General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf Flynn is convicted: Some people here have brought this up.
Last edited Wed Jun 29, 2022, 01:00 PM - Edit history (2)
He should be recalled to active duty. Court martialed, lose his rank, his pension and dishonorable discharged. Then sent to serve out his prison sentence.
As a veteran, I can only explain my anger with Flynn this way. I wish I could beat the shit out of him. Fucking traitor.
Joinfortmill
(14,397 posts)MiHale
(9,664 posts)Another vet.
Phoenix61
(16,994 posts)Conduct unbecoming an officer seems a likely start.
jmowreader
(50,533 posts)Officers are dismissed, which is just as bad as dishonorable discharge.
I have looked into this. If Flynn is convicted in a civilian court the President can drop him from the rolls of the Armed Forces, which is worse than dismissal: it will, on paper at least, make it like he was never in the service at all.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)whatever is possible...!
I've never forgotten that he worked illegally as a Turkish agent while tRump's National Security Adviser to get a Turkish U.S. resident extradited and delivered to Erdogan, in the Mueller report, and during tRump's campaign had also discussed kidnapping the cleric for $15M with Turkish officials while ex-CIA Director James Woolsey was present. Around that time people watching Turkey reported that a notorious political prison on an island had just been quietly emptied except for one resident and suspected it was being readied to take delivery.
These people always make me wish there was a hell ready for them.
Ohio Joe
(21,733 posts)Is it really allowed? Has it ever been done? Are there circumstances that allow for it?
I know nothing about this
former9thward
(31,949 posts)that I think is your answer...
sarge43
(28,940 posts)An appeals court in 2019 overturned such a case based on 5th Amendment rights. It hasn't been challenged, so it's still in effect.
On the other according to US Code 8312 if a retired commissioned officer is convicted in a civil court of certain offenses (sedition is one), s/he loses all pay and most likely be dismissed. In other words you can't play; we don't pay. Dismissal is the equivalent of a dishonorable discharge. The prep loses every benefit; it's like they never rolled off the bus.
Ohio Joe
(21,733 posts)Thank you
sop
(10,106 posts)are in this thing up to their necks. Hopefully their pardons will be rescinded soon so they can join Trump down in Guantanamo.
jimfields33
(15,705 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(12,264 posts)Firstly, bear in mind that the pardon power the president possesses is limited to only federal crimes. In other words, the president can only issue pardons or commutations for crimes against the United States of America.
On the other hand, neither the president nor the court can force an individual to accept a pardon. And when a president issues a pardon, the recipient has to acknowledge it.
If a president issues a pardon, but fails to deliver it, then it wont take effect. This implies that a new president or the one that issued the pardon can revoke it.
There have been several cases where pardons were revoked. But keep in mind that those were never delivered. Thus, they were not active.
There has never been a time where an implemented presidential pardon got revoked. So, once implemented or accepted, a presidential pardon becomes effective. The court or congress cannot revoke it.
sop
(10,106 posts)"The Pardon Power Is Not--and Never Was--a Grant of Unchecked Presidential Prerogative"
"As I noted in my earlier column, the major reason that we have not seen limitations on the pardon power is that it simply has never been tested. That is, we cannot allow ourselves to buy into the circular logic of saying that 'the pardon power is unlimited because it has never been limited, so we cannot limit it.'"
"I am not the only scholar to have made this point. Steven G. Calabresi and Norman L. Eisen, a bipartisan pair who would not be expected to be on the same side of any issue, wrote in The Times last month that Trumps pardons must be challenged."
"Calabresi and Eisen conclude: Mr. Trumps pardons should be challenged legally by federal prosecutors or others. The pardon power is a relic of the royal English prerogative, which, if un-cabined, could be used as a wrecking ball of both our democracy and the rule of law. We believe that Mr. Trumps midnight pardons of Mr. Bannon and his ilk are unconstitutional and, if reviewed by courts, should be set aside."
"For now, it is enough simply to emphasize that the conventional wisdom regarding the unlimited presidential pardon power represents a badly mangled and dangerous interpretation of what can only be a limited and carefully used presidential power. Whether or not Trump has a 'pocket pardon' that he will brandish when needed, what we already know about his actions before leaving office gives us more than enough reason to reverse some of those pardons and to limit the legacy of Trumps damage to the rule of law."
https://verdict.justia.com/2021/02/25/it-is-possible-and-necessary-to-nullify-trumps-corrupt-pardons-including-secret-ones
erronis
(15,185 posts)sop
(10,106 posts)From what I've read, a president's pardon powers are largely unlimited, but he/she cannot pardon someone to cover up his/her own crime(s). Also the issue of blanket pardons and pocket (or secret) pardons is unclear. In the end, these pardon cases would have to go before the current SC, and they're not likely to overturn any pardons Trump issued.
MarineCombatEngineer
(12,264 posts)however, just one teeny tiny correction.
it's Court Martialed, not marshaled.
No disrespect intended.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Traildogbob
(8,684 posts)😉 Fucking auto correct. I Damn sure want part of that kicking of the ass. I would love for the military justice system step in and at minimum not allow another tax dime be given to him. I would drop his ass not in Russian where he would help kill Ukraine civilians, but Afghanistan, in uniform and tell Taliban he killed thousands of Muslims. I cant understand how a single vet can stomach his ass, then I have to admit that many many vets were in the attacking mob. It stains the Rep of all of us vets. I spent years being looked down on as a vet from Viet Nam era. Finally I have been proud to be out with a Navy hat or tee shirt signifying my service. Now, Flynn et al have brought back the stigma vets faced for decades. Fuck Flynn with a live Hell Fire Missile. I would like his head stuffed into either the Forward of Aft Five inch connons mounted on my destroyer.
H2O Man
(73,513 posts)jaysunb
(11,856 posts)SilasSouleII
(361 posts)Agree!
brooklynite
(94,384 posts)The Military doesn't exist to impose "punishments" for civilian crimes.
How many Democratic veterans would you like to be targeted by a future Republican President.
erronis
(15,185 posts)That's just they way they operate.
Maybe for brassy types like Flynn the actions are different. But for the 99% that rely on government assistance after serving, the (r)s will go out of their way to screw them.
brooklynite
(94,384 posts)erronis
(15,185 posts)The (r)s trot out a McCain or Dole every now and then to try to say that they are patriotic. (BTW - those two are anathema now.)
The vast majority of politicians haven't served in the military or other public service (Peace Corps, VISTA, etc.). And I'll bet the (r)s are very unrepresented in anything like public benefit (unless there are $$$s associated.)
uponit7771
(90,304 posts)... seen and heard in the last 6 years?
Thx in advance
brooklynite
(94,384 posts)Civilian crimes get prosecuted and punished by civilian authorities.
5th Avenue Hogan
(9 posts)Did less harm to his country
erronis
(15,185 posts)During World War II, 1.7 million courts-martial were held, representing one third of all criminal cases tried in the United States during the same period. Most of the cases were minor, as were the sentences.[2] Nevertheless, a clemency board, appointed by the Secretary of War in the summer of 1945, reviewed all general courts-martial where the accused was still in confinement,[2][5] and remitted or reduced the sentence in 85 percent of the 27,000 serious cases reviewed.[2] The death penalty was rarely imposed, and usually only for cases involving rape or murder. Slovik was the only soldier executed who had been convicted of a "purely military" offense.[2]
The execution by firing squad was carried out at 10:04 a.m. on January 31, 1945, near the village of Sainte-Marie-aux-Mines. The defiant Slovik said to the soldiers whose duty it was to prepare him for the firing squad before they led him to the place of execution:
They're not shooting me for deserting the United States Army, thousands of guys have done that. They just need to make an example out of somebody and I'm it because I'm an ex-con. I used to steal things when I was a kid, and that's what they are shooting me for. They're shooting me for the bread and chewing gum I stole when I was 12 years old.[12]
OMGWTF
(3,943 posts)Totally Tunsie
(10,885 posts)Flynn is a TRAITOR.
RKP5637
(67,089 posts)LiberalFighter
(50,795 posts)Deminpenn
(15,265 posts)also former USAF, iirc, JAG.
LiberalFighter
(50,795 posts)And would know that bit because he was JAG.
LiberalFighter
(50,795 posts)Deminpenn
(15,265 posts)nt