Consequences for Veterans and/or retirees in the 2021 DC Riots

[SlickAg]

I think what makes this a different situation is that these Guardsmen are just that- citizen soldiers who are not always bound by the UCMJ.

So if someone posted something two days ago, when they were on duty, got it. If someone posted something two months ago, on their time, that’s an entirely different ball of wax.

There used to be a very simple solution to all of this: military personnel refraining from vocalizing their beliefs about their elected leadership. But I think we all know that ship has sailed.

 

[bubblehead]

I think what makes this a different situation is that these Guardsmen are just that- citizen soldiers who are not always bound by the UCMJ.

To be more specific... Soldiers and airmen in the National Guard of the United States are subject to the UCMJ only if activated (mobilized or recalled to active duty) in a Federal capacity under Title 10 by an executive order issued by the President, or during their Annual Training periods, which are orders issued under Title 10.

 

[Hair Warrior]

I would be interested to see the comments and context, but I doubt we will.

"Comments or texts..." I assume the "comments" are Social Media posts, but what did he mean by "texts". Are you looking at people's texts on their cell phone or did they mean something else?

Think messaging apps.

 

[Brett327]

I think what makes this a different situation is that these Guardsmen are just that- citizen soldiers who are not always bound by the UCMJ.

So if someone posted something two days ago, when they were on duty, got it. If someone posted something two months ago, on their time, that’s an entirely different ball of wax.

There used to be a very simple solution to all of this: military personnel refraining from vocalizing their beliefs about their elected leadership. But I think we all know that ship has sailed.

Based on what we know, this is very likely a judgment call leadership is making based on their assessment of an individual’s character or perception of a potential threat. So, at this point, whether the individuals were subject to UCMJ is not relevant unless someone gets charged with a violation.

 

[Griz882]

My old ARNG friends tell me that one guy is believed to be some kind of member/follower of the Oath Keepers. The second person made some comments that got his own platoon mates concerned so they reported it up the chain. The remaining ten or so aren’t related to protests or riots but have “something” in their recent past that makes the FBI say...”ummmm.” Not enough to investigate, just enough to say, “no thanks” to entering the protective zone.

 

[MIDNJAC]

Out of curiosity, is having a security clearance a common thing amongst our infantry peeps?

 

[HAL Pilot]

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) sharply criticized federal officials Monday over reports that the Department of Defense, assisted by the FBI, is vetting members of the National Guard assigned to provide security during the inauguration this week. In a tweet Monday evening that included an article from The Washington Post, Abbott called the joint effort by the Pentagon and FBI "offensive." He also said that he would not order Texas's National Guard deployed to Washington, D.C., again if the troops under his command were "disrespected" and had to take part in the vetting effort.

 

[Pags]

Out of curiosity, is having a security clearance a common thing amongst our infantry peeps?

I don't think anyone doing SF-86s took these sort of orgs seriously until a few weeks ago. A few months ago that topic came up in a thread here.

 

[MIDNJAC]

I don't think anyone doing SF-86s took these sort of orgs seriously until a few weeks ago. A few months ago that topic came up in a thread here.

Yeah that is probably true, and I guess most of my experience has been via SSBI's which probably doesn't paint an accurate picture

 

[SlickAg]

Based on what we know, this is very likely a judgment call leadership is making based on their assessment of an individual’s character or perception of a potential threat. So, at this point, whether the individuals were subject to UCMJ is not relevant unless someone gets charged with a violation.

If you can’t charge someone with a UCMJ violation, where exactly is that line drawn? Does it depend on the definition of “abundance of caution”?

“These are vetting efforts that identify any questionable behavior in the past, or any potential link to questionable behavior not related to extremism,” said Jonathan Rath Hoffman, chief Pentagon spokesman. He said that the Defense Department is proactively removing people “out of an abundance of caution.”

“There is going to be a continued look at this,” Hoffman said. “Whether that is an internal DOD look within their chain of command or an investigation by others is something that is being determined.”

 

[Jim123]

Out of curiosity, is having a security clearance a common thing amongst our infantry peeps?

ISTR confidential for low ranking grunt in a line company and secret coming later, back during OIF when manning was more of a pump than a filter.

The comms guys need secret or higher, I think the supply sergeant needs secret too.

 

[BigRed389]

ISTR confidential for low ranking grunt in a line company and secret coming later, back during OIF when manning was more of a pump than a filter.

The comms guys need secret or higher, I think the supply sergeant needs secret too.

For the PFC LCPL types I would imagine not. Cannon fodder, I mean Infantry, is open to green card holders - and green card holders cannot get a security clearance as they are non-US citizens.

I’m more surprised that we’re surprised by this. White House military staff are required to undergo another screening that goes beyond SSBI. Out of tens of thousands of NG troops, with that extra scrutiny, odds were you were gonna find a few that maybe threw up some red flags.
I know a few guys that had their career trajectories altered based on a bad poly or who they chose to marry due to their in laws status. It is what it is.

 

[Brett327]

If you can’t charge someone with a UCMJ violation, where exactly is that line drawn? Does it depend on the definition of “abundance of caution”?

“These are vetting efforts that identify any questionable behavior in the past, or any potential link to questionable behavior not related to extremism,” said Jonathan Rath Hoffman, chief Pentagon spokesman. He said that the Defense Department is proactively removing people “out of an abundance of caution.”

“There is going to be a continued look at this,” Hoffman said. “Whether that is an internal DOD look within their chain of command or an investigation by others is something that is being determined.”

It’s a judgment call by whomever is in charge based on the facts available to them. If they subsequently find illegalities during their investigation, then they charge the individuals accordingly.

 

[nittany03]

I don't think anyone doing SF-86s took these sort of orgs seriously until a few weeks ago. A few months ago that topic came up in a thread here.

It would mildly surprise me if there wasn't a serious spool-ex going on at DEOMI, the Joint Staff, and OSD right now about how to screen the force.

 

[SlickAg]

It’s a judgment call by whomever is in charge based on the facts available to them. If they subsequently find illegalities during their investigation, then they charge the individuals accordingly.

I don’t expect someone who’s only ever been on active duty to really understand. My question is whether or not any of these Guardsmen had their rights violated. And you might dismiss that argument, but we are living in a world in which a sitting US Congressman said the following:

“'The National Guard is 90 some-odd percent male, and only about 20 percent of white males voted for Biden,' he said. 'You've got to figure that in the Guard, which is predominantly more conservative … they're probably not more than 25 percent of the people there protecting us that voted for Biden. The other 75 percent are in the large class of folks that might want to do something,'”

Democrat congressman: Trump supporters may 'do something' to Biden

Rep. Steve Cohen (D) expressed concern National Guard troops responsible for protecting Washington could be a threat. He suggested too many 'white males' voted for Trump.

www.google.com