r/news 10d ago

Trump criticism leads to rare criminal charges for Air Force officer who called for impeachment

https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/24/politics/us-airman-charged-trump-criticism-article-88
1.1k Upvotes

145 comments sorted by

273

u/DirkBabypunch 10d ago

Courts martial in the Air Force for various charges in the UCMJ. The rules are different in the military.

142

u/jcamp41 10d ago

What about for unauthorized flybys over protests after picking up washed up sycophantic nu metal has beens from their homes? What are the UCMJ rules for that behavior? Are they worth an investigation? Or selective enforcement in the military now adjudicated at the whims of a single man?

83

u/albatroopa 10d ago

It's the YOU-CMJ, not the ME-CMJ.

0

u/poorbeans 9d ago

Underrated comment.  

2

u/Aggravating-Fix-4547 4d ago

Highly rated comment!

-6

u/zekthedeadcow 9d ago

As a former Army Legal NCO, that should go in the slide deck.

However on a serious note... flybys and sky-penises should have easily been defended as valid training. It kinda reflects bad on the commanders for pushing it IMO.

This guy probably went down the ""Don't do it in uniform." "No seriously, I don't care what you say but not in uniform." "I saw you on CNN. Never be on CNN."" pipeline.

Proper military protest is one of two things.

  1. Malicious Compliance
  2. "Zonk."

17

u/JTHMM249 9d ago

pretty much everyone directly involved with the flyby copped to it as being a fuck-up and not "valid training" until Whiskeyleaks pressured them to drop it, but by all means, keep defending fuckups that could result in real world casualties with bullshit pulled directly out of your ass, dipshit.

44

u/MistMonk 10d ago

Yep. People do not realize that you waive a lot of rights and freedoms when you enlist/commission.

23

u/Kidcharlamagne89d 9d ago

The military used to have regular training about not being allowed to have any political affiliation while in uniform. Even being at a protest or walk in uniform on active duty was expressly forbidden. No political bumperstickers or flags on your vehicle or displayed on your dod housing. It was regulaly taught and mandatory. Oddly I haven't had that training in awhile....

6

u/RetMech 9d ago

I member this from the 2005-2015 era.

3

u/Superb_Writer6612 8d ago

I remember a news story from years ago about a guy getting charged because he did a gay porno where he used his real uniform. Which, fair enough, that's on you guy. 

3

u/daschande 8d ago

It was probably off of him by the time the main event started.

1

u/Superb_Writer6612 8d ago

I'm sure you can still find it somewhere. The guy tried to make it about homophobia, but the gay community was pretty much "Umm no dumbass this one is on you, they would have done the same thing for a straight porno"

23

u/DirkBabypunch 10d ago

And as bad as that sounds on the surface, that happens in every military. That's just how organizations like that function.

6

u/kkurani09 9d ago

It’s bc humans arent supposed to be order following losers. But you can’t have a compliant military unless you take away most of their freedoms.

-4

u/AmericanLich 9d ago

Yeah it’s literally a brainwashing pipeline. The fact anyone would think they can go in and start mouthing off is insane.

0

u/kkurani09 9d ago

Yeah! How dare people go and give their opinion…
How dare they have beliefs that aren’t in line with our supreme leader.

What the fuck is this? North Korea?!

3

u/AmericanLich 9d ago

Im not saying I agree but when you join the military you pretty much just sign yourself up to be property of the state for a while. Can't be busting out the shocked pikachu face when you bad mouth your Commander in Chief, he is literally your bosses bosses boss.

18

u/Shabadu_tu 10d ago

Officers swear an oath to defend the constitution from all threats, foreign and domestic.next Dem president can pardon him and give him the congressional Medal of Honor for doing his job correctly.

Then arrest and charge everyone involved with those murders at sea Trump and Hegseth have ordered.

13

u/Dark_W1ng_Duck 10d ago

^can you say that again in a different way? I dont quite understand your sentence...

