Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Guam National Guard Chief: Our Soldiers Are “Non-Partisan” Despite Marching In Protest On Republican Rep’s Office

Guam National Guard Chief: Our Soldiers Are “Non-Partisan” Despite Marching In Protest On Republican Rep’s Office

Soldiers marched in uniform on office of Marjorie Taylor Greene protesting her inaccurately describing Guam as not part of America. She responded: “The Democrats need to stop using them as political theatre and drama on Capitol Hill.”

The Guam National Guard apparently has soldiers stationed in D.C. as part of the charade that the Capitol remains under some dire threat requiring troops from around the nation to encamp in the nation’s capitol in a show of force for months.

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene in a CPAC speech mistakenly referred to Guam as not being part of America. In fact, it’s an American territory and its residents are American citizens. To protest against Greene, a Guam Democratic Congressman led some of those troops, in uniform, in a protest march to confront Greene. We covered the story in, Congressman Brings National Guard To Confront Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Over Guam Status Gaffe:

In a totally inappropriate move, Guam Congressman Michael San Nicolas, who is under an ethics investigation, led a group of Guam National Guard in uniform to Greene’s office to confront her. She wasn’t there at the time, but the visual of military-fatigued National Guard engaging in a political protest directed at a Congressman, in the halls of the Capitol no less, was another sign that the military is losing its bearing in the age of Biden.

Here is the video, posted by The Hill:


Greene called it a political stunt, which it was: “It’s time for our great men and women of the National Guard to go home and be with their families. The Democrats need to stop using them as political theatre and drama on Capitol Hill. Shame on Democrats for disrespecting our military.”

Rather than reprimanded these soldiers for protesting in uniform, the Guam National Guard insists it is non-partisan. Military Times reports:

In a statement Tuesday, Maj. Gen. Esther J.C. Aguigui, adjutant general of the Guam National Guard, said the force remains a “non-partisan entity” despite the event.

“We appreciate Congressman San Nicolas’ efforts to represent our culture of Inafa’ Maolek, or bringing harmony, practiced here in Guam,” she said in a statement. “We also thank Congresswoman Greene for ultimately helping raise awareness of Guamanians as citizens of the United States, and our rich tradition of service and sacrifice to our nation.”

Guard officials did not answer questions about who organized the event and whether it constituted using uniformed troops as political props, which is in violation of Defense Department regulations….

Under long-standing Defense Department policy, service members and department civilian employees acting in their official capacity “may not engage in activities that associate the DOD with any partisan political campaign or elections.” That specifically includes appearing in uniform at political campaign events.

I’ll repeat what I said yesterday: I have an idea. How about the military go back to staying out of politics.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I guess it takes more than a platoon from the Guam NG to take on a new rep from Georgia. Or… it takes more than a platoon to back up a Dem who can’t stand on his own. Either way… the “show of strength” is anything but. Reverse the roles and see the fallout. The common thread for many in the NG is that they are The Militia mentioned in the Bill of Rights… which is bogus but what isn’t these days?

    JusticeDelivered in reply to alaskabob. | March 16, 2021 at 10:33 pm

    I have never had reason to pay attention to Guam. Now I am wondering if Guam is like Puerto Rico, with 50% of their population sucking up American taxpayer money.

    How about a watch group, alerting us if they are trying to get unearned income. There could be some organized resistance, to block such.

    maxmillion in reply to alaskabob. | March 16, 2021 at 11:47 pm

    Democrats always freak out, clutch their pearls, and talk all paranoiac when Republicans do 1/10 of the dirty politics they do.

      MattMusson in reply to maxmillion. | March 17, 2021 at 8:59 am

      And with that in mind, I think that Governor Abbott of Texas should send a Non-Partisan contingent of Uniformed Texas National Guardsmen to visit the Supreme Court.

    Temujin in reply to alaskabob. | March 17, 2021 at 10:33 am

    So, then the UCMJ has actually been repealed.

      Milhouse in reply to Temujin. | March 17, 2021 at 11:41 am

      No, it is has not. As the chief said, this was not a partisan event. There is nothing in the UCMJ against guardsmen participating.

        Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Milhouse. | March 17, 2021 at 2:08 pm

        Milhouse you frankly have no idea what you are talking about here. This is absolutely the most grievous event I have ever seen. Soldiers can’t even do this when not in uniform. Hell, they can’t even do this in the to another soldier. And this was clearly a partisan exercise. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. These soldiers where not invited by the congressman or her staff, so it was clearly a demonstration – in uniform.

        Now, if you have no problem with 20 or so anonymous soldiers showing up at your door to let you know they are displeased with something you said, well, OK, welcome to the dictatorship.

        Arminius in reply to Milhouse. | March 17, 2021 at 8:36 pm

        You are correct Milhouse. There’s nothing in the UCMJ against active duty armed forces personnel from participating in this. The prohibition is found in DoD Directive 1344.10 and consequently subsequent service-specific instructions. Which make these prohibitions general orders. The UCMJ articles that deal with violating general orders don’t specifically list the general orders that they cover let alone any specific prohibitions they contain.

        So in all other respects Brave Sir Robin is correct; you don’t have any idea what you are talking about. This is a textbook example of a prohibited partisan activity. Not a made up controversy that the Democrats always ginned up whenever President Trump did something entirely legal such as engage in speech entirely protected by the First Amendment. Or this:

        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6532871/CNN-experts-Trump-broke-military-rules-signing-MAGA-hats-Iraq.html

        “‘What commander allowed that to really happen?’ CNN experts claim Trump forced soldiers to break rules by signing ‘MAGA’ hats in Iraq but White House says eager military members brought their own souvenirs

        …Donald Trump attracted criticism Wednesday on CNN for autographing red ‘Make America Great Again’ hats during a high-profile visit to a U.S. military base in Iraq.

        Trump’s role as president also makes him commander-in-chief of America’s armed forces. Since he’s a civilian, the military’s rules barring active duty servicemen and women from some political activity don’t apply to him.

        But he may have put soldiers and airmen at risk of violating the regulations by jovially signing the hats that some men and women in uniform brought with them when they heard they would meet the president…

        …A pool reporter on the scene noted that Trump also ‘signed an embroidered patch that read “TRUMP 2020″‘ – a seemingly direct endorsement.

        White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told DailyMail.com on Thursday that the soldiers brought their own souvenirs for autographs.

        ‘We didn’t bring any of the items with us. They were personal items of the service members,’ she said in an email..

        …Politicizing events that feature men and women in uniform ‘puts the soldiers – truthfully, all of the military personnel – in a very bad position,’ retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling said during one CNN broadcast, ‘because the military has regulations against doing exactly that.’

        …The network’s veteran Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr suggested that if the soldiers already had the hats, it would be a less serious situation than if the White House had passed them out. the former turned out to be the case, Sanders said.

        But still, Starr claimed, senior officers in Iraq should have prevented it.

        ‘What commander allowed that to really happen?’ Starr asked. ‘Because this is very much against military policy and regulation. Troops are not supposed to be involved in political activities. The U.S. military is not a political force.’

        Retired Rear Admiral John Kirby, a former Defense Department spokesman and a paid CNN military analyst, said a hat bearing Trump’s slogan ‘is a campaign item, and it’s completely inappropriate for the troops to do this. Not supposed to do this, and I’m sure that their boss is seeing that. They’re not going to be happy about it.'”

        No doubt their woke leftist seniors weren’t happy about it because the Congressional Democrats demanded an investigation and that the troops involved be disciplined if they violated DoD directives, policies, and regulations, when the MFM hounded the Pentagon for answers the Pentagon made damn sure people knew they were at least considering adverse actions against the troops.

        “The Pentagon did not respond to a request for information on Thursday about whether any of the uniformed personnel photographed and videotaped with Trump slogan hats on Wednesday would be disciplined.”

