I haven't served.  But I know there is a UCMJ.  But Congress was the author of the UCMJ. They can amend it.  They have the right and the power to question members of the military about many subjects, including possible amendments to the UCMJ.

How do you come to this ridiculous conclusion?  You do know (oh wait... you didn't serve so you don't know) that the military operates under a total different set of laws on top of current Federal, State and Local Laws according to where they happen to be stationed.

Let me give you a little civics lesson since you didn't seem to get it in your government school.

Did you know that the Captain of a Navy ship could order a sailor confined and only given bread and water?  This without a trial by Judge and Jury?  Think it doesn't happen?  I've seen it.

Second of all, a member of the military is under the command of the Executive branch of government who's ultimate Commander and Chief is The President of The United States.  Congress has 0% power over any military member.

My point is, with your ignorance regarding the military you probably shouldn't be commenting on what they "can and can't" do or whether a career move is "lateral".

Of course I know a captain of a ship has absolute power over all the passengers on the ship. Everyone knows that.  It even applies to cruise ships. Until you get to port, the Captain's word is law. If the captain abuses his power, he might be in trouble after the ship reaches port, but as a passenger or enlisted person you would rather not wait for that. 

but Congress does have the power to question any member of the military about anything, just like they have the power to question any civilian about anything. You can invoke certain rights and legal principles, and not answer, but they still have the right to ask. They do not have the power to give orders, obviously, but you're wrong to say they have no power at all.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

It's pretty obvious that you have no clue as to how the military works.  Getting "fired" from a job and moved back to a desk for an Officer is basically the "end of your career" not a "lateral move".  He will be "retired" by the end of the year.  That's why there was so much concern when he chose to testify lie.

With your lack of military knowledge and protocol, you should probably not be commenting on what they "can" or "could" do.

His career is over.

An honorable discharge would also be a nothingburger, from my perspective. If they don't need him anymore that's fine.  Folks get laid off every day in the private sector.  
Just as long as he gets what everyone else who served honorably for the amount of time he served gets in terms of severance or pension.

Just STOP TALKING. You're embarrassing yourself and you either don't care or too stupid to realize it.

---

An honorable discharge would also be a nothingburger, from my perspective. If they don't need him anymore that's fine.  Folks get laid off every day in the private sector.  
Just as long as he gets what everyone else who served honorably for the amount of time he served gets in terms of severance or pension.

Just STOP TALKING. You're embarrassing yourself and you either don't care or too stupid to realize it.

What's wrong with what I said? 
Are honorable discharges bad?
Should Vindman still be serving in the white house?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Just STOP TALKING. You're embarrassing yourself and you either don't care or too stupid to realize it.

What's wrong with what I said? 
Are honorable discharges bad?
Should Vindman still be serving in the white house?

Your so-called knowledge of the military is ridiculous and has a "nails on a chalkboard" affect on those of us who actually served.

---

What's wrong with what I said? 
Are honorable discharges bad?
Should Vindman still be serving in the white house?

Your so-called knowledge of the military is ridiculous and has a "nails on a chalkboard" affect on those of us who actually served.

You mean knowledge and unfounded assumptions aren't the same thing?

---

If you work in intelligence and you take things public, you deserve to be fired.

He even consulted a NSC lawyer who told him not to do this and he ignored them.

If being derelict of duty ruins his career, it's his own fault.

---

What's wrong with what I said? 
Are honorable discharges bad?
Should Vindman still be serving in the white house?

Your so-called knowledge of the military is ridiculous and has a "nails on a chalkboard" affect on those of us who actually served.

Thank you for your service.
But you didn't answer my questions. In any case, most everything I've said here is how I think things should be, not how they are.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Your so-called knowledge of the military is ridiculous and has a "nails on a chalkboard" affect on those of us who actually served.

Thank you for your service.
But you didn't answer my questions. In any case, most everything I've said here is how I think things should be, not how they are.

Wow, you've made progress I see.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Vindman will be just fine. Some high level dem will reward him with a cush job when he gets out of the military. He will become an analyst for CNN or something. Just my opinion.

