Image 01 Image 03

Wuhan Virus Watch: Navy May Reinstate Fired Captain Who Asked for Help with Coronavirus Outbreak

Wuhan Virus Watch: Navy May Reinstate Fired Captain Who Asked for Help with Coronavirus Outbreak

Trump threatens to adjourn Congress. Oxford University vaccine trials start next week. Significant coronavirus mutations discovered. Most NYC kids may already have the virus.

The US Navy may reinstate the captain, who was removed from his post earlier this month after publicly releasing a letter asking for help with the coronavirus outbreak aboard his ship.

Department officials told the Times that Adm. Michael M. Gilday, the chief of naval operations, has indicated that he may reinstate the ousted Capt. Brett Crozier.

Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a spokesman for the admiral, told The Hill that “no final decisions have been made.”

“As the Chief of Naval Operations has made clear, all options are on the table,” Christensen added in his statement. “That said, Adm. Gilday has received, and is reviewing the Preliminary Inquiry. It will take time for the report to be reviewed and endorsed by Adm. Gilday.”

Trump threatens to adjourn Congress during Coronvirus Task Force Briefing

In Wednesday’s session, President Donald Trump announced that he is considering adjoining Congress and using their absence to make political appointments.

“If the House will not agree to that adjournment I will exercise my constitutional authority to adjourn both chambers of Congress,” he said.

The president claimed his administration is understaffed and blamed congressional Democrats for holding up his confirmations and stonewalling his agenda.

Trump added that he has the constitutional authority to dismiss both chambers and accused Congress of failing the American people and shirking their responsibilities as elected leaders

The President termed Pro-forma sessions “scams.”

“The current practice of leaving town, while conducting phony pro forma sessions, is a dereliction of duty that the American people cannot afford during this crisis,” an angry Trump told reporters at his daily White House briefing on the coronavirus crisis.

“It is a scam that they do. It’s a scam and everyone knows it, and it’s been that way for a long time,” Trump said.

No U.S. president has ever used the authority, included in the Constitution, to adjourn both chambers of Congress if they cannot agree on a date to adjourn.

It was not immediately clear if Congress’ current absence from Washington because of the global pandemic could be classified as being due to a failure to agree on an adjournment date.

I anticipate there will be a robust discussion in the next few days about whether Trump can actually invoke the “Adjournment Clause.” It turns out that Justice Scalia wrote that the President could use the adjournment power to block Senate “intransigence,” which can be reviewed by Legal Insurrection readers who want more background on this tactic.

The full briefing is here:

Oxford University to begin tests of its coronavirus vaccine on humans next week

Faster, please.

Hopes of eliminating the coronavirus were raised today after leading British experts revealed trials of a vaccine would begin on humans next week.

Oxford University scientists are confident they can get jab for the incurable disease rolled out for millions to use by autumn.

Tests of the experimental jab on different animals have shown promise – and the next step is to use it on humans to prove it is safe.

The Oxford team are one of hundreds worldwide racing to develop a COVID-19 jab, which experts fear could take 18 months.

More than 70 vaccines are currently in development, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

‘Significant’ coronavirus mutation discovered, could make vaccine search ‘futile’

Unfortunately, the virus may mutate to the point that a vaccine is not a practical solution.

Researchers have discovered what they described as a “significant” mutation of the novel coronavirus, which they believe “raises the alarm” that the search for a vaccine could become “futile” down the line.

The study, published on the repository, notes researchers were able to analyze a sample of SARS-CoV-2 from India on January 27 and found a mutation that “leads to weaker receptor binding capability.” The receptor, known as ACE2, is an enzyme in a person’s lungs.

Most NYC kids ‘probably’ already have coronavirus, says one doctor

One New York City pediatrician believes most of the city’s children “probably” already have coronavirus and are serving as vectors to spread the disease.

Dr. Dyan Hes at New York City’s Gramercy Pediatrics advised parents to assume their children have the virus if they contract even mild symptoms consistent with the disease.

“I think that probably 80 percent of the children have coronavirus. We are not testing children. I’m in New York City. I can’t get my patients tested,” Hes said during an interview at CBS News.

“And we have to assume, if they are sick, they have coronavirus. Most of them, probably 80 to 90 percent of them, are asymptomatic.”

Animals reportedly missing guests at mountain zoo in Colorado

Keepers at the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado report that many animals, including species like giraffes that aren’t generally drawn to humans, have been clamoring for affection and attention of the staff in the wake of the institution’s closure due to coronavirus.