        Note the Pentagon didn’t send out a spokesweasel to immediately clear the troops who were clearly acting well within policy and regulations. Just like they didn’t immediately stand up for the guardsmen and active duty military personnel deployed in January to DC that the Democrats smeared as “disloyal” and a potential “insider threat” if they voted for Trump. Smearing the troops was clearly the point about here as well. And the senior “leadership” tried to help even though they knew damned well that they didn’t do anything wrong when Trump visited them in Iraq. Although the Pentagon didn’t immediately make any statements clearing the troops of wrongdoing immediately, as they did here, there was no investigation. Everybody with two brain cells to rub together knew damned well there wouldn’t be. But by performing as “extras” in this Dem produced and directed partisan political theatrical production they did cross the line. As did the ethically challenged Michael San Nicholas. But again, everyone who had two brain cells to rub together knew this was the predictable result. There should have been. Just like in a functioning Congress San Nicolas would be investigated for his blatant Hatch Act violation but not this Klown Kar Kongress.

        I shall go point by point and go slowly so that even you, Milhouse, can understand why you’re wrong. Of course, you’ll never admit it, because you’re Milhouse. But deep inside you’ll know it.

        1. The Hatch Act prohibits elected officials from conducting partisan, campaign related while acting in their official capacity using taxpayer-funded official resources. The Hatch Act makes several large exceptions for the President and VP. None for congresscritters, not even non-voting delegates like this cockroach.

        2. Whenever the President visits the troops it is by definition an official act, even during campaign season. The President is the commander in chief and therefore in the troops chain of command. Always, no matter the season. Same goes for the VP since when he visits it’s as the representative of the CinC, and he’s one heartbeat away from being the CinC. Even if the President/VP make clearly partisan political remarks during campaign season while visiting troops, it remains as a matter of law an official visit. Congresscritters on the other hand have no exemptions from any aspect of the Hatch Act. So if a President visits the troops and some of the troops want to take pics with their CinC while in uniform, they can regardless of their duty status (on or off). The troops are never violating DoD prohibitions against partisan political activities in uniform, etc. Hell, troops can be and in during my career always were ordered to attend Presidential events during Presidential visits during working hours if they aren’t on watch. I made it through two such visits by two different Presidents by standing in for the duty officers. One a D and one an R. The duty officers wanted to go to these rallies, so I stood in for them because I didn’t. Congresscritters can also make official visits to military installations, and troops can attend these official functions when off duty or with special permission during duty hours. These official visits may be related to the Congresscritter’s committee assignments or just general fact-finding related to their military constituents. Off duty personnel may attend these official events in uniform, while personnel who request permission (always granted if they can be spared) to attend during their normal working hours must attend in uniform. But the Hatch Act, and consequently DoD policies and regulations draw distinctions between official visits on the one hand, personal visits and campaign events on the other. Unlike Presidential/VP visits they aren’t always by law official events. So military personnel may meet with Congresscritters during their personal visits but only when off duty and out of uniform. Campaign events are never allowed on military installations.

        3. Fundraising is a partisan political activity prohibited by law while acting within an official capacity. Which is why Al Gore should have been prosecuted for shaking down donors using the taxpayer-provided phone in his taxpayer-funded office in the Old Executive Office Building.

        4. When all non-essential personnel are ordered to attend events associated with a Presidential/VP visit they have to attend in uniform. Anyone off duty who wishes to attend can be ordered to wear their uniform of the day if they do. I’ve always seen that done. If the President wants to meet with the troops he can; he is after all the CinC and no commanding officer can gainsay him. If he wants to take pictures with the troops he can because he is, one more time, the CinC. And if the troops are told they’ll have a chance to meet with the President they can get his autograph if he’s willing to give it. Even on a personal item that they grab on their way to the event. Even if its a personal item they bought from the President’s campaign website. And no commanding officer can stop that because, say it with me people, he’s the CinC. And he isn’t covered by the Hatch Act when acting as the CinC, so he can’t get in trouble if some of those pics he took with the troops on one of his official visits ends up used for fund raising purposes on his campaign website. Neither can the troops because they had their pictures taken with the President at what was, under the law, an official and therefore non-partisan event. Some of them were in fact ordered to be there, and they all were ordered to be there in uniform.

        None of this applies to a congresscritter like San Nicolas who isn’t in the troops’ chain of command and all his activities are covered by the Hatch Act.