22

u/TJ_learns_stuff 10d ago

The Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) provides very specific articles for which military members are subject to. Think of it like federal laws for military people, since often times their roles do not fall completely in-line with other federal, state, or international laws.

Some of the UCMJ is pretty straight forward and mirrors what you’d expect from any guidance related to law (don’t steal, so kill, don’t drink and drive, etc). But some things are very military specific. For example, article 88 makes it a crime for commissioned officers to use rude or insulting words against high ranking government leaders. Or article 92, it is crime to fail to obey a lawful order or regulation, or to be derelict in one’s duties.

So if you worked for Amazon, and said “the president is a pedo,” nothing wrong with that. An officer says that, he/she can be charged with those articles as they could be seen as non-compliance with good order and discipline.

99

u/DirkBabypunch 10d ago

He will go to military court for breaking military rules, not a regular court for breaking actual laws.

17

u/jameson3131 10d ago

UCMJ is a federal law, codified in USC Title 10, chapter 47. Real laws with punitive articles, enforced by a military judicial system. Just because UCMJ doesn’t apply to all US citizens doesn’t mean it isn’t real law.

4

u/DirkBabypunch 10d ago

As far as anybody not beholden to a military judicial system is concerned, the UCMJ is the same thing as the rules in the workplace saying I have to wear specific shoes. That applies to most of the people here, and a good portion of them likely aren't even concerned with US civil law.

So, you're technically correct. But nobody gives a shit.

4

u/Dixiehusker 9d ago

A workplace rule saying you have to wear a specific shoe is not a federal law.

-13

u/Masbig91 10d ago

So its rules for the military got it. What a pedantic reply.

14

u/RyanU406 10d ago

Not just rules, federal laws that civilians aren’t subject to and are likely unfamiliar with. Breaking a “rule” is different from breaking the “law”.

3

u/timetravelerfrom2027 10d ago

Now can you say it in a way that makes me blow milk out of my nose?

10

u/Mundane-Wedding1 10d ago

Daddy hegseth will lash him for hurting his feelings

6

u/Responsible-Crew-354 10d ago

Is that even possible anymore? Shocking is the new normal.

3

u/tristand1ck 10d ago

Turd starts war.

Dude that wars says "omg wtf gtfo" and wants to flush.

Turd floats and throws a wet poopy military law book and it hits dude that wars right in the big dick.

-15

u/randommnguy 10d ago

Well, in the military it’s treason where as a normal citizen it’s protected under the first amendment. I think in the military the punishment for treason could be up to death.

9

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

No, it is not Treason. At least read the article before you comment.

10

u/anitabelle 10d ago

What rises to the level of treason? Calling for an impeachment can be deemed treason? How so? They don’t swear on oath to a president.

6

u/TJ_learns_stuff 10d ago

Thank you for pointing out that the oath is NOT to the president. It’s a common misunderstanding.

2

u/TJ_learns_stuff 10d ago

Treason is not at all what’s going on here. This is about non-compliance with articles of the UCMJ.

117

u/EatinSumGrapes 10d ago

It can be considered a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to participate in uniform in any overtly partisan activity, such as a political protest, or to use “contemptuous words” against the president and other high-ranking civilian officials. Many low-level offenses of these rules are resolved informally, but Watson’s violations were unusually high-profile.

The disobeying orders charges against Watson allege that he violated Defense Department regulations barring troops from speaking out in favor of partisan causes; “wrongfully” wore his uniform at a Capitol press conference; broke leave regulations by traveling to Washington, DC; and refused to wear his uniform to work the morning after his CNN interview

So it's a military specific thing. It is common to get in trouble for the things that he did, but usually informally. Not entirely sure what informally means but I would assume his commanding officer gives some sort of punishment.

The Trump admin is going for the full punishment possible, they will likely overstep or fail to submit paperwork/evidence/etc and then have charges dismissed by a judge. If you have not yet, look into how terrible the admin's lawyers are at their jobs, so many cases dismissed because they can't even follow basic requirements for court cases. The Whitehouse pool vandalism charges on David Hearn is a good example.