“For a lot of our animals, the guests who visit are a great form of enrichment,” said Rachel Wright, the zoo’s public relations and social media manager. “The orangutans and gorillas, human primates we call them … they watch us through the glass the same as we watch them. They’re interested in what we’re doing, and they’re intelligent animals, so they definitely notice when people aren’t coming through.”

Zoo staff remain at work, so the animals are still getting dedicated and top-notch care, training and the human interaction that comes with it, Wright said.

But that’s not the same as having more than 2,000 admirers, window-tappers and treat-givers flowing by on a sunny spring day.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


From what I read at the Spectator, this captain’s immediate superior officer was situated in a cabin, onboard, thirty feet away from his own. Yet, rather than airing his concerns to this man, the captain chose to deliberately go not just outside the chain of command, but, outside the military, to the media, to air his complaints.

Until I hear otherwise, as far as the underlying facts, this guy deserved to be canned. We don’t need leakers who use the media to air complaints in a self-aggrandizing display, when such matters are best dealt with internally.

    maxmillion in reply to guyjones. | April 16, 2020 at 11:10 am

    Maybe his boss was a political tool. The CO cared about his crew. The truth will out.

      txvet2 in reply to maxmillion. | April 16, 2020 at 3:08 pm

      And maybe this was another of Obama’s political stooges taking the political course to embarrass the navy and Trump instead of taking his complaint up his chain of command. He could have gotten away with it in Obama’s Navy. Not any more, I hope.

      Arminius in reply to maxmillion. | April 17, 2020 at 12:23 am

      Maybe he was a political tool. So what? That’s what you have to deal with in the armed forces; the bad and the good.

      The bottom line is you don’t tell the world that a multi billion dollar national asset is crippled. For any reason, no matter how much you care about his crew. As a matter of fact if you really care about your crew the message that you want to send to the world is that you are healthy, fit, and ready for the fight. Even if it’s not entirely true.

      You have to be able to fight hurt. That’s the good thing about boxing; three three minute rounds is a lot harder than it sounds. As a matter of fact when I practiced (I never really got good at it) Krav Maga the roughly equivalent of black belt involved getting cold cocked first. Then fighting your way out of it. There is such a thing as Fully Mission Capable (FMC). Then there’s Partially Mission Capable (PMC). I’ve never served in a unit that could honestly claim to be FMC. There’s always something that needs fixing. But the bottom line is that the lone wolf needs to hide the limp.

      The guy blew it.

    American Human in reply to guyjones. | April 16, 2020 at 11:40 am

    Its not even so much of a complaint as it is disclosing the readiness of your command. A command’s readiness is classified and disclosing it is crime.
    I don’t know what his beef was or why he did it but other commands i.e. aircraft carrier COs did not disclose their readiness to the public.
    BTW, if China thinks we’re not ready or not capable, then they could try something. However, think about it, they don’t have any admirals or generals with actual combat experience, they have no soldiers or sailors with combat experience and they have a untried and untested war machine with aircraft that are less capable and equipment whose actual combat performance is unknown. If they did “try” something, like attacking Taiwan, I’m sure Taiwan could do considerable damage to them. Taiwan has tried and true battle tested equipment they can use as well as an Air Force using U.S. battle-tested and proven aircraft.

      oldgoat36 in reply to American Human. | April 16, 2020 at 12:01 pm

      I agree with this. I think it was handled poorly due to the manner of the announcement, but the Commander had stepped outside his chain of command and went to the News media. The issue you bring up about the readiness and mission are deeply troubling, and should have cost him his job.

      Of course, this is always political footballing if they put him back in, though I think he won’t be in the position long. They will just need to make sure he is off the propagandist radar before he is “reassigned”. The other possibility is the review will find he should not be reinstated, but provides a new layer on why he was dismissed.

      It just seems he should have lost his job, given what is known about this, so this might just be additional cover to end the leftist propaganda.

      CommoChief in reply to American Human. | April 16, 2020 at 12:50 pm


      Exactly. Capt Crozier disclosed the operational readiness status of his command in an email, reportedly with over two dozen recipients, through an unclassified medium and to recipients who lacked the need to know.

      His direct supervisor was on board, he could have and maybe did express his concerns to that supervisor, but didn’t get an answer he liked. He could have filed a whistle blower complaint, apparently he choose not to do so.

      In sum he may have had the purist of motivation for his actions, but his actions ignored the lawful means to make his concerns heard. The unlawful nature of his actions cannot be ignored. We simply cannot afford to tolerate Naval Captains who go rogue.

