Replies

ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.

I'm sure he was counseled, yet continued.

ACtually I read an article when this story first came out which pointed out that he had twice been told what he was doing was OK because he had a disclaimer on his site saying that it was not associated with the USMC.

Saying that you will not obey unlawful orders is the height of discipline and good order - and that was what was previously listed as being what he said that got him in trouble. (To be truthful, this particular article is so poorly-written, I’m not sure whether what they put in quotes is directly from this guy or not. The whole article is clear as mud).

Refusing to confront an illegal foreign enemy combatant in the White HOuse would bring MUCH discredit upon the armed forces, so those refusing to address this are the ones in violation of Article 134.

And yes, the point at which he got into trouble was when he mentioned Obama’s ineligibility. Maybe he should be glad he got off with his life. The chairman of the Arkansas Democratic Party didn’t...

I'm sure he was counseled, yet continued.

If you're correct (very possible but by no means certain,IMO) then a less than honorable discharge may well be appropriate.If not,then counseling should have been the first step by the chain of command.