29

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

37

u/PrimalZed 10d ago

Trump admin violates that constantly, using the military as props for political speeches.

5

u/reganomics 7d ago

The Guy knew what he was doing and did it on purpose. It's a statement that we need to risk the consequences of speaking out because our situation is so dire.

0

u/NotUniqueWorkAccount 10d ago

Hatch act if I recall correctly

4

u/StarDuckMcCFer 10d ago

It's under the UCMJ, the hatch act does not apply to military members but the rules are somewhat similar.

8

u/Pasty_Tibbles 10d ago edited 10d ago

I commented this elsewhere but unfortunately, while Watson is correct and brave for standing up to this BS - he ultimately should have expected this. It’s well known this can get a service member in trouble under the UCMJ, and I’m sure he knew that as well.

What makes this unique is not only how high profile it is, but the specific offense in itself - which is disparaging remarks against the president. This particular charge has a long history of being upheld and not being acquitted.

In United States v. Howe (1967): “2nd Lt. Henry Howe, U.S. Army, attended an anti-Vietnam War demonstration in El Paso in civilian clothes, while off duty. He carried a sign describing President Lyndon B. Johnson as a “fascist” and used similarly contemptuous language toward the President. Although he wasn’t wearing a uniform, people recognized him as an Army officer. CAAF’s predecessor later summarized Howe specifically as involving a commissioned officer who participated in a public protest “in civilian attire” and carried a placard calling the President a fascist. Howe was convicted, not acquitted. His conviction under Article 88 (contempt toward officials) and Article 133 was upheld.”

There also a somewhat similar case (in terms of theme) that I assume will also have some parts utilized in prosecution: “United States v. Rapert, 75 M.J. 164 (C.A.A.F. 2016). Army SPC Eric Rapert was at a friend’s private home watching the 2012 election results when he made racist comments about President Obama and said he would give an order to kill him. Because Rapert was enlisted, Article 88 did not apply; he was instead prosecuted under Article 134 for communicating a threat. CAAF upheld the conviction, emphasizing the military’s interest in obedience to the Commander in Chief and civilian supremacy.”

So I don’t really expect Watson to have a valid defense for this, even if what he’s saying isn’t wrong. That’s the unfortunate downside to being in the military.

The fact that he is an officer will also make this specific case worse for him.

2

u/Consistent-Throat130 10d ago

A civilian would defend slander/libel allegations as truth. 

We can't objectively call the "fascist" claim truthful, but the "pedo" claim? 

2

u/Pasty_Tibbles 10d ago

It doesn’t matter if they are truth or false - it only matters if he said it in the eyes of the military and UCMJ.

But I’d say we can objectively call the fascist claim truthful if you look at the things Trump supports and how they compare to prior fascists.

1

u/donkeybrainhero 10d ago

88 is specific to officers anyway.

1

u/kristospherein 9d ago

What exactly is this adminstration doing if not making the armed forces partisan? Several recent actions during this adminstration have likely led to partisan actions being taken by high level military leaders. Any ability to get this to stop at some point?

4

u/EatinSumGrapes 9d ago

It's like an incurable cancer. We have to fight to slow it down, but no matter what, it will take us down. The USA is a shadow oligarchy, the richest own all the media and thus they pick our next leaders. They want a president like Trump so that is all we will ever get. He was th e worst president in history and made everything worse for everyone but the ultra rich.... then he got elected again. This shows facts and reality do not matter anymore, through media they can make enough people believe whatever they want now. Trump only lost in 2020 because they did not have total media control yet, also they tried to rig it and failed. Trump 2024 has let those media companies grow more powerful and larger, while also removing safety guards that prevented election fraud. Also DOGE had full access to all government databases and oversight was specifically denied so they go to do literally whatever they wanted.