    Arminius in reply to guyjones. | April 17, 2020 at 12:46 am

    Flag bridge is the term I believe you are looking for. It’s not an official term but I refer to the other bridge, the bridge you actually drive the ship from, as the navigation bridge. Maybe I’m not the only one.

    “Navy Unveils Newest Ship Navigation, Bridge Simulator”

      Arminius in reply to Arminius. | April 17, 2020 at 1:01 am

      To be perfectly clear.

      Flag bridge is an official term. Every Flagship has one.

      Navigation bridge is my own invention. Really, it’s just the bridge. But I’m trying to draw a distinction.

Relieving the Captain was a correct action. Nothing has changed in that respect.

There is no short supply of able and ready Commanders as well as Captains who can restore the Roosevelt to mission readiness without reaching out beyond the chain of command, let alone seeking media attention and consensus.

And as far as Wuhan Coronavirus infection rates, we STILL don’t know the g-d- denominator! Why not?

Are dispositions of aircraft carriers at sea in hot spots so freely discussed between the command and the media now a days?

The mutation of this virus has always been lurking out there as a possibility which could cause those who have already gone through it to become reinfected. I read that weeks ago.

I also read recently, though don’t recall which site reported on it, that this Chinese Coronavirus looks like it attacks the autoimmune system. Similar to what HIV did. That means a far different level of long term effects from this disease if it’s true.

It is slowly getting out, but I fear the government knows this virus is far worse than anything we had faced. If it does affect the autoimmune system, we are looking a very dangerous virus which will be far more widespread than AIDS/HIV was.

I have been skeptical of what we are being told, as the actions being taken are not in line with the mild symptoms and the number of deaths/ hospitalizations we have seen thus far. I highly question the claim of such a high percentage of the school children having it and are a big cause of the spread of this. Why would they be at such a high percentage over the rest of the population?

    My wife taught HS HomeEc for 35 years. All the buildings old, poorly ventilated, often poorly heated/cooled. The kids highly social, a veritable slobber-fest 7 hours a day. Making out in the halls, spit-balls, gum-swapping, touching / hitting continuously – desks / chairs not cleaned between periods.

    Every winter, she came home with a cold and/or flu twice … and I got it a few days later. Then she retired in in 2012 and we spent the first 2 years remodeling our home, traveling in the off-season sparingly, lots of just us time – isolating. And we didn’t contract colds or flus until we moved cross-country and attended a small church in a retirement company – where once again, it was a slobber-fest of old pharts being huggy/kissy in greeting each other. We got the flu twice that winter and left that church in the spring.

    We haven’t been sick since – because we live a mostly solitary retired life. I take that back – wife had the flu last winter – her only outing was the grocery store. I didn’t come down with it.

    It may be that the social nature of kids – that 18 years before they’re released from the petri dish that is the public school system, is part of our life-long immunization protocol … get exposed to tons of cruds when young and strong and make us immune as we age and grow weaker …

    What is a “feature” with ordinary illnesses and kid transmission and building-immunity, would seem to be a “bug” with the Wuhan flu. I guess kids are a ‘darned if you do and darned if you don’t’ proposition for us old coots. I think I need to revise my will, again. 😉

    Barry in reply to oldgoat36. | April 16, 2020 at 1:45 pm

    “…but I fear the government knows this virus is far worse than anything we had faced.”

    Then they should tell us the truth. Until they do they are just incompetent boobs like they’ve always been.

    They can’t keep a secret either, which is why I doubt there is anything more than what we know.

      UnCivilServant in reply to Barry. | April 16, 2020 at 2:56 pm

      If they’re trying to hide anything, it’s how much of a dud this pandemic is in terms of actual danger. The numbers are made to look scary, but when put in context of population, the fatality rate of an annual flu season, and the at-risk population profile, it’s looking more and more like there’s no good reason for any of this panicking.

        Well, yea. I’ve said from the beginning that it appeared to be a normal virus other than the lack of immunity.

        So far the deaths in the USA are about equal to three days of our normal death rate.

I don’t know the facts WRT the Capt. Crozier’s missive. I have read that he didn’t leak it to the media, but that it was leaked by someone. If he sent it to someone in his chain of command, and someone else leaked it, find and fry the leaker. If he skipped levels in the chain, investigate the problem link(s). I’ll withhold judgement until the Navy finishes their investigations. If Trump sees fit to intervene, great.

    Barry in reply to ray. | April 16, 2020 at 1:47 pm

    He leaked it when he sent it to 8,321 people using an unsecure method.

    The very definition of a leaker.