---

I mean, if the oath is "I will obey all lawful orders" that kind of says that any officer or Sargeant who ever said, "obey first, ask questions later" may have been speaking out of turn or beyond his authority. It's not a good sign.
If you're in a training exercise, sure, obey orders. But make sure you understand the rules of engagement before you might encounter a real enemy. The guys in My Lai were ordered to shoot civilians. Many of them disobeyed orders, thank God, but it was still a massacre and a disaster.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

As a citizen you and I are allowed to say whatever we want about the President with no fear of repercussion.

As a member of the United States military you're not allowed to be overtly critical of the commander-in-chief. So.....

Not to mention he has a reputation as an overly political ladder climber. That idiot Sondland is gone too.

$1m well spent, eh Gordo?

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

Your so-called knowledge of the military is ridiculous and has a "nails on a chalkboard" affect on those of us who actually served.

Thank you for your service.
But you didn't answer my questions. In any case, most everything I've said here is how I think things should be, not how they are.

It’s awfully convenient that you’re treating this as just your opinion on how it should be now that everyone told you you’re wrong.

---

The term "fired" is a little misleading. The LTC had already decided to leave the NSC but in any case, he was reassigned to the Pentagon. He did not lose rank, he did not receive non-judicial punishment, etc. Reassignments occur all the time in the officer corp for similar conflicts of interest or simply as a career progression move. There seems to be a lot of misinformation or basic understanding in this thread from the non-military members.

---

The term "fired" is a little misleading. The LTC had already decided to leave the NSC but in any case, he was reassigned to the Pentagon. He did not lose rank, he did not receive non-judicial punishment, etc. Reassignments occur all the time in the officer corp for similar conflicts of interest or simply as a career progression move. There seems to be a lot of misinformation or basic understanding in this thread from the non-military members.

It wouldn’t be surprising to see him passed over. He’s made a political mark of himself.

---

The term "fired" is a little misleading. The LTC had already decided to leave the NSC but in any case, he was reassigned to the Pentagon. He did not lose rank, he did not receive non-judicial punishment, etc. Reassignments occur all the time in the officer corp for similar conflicts of interest or simply as a career progression move. There seems to be a lot of misinformation or basic understanding in this thread from the non-military members.

That all reads correct to me.
What did I say that you think contradicts this?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The term "fired" is a little misleading. The LTC had already decided to leave the NSC but in any case, he was reassigned to the Pentagon. He did not lose rank, he did not receive non-judicial punishment, etc. Reassignments occur all the time in the officer corp for similar conflicts of interest or simply as a career progression move. There seems to be a lot of misinformation or basic understanding in this thread from the non-military members.

Undermining a superior in your chain of command doesn't go over well in the military.

He has basically ostracized himself. 

His days of promotions and cush assignments are over.

He will probably be out of the military within the year.

---

How do you come to this ridiculous conclusion?  You do know (oh wait... you didn't serve so you don't know) that the military operates under a total different set of laws on top of current Federal, State and Local Laws according to where they happen to be stationed.

Let me give you a little civics lesson since you didn't seem to get it in your government school.

Did you know that the Captain of a Navy ship could order a sailor confined and only given bread and water?  This without a trial by Judge and Jury?  Think it doesn't happen?  I've seen it.

Second of all, a member of the military is under the command of the Executive branch of government who's ultimate Commander and Chief is The President of The United States.  Congress has 0% power over any military member.

My point is, with your ignorance regarding the military you probably shouldn't be commenting on what they "can and can't" do or whether a career move is "lateral".

Of course I know a captain of a ship has absolute power over all the passengers on the ship. Everyone knows that.  It even applies to cruise ships. Until you get to port, the Captain's word is law. If the captain abuses his power, he might be in trouble after the ship reaches port, but as a passenger or enlisted person you would rather not wait for that. 

but Congress does have the power to question any member of the military about anything, just like they have the power to question any civilian about anything. You can invoke certain rights and legal principles, and not answer, but they still have the right to ask. They do not have the power to give orders, obviously, but you're wrong to say they have no power at all.