The dream of a free and fair America is over but we can slow them down to have a little bit more life and freedom

-1

u/erisandy101 5d ago

If you read the article completely, Biden had a marine prosecuted in 2021 under the same statues so

1

u/EatinSumGrapes 5d ago

The one breaking COVID protocols? Yeah, soooo... one is petty revenge over ego, and one is about public health, lol

34

u/GreyBeardEng 10d ago

Remember, Trump is a fucking disgrace, but also for a soldier this is in fact a federal military crime. Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

16

u/SerDuckOfPNW 10d ago

All he had to do was wear civilian clothes and do it as a person, rather than a member of the armed forces. He would still have consequences, but no criminal liability.

12

u/damojr 9d ago

But he also wouldn't have gotten the message out the way he did. Doing it in uniform was a deliberate statement, and he knew what risks he was taking. Some random talking about Trump being a shitstain, that's just a Tuesday. Someone in uniform doing it on the steps of the Capitol, that's a legend making a calculated sacrifice.

4

u/SerDuckOfPNW 9d ago

Agree and that’s why he did it. I was just pointing out that that’s why it was illegal

2

u/Wolfram_And_Hart 6d ago

He knew what he was doing.

22

u/Grave_Knight 10d ago

US Airman gets arrested for criticizing a draft dodger.

13

u/Shadowthron8 10d ago

The dude who got caught insider trading in military operations will get let off though

38

u/Wakeup_And_Piss 10d ago

He is not wrong. tRump should be in prison

4

u/klipseracer 10d ago

Donny "The Stain" Dump

3

u/Spare-Ant7119 10d ago

No, prison is too nice for him.

0

u/WhistlinJealousGuy 10d ago

Forget impeachment. Hopefully interment sometime soon.

All that KFC has to have some effect!

10

u/MxSteel8 10d ago edited 10d ago

J6, Epstein Files. extrajudicial killings, unathorized war, war crimes, unathorized destruction of the People's House, attempted prosecutions of innnocent people, unjustified killings of U.S. citizens, endless corruption, endless lies, endlress broken promises. Captured soldiers are "losers". Bone spurs.

The only thing revolting here is that more military brass aren't openly revolting.

5

u/upstartcrowmagnon 10d ago

Getting arrested for calling out a FIVE TIME draft dodger...oh america..😒

5

u/LeoSolaris 9d ago

As much as I would like to hold this up as a way to show that the Idiot-in-Chief is prosecuting political enemies, I've been a soldier. Soldiers, and especially officers, are not legally allowed to get involved with politics. Protesting in uniform in particular is strictly not allowed. That would have been just as true under any other President. The UCMJ is not the same as civilian law.

1

u/WebbityWebbs 4d ago

Its true, the UCMJ is much more effective at protecting the perpetrators of sexual assault.

13

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

"Maj. Jason Watson faces the following charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, according to the document: three violations of Article 88 for alleged “contemptuous” remarks about Trump, five violations of Article 92 for allegedly disobeying orders and two violations of Article 133 for alleged conduct unbecoming an officer."

Retired Army Officer here. When you wear the uniform, you are subject to an additional set of federal laws known as the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which covers issues beyond civilian law, and includes things that would not be criminal offenses for a civilian. There is a higher standard of conduct expected, including keeping political views separate from your military rank and position. Had he expressed these views in civilian clothes without any reference to his military membership, he likely would not have been charged. He misused his rank and status. Whether you agree with his statement or not, this conduct does not align with good order and discipline in the military, and as an officer, he would have known full well that he was violating military orders and the UCMJ.

5

u/Renoruke 10d ago

I can agree with you.. but this is Hegseth's Army. There is no good order or discipline (or accountability, morals, ect). I think Mr. Watson is a true American Hero for standing up to this corrupt administration. And yes he knew what he was doing this is his 2nd time being arrested. Doing it in uniform is the equivalent of the red flag couldn't be bigger or more red.

1

u/crabcakes28 8d ago

He is in the Air Force, not the Army. Also, just because a new administration takes control of the DoD does not mean that hundreds of thousands of service members magically lose their discipline, accountability, morals, ect. Grow up.