Another health issue that has not been explored this early in the pandemic is what level of destruction it will leave in its wake. The deaths are terrible, but lasting damage to the survivors’ vital organs could create another, long-lasting, health care crises. Some limited reports are emerging that suggest, unlike the seasonal flu, Covid-19 permanently destroys lung tissue and may cause permanent heart and kidney damage. I’ve had open heart surgery to replace a damaged heart valve and we have a good friend who received a lung transplant due to idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. These are incredibly expensive procedures and require significant health care resources. Imagine tens (or hundreds) of thousands of Covid-19 survivors who required this level of care. I believe we’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg with this pandemic.

    Mac45 in reply to RNJD. | April 16, 2020 at 2:09 pm

    More “What If” COVID scare tactics. Let’s take a look at the virus and what has been done about it, to date.

    1) COVID spreads out of China. The PTB [powers-thaat-be] shut down the entire free world and its global economy. Something which has NEVER been done before for any pandemic. This was the “We Will All Die From the Virus” meme. It was taken right from the scripts of any number of very baqd end of the world movies.

    2) We were told that masks were useless against the spread of the virus and only restricting the entire population of the world to their homes and local grocery stores would help. After the populace had been flocking, en mass, to the confines of a few grocery stores where they breathed upon each other and the employees, we noticed that grocery store employees were not dropping like flies. Huummm. Not only did this undermine the claims for the stay at home restrictions, it was counter to the whole purpose of them, which was to maintain a large social distance. Again, huummm.

    3) To maintain the illusion that COVID was rampant, the CDC issued guidelines which instructed the cause of death for any person who tested positive for exposure to the virus, may have been in contact with someone exposed to the virus, possessed any of the myriad symptoms associated with COVID, or which any physician suspected the patient may have been exposed to COVID be classified as a death due to COVID, regardless of any other medical problems which the patient may have had. It got even worse, when evidence surfaced that that NYC was classifying every single death from a non-trauma incident as being COVID related. And, still the death toll as reporte4d was less than or not significantly higher than that of N1H1. Huummm.

    4)As people, including the 22 million+ on unemployment in the last three weeks, began to question the need for the draconian measures in place, we are suddenly told that we can not even venture outside the house without a mask. But, we were told the masks don’t work. What changed? And, we are now told that simply sitting in a close motor vehicle, but visible to the public is somehow going to spread the virus. WTF???

    5) So, as people wake up to the fact that all of the pain and suffering being caused by the PTB is a media and politician driven hoax, they keep coming up with new scare tactics. Chris Cuomo, in the midst of video blogging claims that he is till too weak to get off the couch, is busy threatening a man many miles from that couch, in front of Cuomo’s unfinished house. WTF??? But, now we have the “what if the virus does lasting harm to a person” meme being bandied around. What if getting run over by a motor vehicle does the same thing? Should we all cower in our homes to avoid that slim possibility?

    Look, the COVID virus is a nasty piece of work. But, it is not unique in the annals of epidemiology. It appears to be less dangerous than initially presented by the media. Yet, we are being told that not only were the historically unique draconian measures necessary, but that they must continue, no matter what harm they cause to the populace. Does anyone see anything out of place here? Who is actually being harmed and by what? The virus? Or the Establishment media and the political hacks? When people figure it out, the world might not be a very health place for either journalists or politicians.

      RNJD in reply to Mac45. | April 16, 2020 at 2:46 pm

      Oh for heaven’s sake, I’m not trying to ‘scare’ anyone, but mentioning an issue that needs to be considered by those elected officials deciding whether, when, and how the economy needs to be opened up. President Trump and the governors need to be really careful here. Right now the only “blame” for this virus and the resulting disruption is the Chinese government. People are willing to give our leaders a pass pending the decisions being debated. If, heaven forbid, the wrong choice is made – if things open up but the virus roars back to life and many more die or are permanently impaired OR if things don’t open up and a depression results – President Trump and, by extension, the republicans will own this. It will be a blood bath this November. That’s why all potential outcomes need to be carefully considered. I’m just suggesting that a Pollyanna-like reliance that it’s “just the seasonal flu, nothing medical to consider here, open up the darn country already”, just might not be the most well-reasoned approach.

        Barry in reply to RNJD. | April 16, 2020 at 3:19 pm

        “I’m not trying to ‘scare’ anyone”

        “but lasting damage to the survivors’ vital organs could create another, long-lasting, health care crises.”

        Sure. We could also say that the virus may have extraterrestrial origins and that those infected will slowly morph into aliens.

