinner held last week. And here's the link to more photos from the event. (I'm also curious about what looks like uniformed law enforcement officers participating in the fundraising dinner -- 'Album 3'.)"

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. since boykin did it and got away from it

what are you dong to the lower enlisted... or officer, does not matter. Remember a LtGen got away with it... any defense lawyer that is half way competent will bring this up

[MADem]

3. Boykin got an LOI, I believe (slap on the wrist)

Letter of Instruction, FWIW--stays in your record until you transfer, then it is trashed.

[MADem]

2. He can participate, in CIVVIES, but he is not to use his rank

and if his rank comes up, he is obliged to make it clear that any remarks he makes are not endorsed by either the DOD or his branch of service.

A law WAS broken. No question. Partisan political event, different from something like the State of the Union, or a Veteran's Day event, that is geared to all. HUGE bozo no-no.

Guess he either slept through ethics class, or they cut it from the budget to repair more oil wells over there in EyeRack.

[MissMarple]

5. They can only attend out of uniform and as spectators not participants.

The law is in one the links. :hi:

[MADem]

8. By participate, I meant attend, as a citizen, not as a speaker n/t

[MissMarple]

6. Here is the policy.

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html2/d134410x.htm

4. POLICY It is DoD policy to encourage members of the Armed Forces (hereafter referred to as "members") to carry out the obligations of citizenship. While on active duty, however, members are prohibited from engaging in certain political activities. The following DoD policy shall apply: ...

4.1.1. A member on active duty may: ...
4.1.1.3. Attend partisan and nonpartisan political meetings, rallies, or conventions as a spectator when not in uniform.

4.1.2. A member on active duty shall not:

4.1.2.1. Use his or her official authority or influence for interfering with an election; affecting the course or outcome of an election; soliciting votes for a particular candidate or issue; or requiring or soliciting political contributions from others. ...

4.1.2.3. Participate in partisan political management, campaigns, or conventions (unless attending a convention as a spectator when not in uniform).

4.1.2.4. Make campaign contributions to another member of the Armed Forces or an employee of the Federal Government. ...

4.4.4. A member who violates any of the prohibitions in subparagraphs 4.1.2., 4.2.1., 4.3.1., or 4.3.4., or enclosure 3, of this Directive may be subject to disciplinary or adverse administrative action under Service regulations. ...

E3.3. EXAMPLES OF PROHIBITED POLITICAL ACTIVITIES

E3.3.8. Speak before a partisan political gathering, including any gathering that promotes a partisan political party, candidate, or cause.

[HereSince1628]

4. What the US does NOT need is a military interested in politics.

I cannot think of a single thing more likely to lead to the Napoleonic failure of American democracy.

When you look across the history of western democratic movements, you ought to be struck by the realization that MOST of the republics the revolutions put in place foundered on the shoals of dictatorships, many of them military juntas.

It makes me sick at heart to realize where the nation is perched and how quickly we came here.

[DURHAM D]

7. Sadly - the military is interested in politics - has been since

post WWII. That is what Ike warned us/them (military) about.

General Marshall (as in the guy who rebuilt Europe) thought that active duty military should not be allowed to vote period. He was afraid they would align themselves with one party and become a single issue voting block. Just look at the voting percentages of the officers (90% through 2000) and the enlisted (65-66%) for repugs. Gen. Marshall's fears have come true.

Giant defense contracts are awarded to companies that don't really make a product - we just run the money through the military turn it over to repug companies that then give it back to repugs on certain committees as campaign donations and repug presidential candidates.

We now have publicly funded campaigns but just for repugs - our tax dollars at work.

[HereSince1628]

9. Maybe but I am not sure. Conscription played a major role in mixing

the socio-economic structure and the partisan alliances resulting from that.

I think that an all-volunteer army self aware of itself and the deadly risks it faces is a force that is not representative of the cross section of America.

I am NOT saying it produces ONLY republicans and conservatives, I am saying it draws on people who share the notion that voluntary enlistment, including service as a combatant is a good choice.

Being subject to make that choice predestines volunteers to not represent the broad American viewpoints. Looking at the recruitment difficulties the military is experiencing it seems reasonable to say that special viewpoint is far far beyond that of a majority of high school and college-aged Americans.

[TankLV]

10. It's only a crime if a DEMOCRAT does it.

And I am being DEADLY serious here.

[MissMarple]

11. It's a crime, but only Democrats and any opposition are held to account.

I want my country back.