The Daily Mail reports that 120 retired general officers have signed a letter questioning President Biden’s competence:
A group of more than 120 retired military officers have written to President Joe Biden to tell him his election was less than legitimate – while questioning his mental acuity.
The letter echoes former President Donald Trump’s claims of widespread election fraud – which have not been borne out in the courts – and comes on a day when Rep. Liz Cheney ripped Trump for his claim that the election was ‘stolen.’
‘Without fair and honest elections that accurately reflect the ‘will of the people’ our Constitutional Republic is lost,’ the letter from retired officers says.
The group calls itself ‘Flag Officers 4 America’ and consists of retired military officers including generals and admirals.
‘The FBI and Supreme Court must act swiftly when election irregularities are surfaced and not ignore them as was done in 2020,’ they wrote.
The letter, called an ‘Open Letter from Retired Generals and Admirals,’ was reported by Politico.
It echoes Trump’s claims that absentee ballots are not secure as it goes after Biden, who serves as Commander in Chief of the military.
The letter is reproduced in the report. This strikes me as extremely serious and fraught with risk. Perhaps someone more familiar with the Uniform Code of Military Justice than I could comment but if I remember correctly even though retired these officers remain liable for court martial for insubordination with possible reduction in rank or worse.
They can always be recalled to active duty and court-martialed.
It is very scary when a large number of senior officers, all of whom went through the political vetting process, sign such a threatening letter. French officers did the same thing. I wonder if the Brits will.
This is another sign of just how high the tensions in this country are. There is still an ongoing open, armed insurrection in Portland, where the revolutionaries have seized control of several downtown blocks. So far, they still have the support of the elected and appointed officials in Oregon. If that is not a Ft. Sumter event, what is?
Combine that revolt with a black underclass that is also in revolt, unassimilable and ungovernable, and we have quite a mess. If we now get right wing gangs in the streets, we will be full Weimar. The looming inflation is likely to add more instability, and we have numerous lunatics like Gov. Whitmer of Michigan stoking the fires.
If you are living in the big city, get a pied-a-terre in the country somewhere. And get a gun.
I agree.
I agree this is a terrible thing for them to do and it is part of a growing trend. The longstanding cultural norm of the military, and especially senior officers, being apolitical is breaking down.
As a technical matter, retired active-duty personnel are not completely divorced from their military obligations. Veterans and those who retire from the Guard or Reserve don’t fall under UCMJ jurisdiction, but active duty retired personnel do.
In practice, retired personnel are very rarely prosecuted under the UCMJ and only for very serious crimes. The most recent cases where this has happened involved things like rape, child porn, soliciting a minor for sex, etc.
So, in theory, someone could try to charge these officers, but it’s very unlikely. And I’m not sure it would be the wise or right thing to do either.
Yep. That’s the risk. Maybe I should write another post, “The General Staff Follows the Election Returns”.
Is this letter an act of insubordination, or an act of courage, in the face of a brutally enforced consensus type of ideology that has taken over this country?
In many serious peoples’ opinions there is nothing “settled†in the irregular outcome of the 2020 election, just as the science in global warming is far from being settled either – much to the displeasure of those who rely on “experts†to sort out everything, giving way for individuals not having to employ any critical thinking tools themselves. So, IMHO, to openly repudiate events, opinions, disingenuous “facts,†that seem dishonestly represented to the public, is fraught with all kinds of risk for those who dare take on such a task. After all, these military men have nothing to personally gain from their outspoken charges. In fact they will probably face a barrage of insults, derision, negatively impacting their reputations. However, when people such as these men, go ahead and say what millions have been censored, repressed, humiliated, and arrested for talking about, this is the very epitome of a courageous act.
“In many serious peoples’ opinions there is nothing “settled†in the irregular outcome of the 2020 election”
The point is that the military as an institution, and the present and former leaders of that institution, should be silent on such political questions.
While I’m skeptical of slippery slopes in general, it’s a real concern here. When it comes to military involvement in politics, there are a plethora of examples demonstrating this is bad going all the way back to Rome and even before.
I heard an interview with a primary author of the letter this morning. A rather sober voice in my opinion.