        Mac45 in reply to RNJD. | April 16, 2020 at 3:24 pm


        1) China did not close down the Free World, our politicians did. They politicians closed down the economy, created all of the current and pending economic hardship. They now OWN it. We expect our elected officials to display some common sense. But, apparently common sense has left the building. They do not get a pass on their actions. Nor does the media, created the hysteria over this virus. Why should the common people care about the politicians who have sentenced many of them to financial ruination and some to death, because of the draconian measures which they took?

        I will guarantee you something here. If the economy and society is reopened and a Dem has not be elected President, the media will start screaming that it was opened too early and we are all going to die.

        The virus is a simple corona virus. It got loose into the world, probably by accident. Then it was weaponized by the press and the political establishment. It was used as the excuse to cripple, if not destroy, the Global economy. Now, as there was never any real evidence that the virus was apocalyptic, why shut down the entire world? It has never happened before. Who benefited from that? Why were the reporting standards modified to pad death statistics from the virus? Why, as we see cases declining is the lead federal medical experts claiming that we have to have ZERO cases of this virus before we can go back to work? How do you staff an economy, if only those who have antibodies to the virus are authorized to work? And, why should people wait for a year for a vaccine to be produced to produce those antibodies, when all they have to do is hang around with other people until they contract the virus?

        Put on your thinking caps and stop drinking the KoolAid. There is an agenda here. And it has nothing to do with saving people from a “deadly” virus. The actions of the media and our politicians go beyond incompetence and suggest actual malevolence. Holding up in your house does you no good, if you can’t pay your bills and get evicted. It does you no good if you starve to death because you have no money. And, once there economy is reopened how long is it going to take to pay off your debt or, in thee case of small businesses, generate enough income from a cash strapped consumer base to survive?

        Yes, there are factors that governors should take into consideration for opening the nation. But, future lung problems among a minuscule portion of the population is not one of them. This is nothing more than another scare tactic to keep the fear alive.

      Barry in reply to Mac45. | April 16, 2020 at 3:22 pm

      Good job, Mac

      txvet2 in reply to Mac45. | April 16, 2020 at 3:24 pm

      Plus, none of those measures were intended to actually decrease the number of cases, they were only intended to “spread the curve” to avoid overwhelming hospitals – even though the number of cases were/are far below normal seasonal flu numbers.

        Mac45 in reply to txvet2. | April 16, 2020 at 3:38 pm

        Do not get trapped in the EXCUSE that the draconian, citizen incarceration protocols were only to “flatten the curve”. They were not sold to the public that way. We were told that exposure would kill us. Now that the public is beginning to question the motivation behind throwing 22-40 million people out of work and plunging this nation, and the world, into a deep recession if not depression, the medical and political leadership had to come up with an excuse for their actions. So now their excuse is “flatten the curve”. But, don’t wear face masks and congregate in only a few places, grocery stores. Now we are being told that we should all be wearing masks, in public. None of this makes sense, unless our leaders are totally incompetent or are actually trying to destroy the lives of the people of this nation. Pick one and act accordingly.

          txvet2 in reply to Mac45. | April 17, 2020 at 3:42 pm

          I never took it that way. From more or less the beginning, I remember the charts they used projecting infection rates with or without the onerous restrictions they put on us, making more or less making the case (right or wrong) for avoiding overwhelming the medical resources.

      rocky71 in reply to Mac45. | April 16, 2020 at 5:59 pm


The good Captain should not have let his boys take shore leave in Viet Nam.
And loose lips sink ships.
No, he is un-fit for duty.

    Barry in reply to snowshooze. | April 16, 2020 at 1:48 pm


    Problem 1 – Vietnam leave

    Problem 2 – Leaking the status of his ship

    inspectorudy in reply to snowshooze. | April 16, 2020 at 6:40 pm

    Vietnam has been proven to NOT be the source of the carrier’s infestation. It came from supply aircraft that brought supplies from several Asian countries including Japan and the Philippines. I am a firm believer in the chain of command but I do not know the facts of this issue and for that reason, I am going to withhold my opinion. If I or my child had been on that ship and the Navy had refused to help the captain with his health problem I do not know what avenue I would have taken. Having been in the military I have seen how it can be totally dysfunctional and absolutely mindless concerning the welfare of its members. I have seen a chain of command that no one would report anything to their superior’s for fear of retaliation. Like any other organization, the military is only as good as the next senior person in the chain. We do not know what happened and who was or was not informed and what they did or didn’t do. You can say one thing for the captain, he cared more for his crew than he did for his own promotion and that says a lot in my book!

