Posted on 09/02/2014 7:32:23 AM PDT by lbryce
A Vietnam veteran and former Green Beret who was on the St. Louis police force for 35 years was forced into retirement after liberal news outlet CNN unearthed a video in which he spoke about President Obama and the direction of America.
Sgt. Maj. Dan Page (Ret.) spoke to the St. Louis/St. Charles division of the Oath Keepers in April of this year, and the video of his speech made it to YouTube under the title “The End of American Sovereignty & Constitutional Rights,” which is harshly critical of President Obama, liberal judges, affirmative action, and notes that the Declaration of Independence gives Americans the right to overthrow the government, according to the Washington Post.
(Excerpt) Read more at madworldnews.com ...
When the first Amendment goes....
Well, it really doesn't make sense to say, you can pry my First Amendment rights from my cold dead tongue.
If he was not on the company clock when he made the comments, he should have a good court case.
Looks like most of us on here are going to be unemployed shortly the way things are going. Either accept this insanity, or starve to death. Great.
Hey he failed to realize that free speech is only for liberal loonies. Most of us know better.
If he introduced himself as Officer Dan Page, or anything that identified him as a member of the city's police force, then he doesn't.
It is not nice to disparage Dear Leader.
Well, Sgt. Maj. Dan Page’s words proved to be accurate
Since the police force is a government agency and not a private company, he’s got something of a First Amendment case here.
If he introduced himself as Officer Dan Page, or anything that identified him as a member of the city’s police force, then he doesn’t.
Not to mention two other things: 1) A very powerful police union, and 2) police retirement can be quite cushy (although it's best if you have a year's warning to run up the "last year's" earnings by doing a lot of details.)
When will We The People speak up against this tyranny? Listen to an Israeli discuss What Would I Have Done when speaking about the Holocaust:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crIKfuUX5PE&feature=youtu.be
"Article 88 of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) makes it a crime for a commissioned officer to use "contemptuous words" against the President, Vice-President, Secretary of Defense, and other specified high government officials. Enlisted members can be prosecuted under Article 134 for using similar words. The words have to be "to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, or conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces." Military members have gotten into trouble for calling officials "fascists," "thieves," murderers" "tyrants" "fools" and "gangsters."
http://nlgmltf.org/leaflets/GI_Rights_free_speech.html
From the above I'd need to see the content before making judgment.
Seems an obvious and utterly egregious abrogation of his First Amendment rights.
Granted, the constitution doesn’t mean anything anymore, but I’d still get myself a good and vicious attorney and sue.
He should have slammed Christians and proclaimed that he was gay.
He could be in the running to be Attorney General.
The truth shall set you free....of your job.
Guess he could have been in ‘full regalia’ while addressing the M Sam ‘fan’ club claiming double discrimination and probably gotten a promotion.
I say ‘double discrimination’ guess you could call it ‘triple discrimination’ if Sam THINKS he is a woman.
Hard to tell anymore....
I had a flashback today to an old TV show with Jim Backus(?) who was dozing off while getting a haircut in prep for his HS reunion and was mumbling Butch (an old classmate) and he ended up with a crew cut.
Guess in todays world it would be assumed he was talking about a female with a hankering for females..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.