It goes well beyond election results. There are concerns about the bizarre politically correct recruiting scheme being implemented, troop cohesion with the current guilty because you are white/victim because you are black preaching, and even the Administration’s Colonial Pipeline driven sudden fondness of keeping its hands off private enterprise.
And spare me the notion of an apolitical military. Was anyone awake the last four years? Talk about principles of convenience.
Not a half hour ago I had a conversation with a retired naval officer who made just that point. His take which I agree with is that both are concerning. It’s not a benign trend and it is a break from the past.
The self-referential justifications work both ways, which is exactly why it is a slippery slope.
Its not an act of courage to repeat the talking points favored by your political party. I think this is a continuation of the degradation of principles and honor among former military. Way too many O-6 and above end up working for contractors and making tons of money upon leaving the service. It has become more common for recently retired military to actively seek out political roles including campaigning for politicians.
However, it is a major inflection point. We have never had senior officers publicly supporting in mass numbers conspiracy theories.
I agree with Andy that nothing will happen here. There should be serious consequences for this. They should lose pensions. It wont happen as it would make them martyrs.
Steve
In theory Andy is right about how the military should remain apolitical. However, that line has already been crossed when the military rebuked the former president in a similar written letter at the end of his term.
In fact, nowadays, most governmental departments, bureaucracies are riddled with undercurrents of political bias, overreach, and disingenuous posturing. The IRS was used to intimidate groups considered conservative during Obama’s reign. Those entities enlisted to manage our national security miserably went rogue during the Russian Collusion fiasco. The FISA court proved to be inept in giving out warrants granting surveillance that should not have been approved. The DOJ refused to get involved in federal election irregularities, backed by thousands of citizen affidavits, saying it was a state matter. However, now the DOJ has no hesitancy in threatening to intervene in a state issue dealing with the AZ forensic audit. Double standards anyone?
“The IRS was used to intimidate groups considered conservative during Obama’s reign. ”
No evidence of that. IN fact it was the Trump DOJ that finally let Lois Lerner off the hook since there was nothing to be found.
Steve
True The Vote won a decade-long battle against the Lois Learner run IRS, in which conservative groups like True The Vote were targeted and blocked from attaining a tax-exempt status, in order to stem their influence and involvement in Obama’s 2012 reelection.
A successful strategy of the dem party, to dilute any of their slimy political transactions, has been to drag their feet, not comply with subpoenas, wipe evidence off hard drives and simply wait out news cycles until public interest dissipates and moves on to something else. This was used in the lengthy pursuit of Benghazi justice, through many of the IG complaints during the Obama DOJ, the Obama Administration’s use of the IRS to get rid of conservative organizations, and now (IMO) deriding and obstructing attempts to address the myriad of voter fraud changes that have arisen from the past election.
Yup, I read the verdict. The course ruled that the IRS had discriminated against the True the Vote illegally. There is no link to anyone outside of the IRS and no link to the Obama admin showing it was done for intimidation. The IRS was just wrong.
Benghazi? Seriously, there were 8 complete investigations. Several of them by Republicans. They were completed. Didnt find anything. Going to try a ninth? (This coming from someone who is OK that Trump didnt hav e to testify but Clinton did. Rules are always different for you guys arent they?)
Steve
Clinton’s testimony was a joke before the FBI, surrounded by her attorneys with most answers being “I don’t remember.†Her testimony before Congress was only significant because of it’s length, not for it’s substance. Also, she destroyed subpoenaed emails and was reluctant in cooperating with the investigation into Benghazi. Trump, OTOH, fully cooperated with millions of requested documents, unabridged access to his WH attorney and others. It was only the sit-down perjury trap interview, where he took his attorney’s advice to give written answers versus a face-to-face with Mueller. Trump’s administration, as a matter of fact, had more transparency and openness than you will ever find in Obama’s and Biden’s rehearsed, well scripted interviews and press conferences.
As for insinuating rules are different for R’s than D’s – I agree. The democrats demand rules for others that they never follow themselves. Democrats also project bad, devious, hypocritical behavior onto their opponents that more aptly describes their own behavior.