        So, let’s put these facts together. This was a partisan political issue because the Dems have made the fact that Marjorie Taylor Greene is even in Congress a partisan political issue, as I noted in a comment on the earlier thread:

        https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/03/congressman-brings-national-guard-to-confront-rep-marjorie-taylor-greene-over-guam-status-gaffe/

        The fact that she’s the Dems’ pet partisan issue is illustrated by the fact it was the Dems who stripped her of her committee assignments by majority. Not her own party, as set by precedent and longstanding tradition. And they’ve made her a partisan issue because they use her presence in Congress and everything she’s ever said for fundraising purposes.

        In case you don’t want to wade through my stream-of-consciousness novella on the other thread, here’s a link.

        https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-replaces-trump-as-democrats-fundraising-outrage-fuel/ar-BB1dzjXt

        The Dems will use her Guam gaffe for fundraising purposes. It’s not a matter of if but when. Particularly on Guam, and particularly by San Nicolas. He got outspent in 2020. He ultimately won, but he’s making sure he’s not outspent again. He got outspent because his better financed opponent raised five times the money San Nicolas did. He will use Greene’s words against the GOP, to prove to his constituents just how racist those Republicans are. The only question is, does he still use the picture that he arranged to be taken with his active duty uniformed props?

        Trump could, because as President he’s not subject to the Hatch Act when he makes official visits to meet the troops. Since he’s the CinC, that’s always. San Nicolas isn’t the CinC, so he can’t use the pic for fundraising if, as he now claims, he was conducting a tour for members of the Gaum National Guard. Constituent services are within the official duties of a congresscritter, but that makes things worse if he uses the pic for a campaign related partisan activity like fundraising. For him, not the troops.

        For the troops their situation would have depended on a variety of factors, if we still had a functioning republic and the rule of law. If they cooked up this political protest on their own they’d be in a lot of trouble. Troops can participate in political activities, partisan and non-partisan, on their own time while off duty but on base. They can write letters to the editor of local papers composed in their living quarters advocating for causes, expressing opinions about issues, their opinions on candidates and elected officials (within certain bounds of decorum), etc. They aren’t supposed to identify themselves as active duty service members and if there’s anything in their letter that reasonably could be used to identify them as active duty members of the armed forces they have to include a disclaimer that they are expressing their own personal opinion only, and do not mean to imply or infer that their letter constitutes an endorsement by DoD (and in the case of the Coast Guard their opinion isn’t an endorsement by DHS).

        One thing they can’t do on their own time, on or off base, is organize. They can’t write letters as part of an organized letter writing campaign, and they can’t organize a political protest. Which is what this stunt was, of course. If they were unlawfully ordered to go with their delegate, and they mistakenly thought the order was lawful, at most they’d be required to undergo remedial training. The individual who issued the order would face more serious consequences. If San Nicolas came up with this on his own (and he claimed it was his idea as part of his “cookie diplomacy” offensive) and simply duped the troops by offering what he misrepresented as an innocent tour when in fact it was the partisan political protest/fundraising photo op it turned out to be then the troops are blameless.

        But of course none of that will happen because there is no law for Democrats. The congresscritters will not pursue the Hatch Act violation against San Nicolas. And consequently the Guam National Guard will not investigate the obvious violation of the prohibitions against active duty service members participating in partisan political activities while in uniform or even out of uniform if that may possibly imply an official endorsement of the party on one side of the issue.

        Maj. Gen. Esther J.C. Aguigui’s statement was the result I expected (stupid woman, she called the citizens of Guam “Guamanians” when Milhouse has already corrected our language on this forum just like he’s schooling us vets on DoD policies and regulations; thanks Milhouse!). It was corrupt and partisan, like everything Democrat. And make no mistake; Guam is as corrupt as any one-party Democrat machine ruled jurisdiction in the nation. And the woke leftists running DoD won’t overrule her. They’re in on it, too.

        CapeBuffalo in reply to Milhouse. | March 21, 2021 at 11:37 pm

        Nope, it wasn’t partisan, just having a little fun belittling a GOP rep who misspoke at a meeting outside of Congress. Didn’t some Dem congresscritter once opine in Congress that Guam might “tip over”if everybody went to one end of the island. No one brought in the National Guard to straighten him out.

United States soldiers in uniform at a political “protest”? That’s court-martial territory, for any service member. Obviously, these people were used as props by the Democrats.