      We don’t know… but you know is was brought by supply.
      Ok, which is it?
      You know, but we don’t?
      I think that is what you mean.

        inspectorudy in reply to snowshooze. | April 16, 2020 at 11:44 pm

        It was in the WSJ that said it was proven because of the incubation time for it to become active. Since it came much later than the visit to Vietnam, it could not be the source. Is that too difficult for you to process? You have a conspiracy theory and you are sticking with it?

Comanche Voter | April 16, 2020 at 1:51 pm

Captain Crozier may be restored to command of the Theodore Roosevelt. Normally after having such a major combatant command, Crozier would be looking to be promoted to flag rank (rear admiral).

He may be reinstated as commander of the Roosevelt. But he can keep looking for that flag rank a long time—it ain’t coming to him.

Flag rank (and achieving of same) is a very political thing. And he has blotted his copybook and embarrassed the Navy. Or if it is politically expedient to promote him to flag, he’s going to be in charge of some shore station in Kansas where they inventory bed sheets.

    CommoChief in reply to Comanche Voter. | April 16, 2020 at 2:46 pm


    He will be very fortunate if he isn’t charged with mutiny. Article 94 of the UCMJ is very unforgiving. His actions as reported in media so far meet that definition.

    At the conclusion and release of it’s investigation I will be interested to see the knots the Navy is going to have to tie themselves into in order to avoid that charge.

Imagine if this had been a nuclear submarine. They go to sea for months, often submerged for weeks.

Is the Navy going to have to quarantine crews in port for two weeks before going to sea ?

    CommoChief in reply to Neo. | April 16, 2020 at 2:31 pm


    The Navy uses a double crew system; one at sea the other on shore which rotates. My guess is they will prioritize the anti body testing for the on shore crew before replacement to, hopefully, mitigate the chance of sailing with an infected crew member.

      Arminius in reply to CommoChief. | April 17, 2020 at 7:01 pm

      You are talking about the blue and gold crews. That’s really only for ballistic missile submarines. We can keep them out at sea forever given that we don’t need to fuel nuclear submarines. Just victual them, and keep fresh crews aboard.

      Carriers, not so simple. According to US code Title 10, Subtitle C, Part 1, Chapter 507, section 5062 part B the US is required to have a minimum of eleven carriers at all times. So there are eleven on active status, two are under construction and two are on order. We don’t need carrier skippers advertising to the world we are one carrier short.,_Strike_Force_Training_Pacific

      The Navy has reorganized since I was in. The jargon keeps changing. But I did serve in the training battlegroup. It’s not a simple thing certifying a carrier battlegroup ready for battle group operations. But if the TR was really compromised we can work overtime getting another carrier ready. Hell, I’d come out of retirement to do it. I would go to sea again, but it would have to be a national emergency because at 57, going on 58, I worry that I would just be a burden.

      Nobody needs that.

      But I would do it. And, more importantly, there are channels to communicate the concerns the skipper of the TR had on his mind. Word. He may not have been the one who made his concerns public. But he told too many people and it became public. That’s bad. I guarantee you we (why do I keep saying we, like I’m still on the job?) could have done things more discreetly.

    Not a bad idea.

    Everybody gets onboard, they close the hatches, remain on shore power and internet while the boat’s corpsman/doctor swabs every crewmember, puts the swabs in a box, and passed it out the main hatch to a shore-based testing facility. For the next week, the crew catches up on their internet, phone calls, online training courses, How Not To Run Into Other Big Ships (the newest Navy training course), and such things. At the end of the week, another crew-wide swabbing and passing out to the shore-based testing, which if everything tests green, out to sea they go.

“One New York City pediatrician believes…” Full stop right there. That’s only one step away from an Anonymous Source. With enough checking, I could get one NYC pediatrician to claim moon-rays cured the common cold.

texansamurai | April 16, 2020 at 4:06 pm

no reinstatement–navy regs are pretty specific–going outside the chain of command absent clear and present danger(meaning, literally, the potential loss of the crew AND the ship)is commander’s discretion but crozier will have a difficult time establishing that level of threat WAS imminent

used to be referred to as OPERA (operational readiness assessment)reports and were ALWAYS classified

he failed in his duty to obey his standing orders, he failed in his duty to keep operational/status reports classified, he may or may not have been complicit in the public distribution of the battle readiness of his ship and therefore the battlegroup, not only endangering the safety of his own crew but the crews of every ship in the group

as the secnav said(sic)” his character’s not at issue but his commmand judgement is. ”

were cinc myself, would not want any commander, especially of a multi-billion dollar capital ship, to be someone whose judgement was suspect–too many other competent people available

inspectorudy | April 16, 2020 at 6:48 pm

That carrier is a nuclear-armed ship and if called upon would have to carry out its mission. There were over 500 infected crew members already and the final number is to be determined. One has died. I do not know if the flight crews have been affected but if they have then the mission of the carrier was already compromised. It appears that bluffing the world is more important than being capable. If this had been left alone, which appears to be the Navy way, the entire ship could have been a disaster waiting to happen. A crash on landing or a mistake in the operation of the ship could have not only harmed many crew but could have taken the big ship out of action for years. Is maintaining a bluff worth that?

