Replies

Please don't take any offense as none is intended, but here's what I see as a problem using his oath as his rationale: He doesn't get to determine who is the enemy. That's not his job and his oath doesn't give him that authority. So to say that he's only following his oath just isn't enough. There aren't any caveats in the officers oath that give him the leeway to pick and choose.

Where I think for sure that he will be found guilty are specifications 1 and 2 of article 92 where he's been given orders to appear in front of his Commanding Officer and he chose not to appear. That happened PRIOR to his missing movement on April 12th. Those were written orders by his superior officers to appear. They orders weren't derived from President Obama.