That is unacceptable.

    We can see the United States military as props or we can see this “stunt” as a taste of what is to come. I vastly prefer the former, but it is now clear that we must at least consider the latter. This is not a good look for our Constitutional republic.

Sounds like the Guam National Guard Chief is getting tired of fielding questions about the actions of the troops in the Capitol. The force may be a “non-partisan entity” but that doesn’t alter the fact that a number of them did unlawfully participate in a political stunt or event organized by a member of one political party against a member of the opposing party.

    Milhouse in reply to Idonttweet. | March 17, 2021 at 11:44 am

    The fact that they happened to be from opposing parties is irrelevant. The “stunt” if you want to call it that was not in any way partisan.

      MattMusson in reply to Milhouse. | March 17, 2021 at 2:51 pm

      You are way out in Fox Mulder ‘I want to believe’ territory here.

      This kind of thing cannot be alibied away. Once it becomes acceptable, the Military can show up and intimidate any politician.

      Arminius in reply to Milhouse. | March 23, 2021 at 3:15 pm

      This is mental illness territory. Based on this Guam comment, the Dems figure they have some momentum to expel Greene from Congress. Two days after this very post went up on LI, a Dem rep introduced a privileged resolution to expel Greene, apparently figuring that enough Repubs are now embarrassed enough to go along.

      https://thepoliticalinsider.com/democrats-now-want-to-expel-rep-marjorie-taylor-greene-from-congress-entirely/

      “MARCH 18, 2021 AT 5:08PM”

      Fine with me, Milhouse, if you want to demonstrate that you’re completely delusional. You are demonstrating what I consider a leftist defect. “I assert X, therefore X is true. Because I assert it.”

      See “Atlanta shooting was another anti-Asian hate crime caused by Donald Trump’s mean tweets” for further examples of the leftist defect. Of course, the latest insanity the left is demonstrating over the Atlanta shooting is simply example # 13,373,298 this year of the same.

      I tried to hint you’ve gone off the rails by pointing out if you’re correct this stunt wasn’t partisan because, uh, Milhouse! then you were also correct that the residents of Guam, in particular those of Chamorro decent, are in fact “Guamese” and the adjutant general of the Guam National Guard, Maj. Gen. Esther J.C. Aguigui, must be an idiot for calling such people “Guamanians” after you have so thoughtfully corrected our language. In fact she appears to be an idiot, just not for that reason.

      But here you are claiming this partisan attack on Greene, and using active duty troops as props to support it, isn’t partisan. I thought of your invention of the word “Guamese” because that’s what leftists do; torture language and invent new words. So if you’re willing to go that far than I’m sure you won’t stop there. Entertain us. Please tell us how the party line vote by the majority Dems to strip Greene of her committee assignments wasn’t partisan. And how the Dems aren’t using Greene’s Guam comment in a partisan fashion. The Dem resolution officially is about Greene’s social media comments from before she was a candidate. But they couldn’t expel her before, and they’ve already used those comments. They have no new charges. So why try again now? Obviously because of her Guam comment.

      And explain how San Nicolas’ stunt isn’t part and parcel of this effort.

      You can’t. At least not in any way that would make sense to anyone not suffering from the leftist mental defect.

As a retired military officer my reaction is that this conduct is unacceptable. I would not bother with the troops involved except to explain why I dismissed their leadership.

    gettem Jocko!

    alaskabob in reply to swampdave. | March 16, 2021 at 10:38 pm

    Have to wonder about their level of training when it comes to uniform code. What have been their courses and instruction?

      Miles in reply to alaskabob. | March 17, 2021 at 1:12 am

      I remember during my Basic Training being specifically taught that engaging in anything in uniform – except voting – that even had the appearance of being political could end up with you being in front of a Court Martial.
      Just me, but I think since NG goes to Basic right along with the Regular & Reserve troops, they get the same training.

        SField in reply to Miles. | March 17, 2021 at 7:40 am

        I can confirm that. I was regular Army and when I went to OSUT Tanker Training at Ft. Knox, we had Reservists and NG mixed in with us. We all got the same training to the same standard.