People always say the military people have the same rights as civilians but they really dont. Basically you have the right to do what youre told to do. Youre told everything. Youre told what time you have to be out of youre bed in the morning and you cant be back in it until a certain time. Your meal choices are what they decide they will be. Ehat you wear is told to you and even if you are cold you cant wear the beanie thing to cover your ears if its not in the POD(PLAN OF THE DAY)  as part of the Uniform of the day
 You cant talk about politics while in uniform you cant hold hands or kiss in public but they have eased up on public displays of affection
 Until not too long ago you couldnt have a beard either
 When i went in you couldnt have more than one tattoo and if you had none you couldnt get one. When you made even the slightest mistake that is even insignificant in any such as use a dark blue pen instead of a black pen you can be yelled at screamed at made to do extra duty or even sent to a non judicial punishment by your commanding officer and lose rank plus half a months pay for two months 30 days restriction 30 days extra duty. The is a specific artivle in the UCMJ titled General which is where they can nail your [BLEEP] to the wall for anything they dont like that doesn't fit in anywhere else in the UCMJ. AS americans we have rights under the constitution, but they dont cover you in the military. If you get in trouble youre screwed cuz they will do whatever they want to you and not even congress can stop them. And dont even get me started on health care and dental. If they want to do something they will
If they want to take out your wisdom teeth even if they arent bothering you they will. Did it to me
I said i dont need them out and the told not politely that they wearnt asking

---

The term "fired" is a little misleading. The LTC had already decided to leave the NSC but in any case, he was reassigned to the Pentagon. He did not lose rank, he did not receive non-judicial punishment, etc. Reassignments occur all the time in the officer corp for similar conflicts of interest or simply as a career progression move. There seems to be a lot of misinformation or basic understanding in this thread from the non-military members.

That all reads correct to me.
What did I say that you think contradicts this?

Damn near every comment you've made is offbase.

---

The term "fired" is a little misleading. The LTC had already decided to leave the NSC but in any case, he was reassigned to the Pentagon. He did not lose rank, he did not receive non-judicial punishment, etc. Reassignments occur all the time in the officer corp for similar conflicts of interest or simply as a career progression move. There seems to be a lot of misinformation or basic understanding in this thread from the non-military members.

Undermining a superior in your chain of command doesn't go over well in the military.

He has basically ostracized himself. 

His days of promotions and cush assignments are over.

He will probably be out of the military within the year.

He has been going outside his chain of command for years and I'm sure his performance reports read as such. With that said, this current situation won't be the sole cause of him retiring (out of the military).

---

That all reads correct to me.
What did I say that you think contradicts this?

Damn near every comment you've made is offbase.

---

Undermining a superior in your chain of command doesn't go over well in the military.

He has basically ostracized himself. 

His days of promotions and cush assignments are over.

He will probably be out of the military within the year.

He has been going outside his chain of command for years and I'm sure his performance reports read as such. With that said, this current situation won't be the sole cause of him retiring (out of the military).

I've been saying the same thing as you.  
I don't think Vindman has been treated unfairly. He doesn't deserve to be in Leavenworth but he also doesn't deserve to remain with the Whitehouse staff.  He probably acted in good faith, but he also pissed off the CoC.  
People who take Trump's side on everything seem to only be hearing the part where I say Vindman acted in good faith and shouldn't be in the brig, and take it to mean something else.  I don't know what.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Damn near every comment you've made is offbase.

---

He has been going outside his chain of command for years and I'm sure his performance reports read as such. With that said, this current situation won't be the sole cause of him retiring (out of the military).

I've been saying the same thing as you.  
I don't think Vindman has been treated unfairly. He doesn't deserve to be in Leavenworth but he also doesn't deserve to remain with the Whitehouse staff.  He probably acted in good faith, but he also pissed off the CoC.  
People who take Trump's side on everything seem to only be hearing the part where I say Vindman acted in good faith and shouldn't be in the brig, and take it to mean something else.  I don't know what.

Good Faith?! 

Idiot!

Vindman

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"