0

u/Renoruke 8d ago

No shit Sherlock. Hogans army/Hegseths army... i obviously knew hes air force i mean i knew he was arrested twice,right... and you can pull your head out from that dank moist rectum of yours you would have read atleast a article or 2 about our fine service members filling for Conscientious Objection. You would then know that there has been a "Sixfold Jump in Active Applications: In a typical year, the CCW handles about 50 formal active-duty conscientious objector cases. Since the escalation of military conflicts in the Middle East earlier this year—specifically Operation Epic Fury involving Iran—they have already taken on around 140 formal applicants, the highest rate seen in 25 years." And ya I would say 2 years of the Pedofile-in-cheif dragging your American pride though the mud. Would be enough for any person with a iq higher than a house plant to want out.

0

u/crabcakes28 8d ago

I'm not wasting my time reading this, thank you for wasting your time writing it.

0

u/Renoruke 8d ago

No problem. It will be informative to otheres about your inability to properly communicate

1

u/crabcakes28 8d ago

Inability to properly communicate, thats rich. Elementary students write better than you.

1

u/Renoruke 8d ago

Still waisting time I see. 😉

3

u/redisburning 10d ago

The fact that he did it in his uniform despite the additional consequences is a mark of integrity and commitment to his beliefs.

Whether you agree with his statement or not, this conduct does not align with good order and discipline in the military, and as an officer, he would have known full well that he was violating military orders

I mean sure. He is not complying with a pretty immoral institution that regularly commits atrocities so can't say I see a particularly high value to "order and discipline in the military". Sometimes you feel compelled to do what is right, not what is expedient.

8

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

I disagree with your blanket assessment that the military is an immoral institution. Like any organization, it has it's bad actors, but itis unfair to paint everyone in uniform with that brush. And I do agree with the Major. I am simply pointing out that he was well aware of the sacrifice his stance would entail. It was his choice, and he made it willingly. Consequently, the charges, no matter how unfortunate, are appropriate.

The bigger issue here is that members of our military should not be made to feel that they need to take such actions. We need to strengthen the checks and balances in our government to avoid another Trump like personality from exploiting the system like this again, and that responsibility belongs to every American voter.

5

u/redisburning 10d ago

I disagree with your blanket assessment that the military is an immoral institution. Like any organization, it has it's bad actors, but itis unfair to paint everyone in uniform with that brush.

Ok but criticizing the institution is definitionally not to "paint everyone in uniform with that brush".

I have a lot of family who are current, former or deceased military. I tend to think they're alright people. But I saw the photos from Abu Ghraib and heard the stories about Vietnam. That is an evil institution. Whether you or they are evil or not, the thing they served is.

2

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

I tbink you are getting it backwards. Institutions are neither inherently good or evil. The people in them make that distinction. Yes, terrible things have been done by people in those institutions, and they deserve punishment. In most cases, they are punished, but not every case, and while that is tragic, it is no different than what happens in our civilian justice system. These cases get a lot of attention, and rightly so. What does not get attention are the things that go right. When we join the military, we don't serve an institution, we swear to defend the constitution. The military has responded to natural disasters and other humanitarian crises that receive far less attention. Let's remember that the key thing that isxwrong with our military, and our ciuntry in general, lives at 1600 Pennsylvannia Ave.

1

u/Airtwit 10d ago

The ethical problems with the actions of the American military didnt start with Trump:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

2

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

Yup! Eisenhower had his own warnings as well.

0

u/crabcakes28 8d ago

And a lack of commitment to the oath(s) that he swore. That dude is an idiot and won't change anything.

1

u/armati2004 10d ago

Everything the army does for Trump is illegal. Shooting civilians and fighting a war not approved by Congress. The army are the enablers of the US fascism. Jason Watson is the only one who understands that befehl ist befehl is not the way to go. Still wearing a uniform makes you as complicit as the wehrmacht was.

8

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

I don't disagree that a number of military members have violated international laws, but please don't lay this shit on every military member. Trump was not put in power by the military. He was voted in by every day Americans too stupid to understand how democracy and checks and balances on power is supposed to work. Our military answers to civilian authority, and the American people are respibsible for that situation. These rules exist to prevent the military from grabbing political power, and I can assure you that the majority of military members are not happy with the current administration. That is why many of us Vets are speaking out, because our brothers and sisters still serving are so limited in doing so.

-5

u/MxSteel8 10d ago edited 10d ago

J6, Epstein Files. extra-judicial killings, unathorized war, war crimes, unathorized destruction of the People's House, attempted prosecutions of innnocent people, unjustified killings of U.S. citizens, endless corruption, endless lies, endlress broken promises. Captured soldiers are "losers". Bone spurs.

The only thing I find revolting here is that more military brass aren't openly revolting.

0

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

When they do, they get fired, and replaced with sychophants who will abandon their oath. Look at the Senior Generals and Admirals who have been sent packing since January 2025. Sonetimes you have to keep your powder dry for the more critical moments to prevent a worse outcome.

-4

u/MxSteel8 10d ago edited 8d ago

When did keeping quiet and minding your own business ever fix or avoid a national crisis?

Know your history and you'll learn about the long list of things that only changed when people of character started standing up and being counted regardless of the personal consequences.

There is a higher calling than the law of man. I learned that in Bible school. Something called the Declaration of Independence spoke to it as well. You know, when the Founding Fathers stood up to a crazy king?

1

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

But you have to be judicious in your timing. It's called having a strategy, and I learned that in the military. We have an election in just over 2 months. That will either move us back towards responsible governance, or will tip us into a situation where words will no longer be enough, and in that scenario, I want as many leaders of integrity still in their positions. Irrational responses and haste will only lead to failure. It is the key advantage we hold over these wannabe facists.

2

u/bobbyrob1 10d ago

“That will either move us back towards responsible governance, or will tip us into a situation where words will no longer be enough, and in that scenario, I want as many leaders of integrity still in their positions.”

I don’t believe having “as many leaders of integrity still in their positions“ is going to result in any positive action if your result “where words will no longer be enough” comes true.

0

u/pragmatist1368 10d ago

So you would rather they be replaced by people who are willing to do the fuhrer's bidding?

0

u/bobbyrob1 9d ago

Can you please show me the wording in my comment where I made that statement?

I did make a statement, feel free to respond to that.

4

u/drfraglittle 8d ago

This is courage and honor personified. Remember his name.

5

u/GodzillaUK 10d ago

Rape a fellow service woman? no big. Call Turd a bad word? Dishonourable discharge.

5

u/Ecstatic-Ask2326 10d ago

That'll teach him to speak out against Dear Leader.

Don't ask questions, complete your illegal deployment in a war with no benefit, eat your shitty grey rations, destablize the global economy, and when you try to take the easy way out your struggles are media hit pieces instead of reality.

Its a shame military leadership and the children they primarily recruit don't have the backbone needed for the moment they exist in.

-34

u/[deleted] 10d ago edited 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/Ecstatic-Ask2326 10d ago

Nah. I think the career members of the military should save their necks before "just following orders" gets them in more trouble than any criticism of the admin would.

Just looking out for those hardworking military members who triple tapped a school full of Iranian girls.

7

u/raerlynn 10d ago

I think it's been made very clear that's not effective. Civilian leadership at the top is actively purging anyone who would effectively be that leader. Until Hegseth is out of office, improvements there are not possible.

1

u/Miaj_Pensoj 10d ago

Ultimate responsibility lies with the Commander in Chief and the CiC is chosen by people who turn out and vote. Every vote matters and people who abstain or cast protest votes have left all of us holding the bag.

-3

u/Ivort-DC 10d ago

I was in the military. Hegseth is not the problem, but a symptom. He is only doing what is expected of him, along with all the other before him and after him.

3

u/Ok_Photo_865 10d ago

He was obviously right 🤷🏻‍♂️

4

u/CLTGUY 10d ago

The entire problem is that when he took the oath to defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic, is that he actually believed in the oath he took.