        It was made crystal clear to all of us- no political activity (with the exception of voting) while on duty, or while off duty in uniform. Punishment would be harsh should you ignore this rule/order.

    txvet2 in reply to swampdave. | March 17, 2021 at 1:53 am

    As I pointed out earlier.

    The Packetman in reply to swampdave. | March 17, 2021 at 7:19 am

    As a former combat Marine, I’m positive Rep San Nicolas isn’t in their chain of command so they need to at least see some NJP.

    But the officers who let it happen? Yeah … they need to go.

    MattMusson in reply to swampdave. | March 17, 2021 at 2:53 pm

    My initial reaction was to email and call the Joint Chiefs. And, I got their addresses and numbers. But, my son is in Uniform. And, I realized that my protests would probably come back on him.

Subotai Bahadur | March 16, 2021 at 11:11 pm

If this stands with no courts martial, it will be repeated by Democrats at will. And the consequences will be unpleasant.

Subotai Bahadur

For this to have happened, there had to be planning and sedition while PDJT was in office.

We let this pass, and we’re dead. Ted Cruz has the lead on this, and we should hold the GOP’s smelly feet to the fire until this explodes.

    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to TheFineReport.com. | March 17, 2021 at 7:38 am

    Yeah, right. The GOP doing anything about this is about as plausible or likely as Republican controlled states seceding from the Union. Not going to happen. Republicans simply don’t have the balls to call the democrats onto the carpet for their manifestly illegal behaviors and actions. They’ll bitch, moan, and complain about it and that’s about all. Nothing useful will come out of it all as they allow the democrats to destroy the Republic.

    henrybowman in reply to TheFineReport.com. | March 17, 2021 at 3:27 pm

    “we should hold the GOP’s smelly feet to the fire until this explodes.”

    Gaaaah. Pass the brain bleach, please.

At the 20 second mark, one soldier had his hands in his pockets. Court martial him!

ThePrimordialOrderedPair | March 17, 2021 at 1:44 am

Friggin Guam. I thought that island tipped over years ago.

This was not just a political stunt. It was far worse. Everyone involved ought to go spend a few decades in solitary at Leavenworth … but nothing will happen to anyone …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair | March 17, 2021 at 1:50 am

It is important for people to understand the actual point of this – this is the democrats showing Americans that “America” no longer exists. That is what this is all about. Make no mistake about it.

southern commenter | March 17, 2021 at 5:16 am

No such thing as a democratic congressperson. Its “democrat congressperson.” Nothing at all democratic about that anti American party.

I don’t know what the hell they are doing out on Guam, but I was an M1A1 tanker in the regular Army and our job wasn’t to “Bring Harmony”, it was to destroy the enemy, pure and simple.

And engaging in political activities while on duty or off duty while in uniform was strictly forbidden.

You Just Didn’t Do It, Ever.

From that photo, the troops aren’t “marching in protest” but rather are sauntering in an undisciplined manner. Tells you a lot, and it’s not good.

Ol' Jim hisself | March 17, 2021 at 8:58 am

Why did we waste the money to bring these troops from Guam? There are many NG units a short bus ride away.

    henrybowman in reply to Ol' Jim hisself. | March 17, 2021 at 3:37 pm

    The Chinese emperor never used local troops to enforce his edicts on a village. He always sent in troops from a faraway village, who would have no familial or social connections with the villagers he wanted to dominate.

    Set the Wayback Machine to Katrina, Sherman, so we can remember how the law-abiding citizens of New Orleans had their homes invaded and their legal firearms confiscated by agents of the Cali-frickin-fornia Highway Patrol (this is not a joke). “Firearms rights? We’ve never even heard those two words used in the same sentence back in California.”

Why am I not surprised that the adjutant general is a woman? I say that as a woman!

Burn_the_Witch | March 17, 2021 at 10:12 am

After watching a National Guard Unit march on a congresswoman’s office, a National Guard Officer bend the knee at a George Floyd protest, Several high ranking members of the military respond inappropriately to legitimate civilian criticism, and the JCS all sign off on a letter that characterized the riot on Jan 6th as an “insurrection”, I feel perfectly safe – as a retired Marine senior SNCO – in saying our military has completely lost the plot.