    CommoChief in reply to inspectorudy. | April 16, 2020 at 10:21 pm


    As you say the Roosevelt would have to carry out it’s mission. Now I am not privy to all the details but since we are all apparently willing to offer comment based on open source reports and informed speculation I do have an opinion.

    I do respect your position regarding crew safety, that is certainly important. However, the mission of the Roosevelt is whatever the Navy says it is. That mission might mean conducting flight operations or it may mean conducting a subterfuge in order to keep potential adversaries off balance.

    The bottom line is that military service inherently carries risk. Risk of death, risk of injury and yes risk of contracting a virus. The mission comes first without exception. It must come before the safety of personnel. Otherwise we would never order a ship to sea, another aircraft into the sky or another battalion to deploy.

    To paraphrase Lee: every commander must learn to cherish the troops of his command, to be a competent commander he must display the willingness to destroy the command.

    Countless members of the military have met that test, IMO his prior service notwithstanding, Capt Crozier failed his test during that moment.

      inspectorudy in reply to CommoChief. | April 16, 2020 at 11:54 pm

      “The mission comes first without exception. It must come before the safety of personnel.”
      What is the mission? Do you have any idea? If it is to sail around the Pacific and look tough then it did fail in that instance. If it had been called on to perform in a combat situation who knows better than the captain of the ship if his crew is up to it or not? Does the captain’s record show that he is a wimp with no command expertise? I do not think so. I flew airliners full of passengers for many years and never harmed one of them, But I as captain, had the authority to override any FAA law that I felt I had to do for the safety of my passengers. Beat your chests all you want but we are not at war and this man did what he thought was in the best interest of his crew and country.

        CommoChief in reply to inspectorudy. | April 17, 2020 at 8:51 am


        Very early in my military career I was taught the mantra of ‘mission first, people always’. Now I don’t know if you served and really don’t care, but if you did you should have been taught that lesson as well before assuming a leadership role.

        Your stated experience as a pilot for a civilian airliner is precisely the opposite of what the military encompasses. As the pilot of a civilian craft no one expects you to go into harm’s way. Precisely because it is a civilian craft, with civilian passengers and crew.

        A military vessel is held to the opposite expectation, they are expected to go into harm’s way and are expected to prevail regardless of casualties. From personal experience, it isn’t pleasant to be the senior person on site and be responsible for ordering subordinates into a fight. It is even less pleasant when one must place them in a nearly no win situation because to do otherwise would comprise the mission and result in even greater casualties.

        Bottom line is Capt Crozier knew damn well what his actions were. He knew he was wrong to take them. His motives and compassion for his crew must be balanced against the mission he was assigned. I can assure you his assigned mission wasn’t to release the operational readiness status of his command using unsecured media to individuals without a need to know.

        You seem to want to wrap Capt Crozier in the mantle of a martyr. Well ok, but at the end to be a martyr results in being fed to the lions so to speak. If you and he are unwilling to face the consequences of being a martyr then don’t presume to lecture those of us who have been in difficult situations and made the very hard decision to send young men to die in order to place the mission first.

        CommoChief Out.

          If you are sending your people into harms way unnecessarily you are unworthy of command.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | April 17, 2020 at 11:15 am


          If one is adhering to the mission statement and following the commander’s intent one is not ‘unnecessarily’ sending troops into harm’s way. Quite the opposite.

          As you may be aware during MDMP, the military decision making process, every subordinate commander, the staff officers and staff NCOs of that unit weigh in. They are charged with providing their best professional input so that the commander can make the final decision in an informed a manner as possible.

          Once that commander makes a decision the focus shifts to execution. One executes the mission to the best of one’s ability. Period. To do otherwise is a violation of one’s oath.

          As my first platoon sergeant put it when we were assigned what we considered a very stupid mission set ‘when it gets from me to you the talking about this is done, we execute this’.

          Capt Crozier’s immediate commander was, reportedly on board. Assuming that commander relayed his orders to Capt Crozier that was the end of the discussion. I have personally been handed on more than one occasion what I believed to be stupid orders. I argued my case to modify or eliminate them. Once the boss says shut up and do it that’s it. You comply with the orders so long as they are not illegal it makes no difference if you agree with them. You execute.