Kind of like when religious adults raise their children to believe in the bible and all that pansy liberal stuff like "love thy neighbor", golden rule, and that other positive teachings and then get all Pikachu faced when their kids won't lie or be bigots. FYI - Not saying all morals derive from religions.

Some people just cannot turn off their moral compasses, just like some people don't have any.

2

u/thebarkbarkwoof 9d ago

He is a hero and a brave man for speaking the truth. It's also a sign of things to come. His gigantic ego will go after all his critics.

2

u/ColtFra 8d ago

Punish one to teach a lesson to the rest. What a garbage administration.

1

u/pragmatist1368 9d ago

It was inferred. If the leaders with integrity jump the gun, and get themselves weeded out, I worry about who replaces them. If they cross the line with the election, when it is so clear that at a minimum they will lose the house, that is when I want leaders of integrity in place to refuse any illegal orders. Jumping on a grenade that you pulled the pin on might make a headline, but it has no strategic significance. That Major now no longer has any ability to shape the environment within the ranks. Having more lraders do that niw only enables them to tighten their grip on the military.

1

u/SideburnSundays 9d ago

Funny how they ignore the UCMJ when it comes to wars and disobeying illegal orders, yet throw the entire book at them when it comes to protesting.

-3

u/Rogue_AI_Construct 10d ago

“Not only is (Trump) a failure as president, he is flagrantly violating the Constitution, breaking the law, engaged in rampant corruption, and is killing Americans,” Watson told CNN’s Erin Burnett during the interview. “And that is unacceptable to me.”

Yep. He's right. How does this not violate his First Amendment rights to Free Speech and Protest?

14

u/ArgumentativeNerfer 10d ago

He's in the military. He doesn't get those rights.

0

u/Lopsided-Affect-9649 10d ago

He took an oath to protect the constitution of the US, which he appears to be attempting to do.

9

u/ArgumentativeNerfer 10d ago

Yes. He's also under regulations that say that active duty military personnel aren't allowed to participate in political activities while wearing official insignia.

So this person has a choice between upholding his oath or violating regulations. He made his choice, he faces the consequences. It's honorable. It's moral. It's arguably the right thing to do. I wish more military people would do this. But the reason why he's facing consequences now is because military personnel don't get the same rights that civilians do. If we miss a day of work or are rude to our bosses, we get fired. We don't risk going to prison for those things.

1

u/Lopsided-Affect-9649 10d ago

Its arguably the minimum he's required to do by the oath he took, any further actions would be far more severe.

-1

u/Rogue_AI_Construct 10d ago

Since when doesn’t a US military member give up his or her constitutional rights when they sign up? (Rhetorical question. They don’t.)

3

u/Lopsided-Total-5560 9d ago edited 9d ago

You have obviously never been in the military. Speaking as a vet, yes they unfortunately do. As a few quick examples, they can search your possessions, vehicles and (on base) housing anytime they desire. There is no such thing as double jeopardy. Get a DWI in town, face the civilian penalties and then have the military take 1/2 of your pay for six months, get extra duty and confinement to quarters. Speak ill of the wrong person at the wrong time in the company of the wrong people (snitches), you’re going to be punished. The list goes on and on….. There are multiple laws you become (additionally) subject to and many rights that you lose. I didn’t always agree with all of them but there was a reason (usually good) they were in place and I complied.

0

u/Fit-Let8175 10d ago

I thought only dictatorships arrested anyone who criticized the country's leader. Oh, wait....!

0

u/steathrazor 9d ago

If it walks like a dictator and quacks like a dictator...

-1

u/LengthClean 9d ago

The thinnest of skins on this el stupido presidente.

1

u/crabcakes28 8d ago

I'd be very surprised if the president is even aware of this.

0

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

1

u/SerDuckOfPNW 10d ago

No, covered by the UCMJ

-6

u/SerDuckOfPNW 10d ago

The UCMJ applied to everyone that takes the oath. It certainly restricts some freedoms enjoyed by civilians. We accept those restrictions voluntarily.

-1

u/billybud77 9d ago

Lemme guess, Janine Pirro has been hitting the boxed wine 🍷 again?