Article

2007-02-08 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-02-08 13:29|| || Front Page|| [10 views since 2007-05-07] Top

Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.

Posted by wxjames 2007-02-08 14:09|| 2007-02-08 14:09|| Front Page Top

#2 I would happily defer my retirement if they give me a seat on his next CM board. This guy is either the dumbest college grad in America or he is a deliberate seditious plant into our military.

Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan 2007-02-08 14:19|| 2007-02-08 14:19|| Front Page Top

#3 After reading this I am now more convinced than ever that he joined the US Army with the specific intent of refusing to go to war.

Mike, I agree 100% with your assessment. His talking points are too polished.

Posted by Sea a few desks over 2007-02-08 14:22|| 2007-02-08 14:22|| Front Page Top

#4 Okay, I'll bite, but remember you asked for it! :)

Each crime listed in the UMCJ is defined by a list of elements -- usually three to six specific actions. Each of them must be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, to obtain a conviction. As a prosecutor, you most assuredly want to avoid charging crimes where you lack admissible evidence to prove each and every element. Because you fall short on any one element, you risk acquittal on the whole charge.

The difficulty with many articles you cite would be proving his intent, his inner state of mind, at the time in question. It doesn't matter so much what the accused did, but what the government can prove, within a very restrictive set of rules. This is meant to protect the innocent, but it's very frustrating when you know the accused is a remorseless scumbag who'd do it again and again.

Personally, my strategy would not be to nickel and dime this to death with stuff like fraudulent enlistment or conduct unbecoming, none of which carry a max punishment of more than a couple of years.

Instead, I'd marshal every possible resource to document Watada's every move for the last four years, and go whole-hog on the one charge that truly captures the evil of his conduct: Art. 94, mutiny and sedition, which carries the death penalty, in peacetime or war.

A mutiny/sedition case would be very unusual, take tremendous effort, and require backing from risk-averse colonels and generals who wouldn't want to do something shocking like fight back or rock the boat. But to me, our justice system is pointless, if we do not use it to stomp bottom-feeders like Watada, and let it be known all across the land, to never, ever, try this shit again.

But then, I am exJAG (of the "ma'am" variety, btw). :)

Posted by exJAG 2007-02-08 14:55|| 2007-02-08 14:55|| Front Page Top

#5 Seems to me he is calling for for the Army (and other armed forces) to mutiny or desert when he says "If soldiers realized this war is contrary to what the Constitution extols if they stood up and threw their weapons down".

Even civilians can be charged with inciting mutiny or desertion. I haven't read the UCMJ lately, so I am not sure which article he could be charged under for these statements.

I, too, would defer my retirement pay for an opportunity to sit on this POS's court martial.

Posted by Rambler">Rambler 2007-02-08 14:58|| 2007-02-08 14:58|| Front Page Top

#6 I was fortunate enough to have the same Jag officer for two seperate commands, lucky PCS. "She" always protected me and never lost, even when she was 7 months pregnant and had to come in on her own time to help!

Like I said, it has to be sedition cause he cant be that stupid!

Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan 2007-02-08 15:16|| 2007-02-08 15:16|| Front Page Top

#7 I guess the Left is now in favor of military coups and opposes civillian control of the military.

So when the M-1s roll onto the White House lawn and President Hillary Rodham is dragged from the Oval Office and strung up from a convenient tree on authority of the provisional council for her crimes against the people, they'll be cool with it, right?

Posted by Mike 2007-02-08 15:16|| 2007-02-08 15:16|| Front Page Top

#8 So ex Jag were you in Germany in the early 90's???

Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan 2007-02-08 15:17|| 2007-02-08 15:17|| Front Page Top

#9 exJAG is in Germany now, 49Pan.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-02-08 15:27|| 2007-02-08 15:27|| Front Page Top

#10 Thanks TW, My Jag in the early 90's was just amazing! A wonderful woman and a pit viper Jag officer. She saved my keester a number of times during the don't ask dont tell, drawdown, oh the angst of Bosnia/Clinton times.

Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan 2007-02-08 15:52|| 2007-02-08 15:52|| Front Page Top

#11 exJAG,

Ma'am, my apologies - and thank you for the comments.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-02-08 16:16|| 2007-02-08 16:16|| Front Page Top

#12 My pleasure. I've posted a detailed legal analysis over on the other thread. In summary: f*ck f*ckity f*ck f*ck f*ck.

I was assigned to USAREUR until a few years ago. I loved defending my commanders, they were great guys. One of my favorite moments was with our XO, who was tough as nails, but scrupulously fair. He was in my office shortly before he was to testify, and it took me a few minutes to realize he was about to wet himself, he was so nervous. Mr. Hardcharger? I couldn't believe it. So impulsively, I squeezed his hand, and told him to just tell the truth. I'll never forget the way he smiled.

He did great. And we won, of course. :)

Posted by exJAG 2007-02-08 16:33|| 2007-02-08 16:33|| Front Page Top

#13 Mrs. Ex-JAG, I love you! Kick ass. Have fun while you're at it.

Posted by Whiskey Mike 2007-02-08 19:43|| 2007-02-08 19:43|| Front Page Top

#14 There is no legal requirement that the US restrain itself from a pre-emptive war. We've done it several times, including both the Grenada invasion and the Panama incursion during President Reagan's terms of office. This POS not only hasn't read the Constitution, he has little knowledge of US history. He deserves far more than he's going to get. Personally, I'd have him walking the rim of Kilauea from morning to night, policing up the new rocks, with a large ball attached to his ankle by a stout chain.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2007-02-08 20:59|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2007-02-08 20:59|| Front Page Top

#15 Watada is having his minutes of fame becuz he andor his Attys know he's gonna lose. The caselaws + UCMJ standards are very clear - that being said, in a few years another(s) will come along to challenge again.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-02-08 21:29|| 2007-02-08 21:29|| Front Page Top

#16 I remember in the 60s SDS types were trying to do the same type of thing by infiltrating in the military, though I do not remember them having much success.

Posted by Alaska Paul">Alaska Paul 2007-02-08 22:25|| 2007-02-08 22:25|| Front Page Top

#17 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]

Posted by wxjames 2007-02-08 14:09|| 2007-02-08 14:09|| Front Page Top

14:09 wxjames
23:51 KBK
23:38 KBK
23:12 Barbara Skolaut
23:12 sinse
23:07 sinse
23:03 sinse
22:50 Angaviling Thomoter8773
22:38 liberalhawk
22:38 Biff! Sock! Kapow!
22:37 liberalhawk
22:36 Anonymoose
22:36 Fleck Graish5949
22:32 SteveS
22:32 Mullah Lodabullah
22:31 liberalhawk
22:25 Alaska Paul
22:24 Omolurt Elmeaper6990
22:21 Broadhead6
22:19 Broadhead6
22:02 JosephMendiola
21:43 Alaska Paul
21:40 Barbara Skolaut
21:40 Alaska Paul