          This is really basic. We can dance as many angels on pinheads as we wish, but at the end of the day you follow lawful orders. For the life of me I don’t understand how folks don’t get that.

          By all means, go to the boss and tell him he is wrong and his orders are stupid. That is demonstrating moral courage that can result in damage to your career. A good leader better be willing to do so. I certainly have and have been more than raked over the coals for doing so. However, having done so and the boss says do it anyway then, assuming the order is lawful, you best salute and execute the mission.

          The only other choice is mutiny. At base it really is that simple.

    Today’s carriers are not, in fact, nuclear armed. They are nuclear powered, but the nuclear weapons were removed after the cold war.

    I am reminded of a Marine captain who fell on his sword in much the same way to inform Eli Stoner that his rifle was crap. Sometimes the well being of your crew has to come before your career, it is the very rare officer who will make that sacrifice.

I know he screwed up leting the boys off on shore leave.
In Virus Country.
I suspect he does too.
I wonder if his little stunt was to garner public support to keep him from having to walk the plank.

    inspectorudy in reply to snowshooze. | April 16, 2020 at 11:47 pm

    Two things. One, the captain did not set the vist plans. That is made by the Navy. Two, Vietnam was NOT the source based on scientific data. Find another tin hat theory.

Everyone should consider he pulled this stunt as an act of self-preservation.
He should be strung up.

As in any chain, whether composed of links of steel or of people is only as strong as the weakest of those links.

Any military member at any level in the chain of command who compromises the mission of his organization in any form whatsoever does not belong in the military at all. No excuses. Period.

a warship exists to carry its weapons into combat–that is its raison d’etre–it is not a civilian vessel–command of such a vessel comes with significant responsibility–crozier’s actions did not occur in a combat environment in which(in keeping with long naval tradition)deference is always extended to the man on the scene

he went outside his chain of command(and apparently without the knowledge/consent of the one star/battlegroup commander who was onboard himself)

without cause, that is a serious offense in itself

to then publicize the situation(particularly as relates to the readiness of his ship) with little(or no)regard to keeping that information secure, he not only endangered his ship and crew but also every ship and crew in the battlegroup(literally thousands of sailors and numerous vessels)

that’s two rather significant lapses of judgment from an officer not engaged in the heat of combat but tied-up in port

My bet is, Naval Operations has zoomed in on RDML(RADM?) Stuart Baker, The Task Force Commander (just down the hall from CAPT Crozier’s office on the TR) and perhaps Baker’s fleet-superiors as well for not tackling the explosive issue on the carrier and on fleet-scene more responsibly. The flag officers may have taken a more career-focused, decision-avoiding, “smart,” rather than professionally correct, tack. Still, the TR’s captain didn’t communicate his issue correctly to those (seven) whom he wrote indiscreetly, it may turn out; he took over Stuart’s job in doing so, the theory runs, or simply refused to manage it himself.

Should he have? seems to be the big question in all this. It’s a novel decision-making environment, with no rules yet, perhaps — which matches the novelty of the coronavirus itself. The “We’re not at war, Sailors don’t have to die” position the captain opined, or formally referenced, or liberally deduced from a procedure manual (it’s not at all clear yet), seems to be the spot on this map marked by a huge “X”.)

Outcomes foreseen: 1) Stuart et al FO’s will be reprimanded but not relieved of their commands; 2) Crozier will also be reprimanded, and his command of the TR will be restored; 3) all those reprimanded will not be allowed any promotion, if applicable, assuming they choose not to retire honorably now, fully vested at the current rank.

Adam, Eve, the Serpent — they all screwed up, and, of course, all must pay.

Meanwhile, I fear a naval battle’s brewing, principally between China and the US (and Taiwan, perhaps), in the South China Sea. But, the new info about underreported Wuhan deaths is very noteworthy today, and integral here, in my estimation. Very, very fluid situation, it seems, with many contingencies in the offing.

Is it almost time to hear, “If you liked the 1962 Cuban Missle Crisis, you’ll just love the 2020 Wuhan Crisis: The South China Sea”? And hopefully, nothing racist is seen or inferred in that construction; certainly none is intended.

All hands, stand by . . .

“‘Significant’ coronavirus mutation discovered, could make vaccine search ‘futile’

Unfortunately, the virus may mutate to the point that a vaccine is not a practical solution.”

Does anyone really think this will stop Big Pharma from producing a vaccine and having Dr. Fauci and the boys mandate it’s production and mandatory vaccinations?

Never under rate the power of “So what?”