*****************************************************************
Source Link: Universal Free Press
The total now stands at eleven. The Army Times reports that two more high ranking military members, each with impressive resumes and service records, have now been relieved of their command duties. That’s eleven this year, and it’s only October.
No reason for the action was given by the Hussein Obama regime other than “it is not related to criminal misconduct.”
Have there been new “rules of engagement” for command issued? Are the players of old not melding with the rules of today? If they won’t play ball with Hussein Obama, do they get booted from the roster, traded for a player who will? We should take some serious looks at the “new teammates in charge.”
The latest to bite the dust are both members of the Army’s 143rd Expeditionary Sustainment Command, deployed to Camp Arifjan, Kuwait. One, Brig. Gen. Bryan W. Wampler, was the commanding general and the other, Command Sgt. Maj. Don b. Jordan, was the senior enlisted man. Major Thomas Campbell, spokesman for the 1st Theater Sustainment Command announced the suspensions effective October 10th.
This comes on the heels of the firing of two of the generals who were guarding and securing our nuclear weapons. (see video below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIqbFBmOZ2c
Campbell declined to comment on the ongoing investigation, other than his comment as to it not being related to any criminal misconduct.
Something doesn’t seem quite right here. If there is no criminal investigation, then what are they investigating? Are they guilty of insensitivity to their pampered enemy, or some other insignificant violation? If the supposed offense is minimal, then why destroy the career and life of a loyal and capable member of the armed forces?
With all of the recent military firings, there is a great deal of speculation of there being an intentional replacement of leadership, based upon new criteria, established by the Hussein Obama regime.
The discussion centers around the existence and failure to pass a possible “litmus test” question of whether the service member would obey direct orders to fire on American citizens, in violation of their oath to the Constitution. Perhaps that kind of non-criminal misconduct is offensive in the new army and enough to get you relieved of duty.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice provides the following protections to military officers:
“804 ARTICLE 4. DISMISSED OFFICER’S RIGHT TO TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL
01. General Provisions
(a) If any commissioned officer, dismissed by order of the president, makes a written application for trial by court-martial setting forth under oath, that he has been wrongfully dismissed, the President, as soon as practicable, shall convene a general court-martial to try that officer on the charges on which he was dismissed.”
I would love to see one of these guys take the Hussein Obama regime on and demand a trial for the supposed transgressions, calling witnesses and exposing any impropriety on the part of those responsible.
That would take an extreme amount of courage and dedication and it might be more than one could be expected to voluntarily walk into, but if it were done, I can see the tremendous amount of heat being brought to bear on the villainous players in the matchup between patriot and despot.
Given the value that many of these dismissed leaders put upon honor, I would not be surprised to learn that an application is already in the mail.
Rick Wells is a conservative Constitutionalist author who contributes to conservative media outlets.
Please follow Rick on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rick-Wells/1405080846374047?ref=hl