As noted above “court-martials” should be considered; but at a minimum removal of the participating troops from the “DC theatre of operation” as well as the superior officers (who clearly are either complicit or not in “command” of those that report to them) and reduction in rank at least one level … Or possibly a “general” or “dishonorable discharge”.

Where is the Democrat outrage similar to when Trump walk across Lafayette Park with Gen. Milley ?

I am sick of hearing of the need to “thank” the military for their service; growing up I never heard anyone thank members of my family for service in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, drug interdiction, other. The Military today has an entitlement complex.

I’ve worked alongside veterans of all ranks, including for various 1, 2 & 4 stars. The only ones to successfully make the transition to the private sector are those that “leave it behind”; in general the “skills” are not transferable.

The US military need once again become a conscription force and stop enlisting non-citizens.

    bhwms in reply to Sisu. | March 17, 2021 at 11:08 am

    Thanking them started as a counter to the leftist crazies spitting on them or otherwise harassing them when they returned from Vietnam, and Congress’ perpetual war against Vets since.

thalesofmiletus | March 17, 2021 at 10:42 am

“It’s a nice office you have here, Congresswoman. It would be a shame if something happened to it — ain’t that right, fellas?”

Why didn’t these non partisan troops march on Hank Johnson’s office to reassure him Guam was not going to tip over?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q

    SField in reply to goomicoo. | March 17, 2021 at 11:16 am

    Or at least lobby him to have a periscope installed on the underside so they can see what in the hell is going on if it does.

By the way, throughout this discussion everyone has been referring to the Guam representative as a “congressman”, but he’s not an actual congressman. Since Guam is not a state it’s not entitled to representation in Congress. As a courtesy Congress has invited the territories to send representatives anyway, and they have many of the privileges of real congressmen: they can sit in the chamber, speak on legislation, and be full members of congressional committees; but they are not real congressmen, so they can’t vote in the full House or be counted in quorum calls.

I assume everyone here understands that, but it should be clearly stated.

I would say that everyone involved in this should be court-martialed, but we know that will not be happening under this Resident in Chief.

Here’s an update to this matter from the GA congresswoman:

https://greene.house.gov/media/press-releases/congresswoman-greene-sends-letter-general-hokanson-and-secretary-defense

It’s a letter, dated 3/16, from the Office of Rep MTG to both the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, GEN Daniel R Hokanson, and the SECDEF, GEN Lloyd J Austin, III, writing especially “to express [her] concerns with the politicization of our military.”

As background, here’s a (curiously undated,) broad and brief statement sent to all Service Members by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Unless we Americans are missing something, this would seem to be the “place” the Joint Chiefs are “coming from”: https://www.military.com/sites/default/files/2021-01/JCS%20Message%20to%20the%20Joint%20Force%20Riots.pdf. and its not comforting for patriots.

Its “non-partisan” language fails its own description, in my view. It needn’t sound or even appear expressly partisan amid all its rhetoric and platitudes, ie, its continually recycled propaganda, to communicate its subtle, still highly controversial and debatable, quite suppressed truths to its readers.

The Deep State lives on, stronger and more vibrant than ever. It now resonates with its environment.

I’m sure the Guamanian NG Commander was encouraged to assume the wholly arrogant, patronizing and condescending posture with which she stated the GNG’s strictly apolitical position, consistent with longstanding DOD policy and practice, by means of the JCS’ letter to all Service troops.

Nature sees to it that spines come in all shapes and sizes, all materials and tensions. The Deep State’s is more than flexible. In its present form, it would seem to be collapsible.

Do you remember that time you were pulled away from playing with your friends and made to come inside to put on your “church clothes” so your mom could drag you over to visit Great Aunt Hattie whom you had never met? By their general demeanor I do believe those guards are reliving just such an experience. Too bad the “not really a congressman” did not turn that troop around and go straight home when they started sulking.

healthguyfsu | March 17, 2021 at 1:40 pm

Honestly, I place 100% of the blame on the congresscritter.

Very bad optics of military marching on congresswoman’s office. Military is having bad publicity right now by stepping on journalist that criticize them, well woke generals anyway.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend