Well, Bush just cited the book of Isiah..

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 12:53am

Iceberg wrote:None of the articles apply, though, because the President - although the Commander in Chief of the military - is NOT a member of the military (indeed, it's illegal for a currently serving member of the military to serve as President of the United States - Eisenhower had to retire from the Army immediately before he took office, and was reinstated at five-star rank by act of Congress immediately after he left office) and not bound by the UCMJ. The President is bound by and must be charged under US Code, not UCMJ (IIRC, excepting in time of war).

How is the highest ranking member of the military not a member of the military? The reason Eisenhower had to retire was because he could not perform the duties of both an Army General and the President at the same time, besides he would hold two different ranks which is not possible. It would be like an Admiral also holding the rank of a Commander, it is not possible.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-03 12:57am

It's unconstitutional for the President to be part of the standing military at the time he takes office.

Besides, how the hell are you going to court-martial the president?

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-05-03 12:59am

You cannot have a serving General in charge of the nation; it invites the spectre of military coup. The military must be subservient to civilian control and cannot exert authority in civilian law. That is why our military is not used as police and have no arrest powers.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:08am

Iceberg wrote:Besides, how the hell are you going to court-martial the president?

Like everyone else who gets court martialed.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-03 01:10am

Death from the Sea wrote:
Iceberg wrote:Besides, how the hell are you going to court-martial the president?
Like everyone else who gets court martialed.

If he's not a memeber of the military how could you? Aside from all the other issues of bringing a president up on charges.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:12am

Stormbringer wrote:
Death from the Sea wrote:
Iceberg wrote:Besides, how the hell are you going to court-martial the president?
Like everyone else who gets court martialed.
If he's not a memeber of the military how could you? Aside from all the other issues of bringing a president up on charges.

I discussed it earlier, the P.U.S.A. is the Commander-in-Chief the highest ranking member of the military.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-03 01:13am

Death from the Sea wrote:
Iceberg wrote:Besides, how the hell are you going to court-martial the president?
Like everyone else who gets court martialed.

A court martial has to be convened by one's peers or superiors. There IS no peer or superior officer to the President - he's the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. That's why the President has to be impeached by the House and convicted and removed by the Senate before any punishments can be placed on him.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-03 01:15am

Death from the Sea wrote:I discussed it earlier, the P.U.S.A. is the Commander-in-Chief the highest ranking member of the military.

Yes. And others have addressed that point. The President is a civilian for all pracitcal purposes in this scenario.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-03 01:15am

Death from the Sea wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:
Death from the Sea wrote: Like everyone else who gets court martialed.
If he's not a memeber of the military how could you? Aside from all the other issues of bringing a president up on charges.
I discussed it earlier, the P.U.S.A. is the Commander-in-Chief the highest ranking member of the military.

You're missing one little thing, DFTS: The President is part of the government, not the military. The President has to be impeached on charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" by the standards of the United States Code, not the standards of the UCMJ.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:18am

Iceberg wrote:
Death from the Sea wrote:
Iceberg wrote:Besides, how the hell are you going to court-martial the president?
Like everyone else who gets court martialed.
A court martial has to be convened by one's peers or superiors. There IS no peer or superior officer to the President - he's the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. That's why the President has to be impeached by the House and convicted and removed by the Senate before any punishments can be placed on him.

I know, so in the Presidents case I would wager the Joint Chiefs or someone near that rank/position would sit on the jury. Because by your arguement the only person who take a five star general to trial is the President, when other generals can do the job.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-03 01:20am

There's no provision in the Constitution to court-martial the President, for a VERY GOOD REASON: Such an action would constitute a military coup of the United States Government.

The President is NOT accountable to the UCMJ; he is accountable to the US Code.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:24am

Iceberg wrote:You're missing one little thing, DFTS: The President is part of the government, not the military. The President has to be impeached on charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" by the standards of the United States Code, not the standards of the UCMJ.

Look we keep going in circles here. But he is a member of the military. The only member of the military that is elected as a matter of fact. He is the only government official that can give military personel direct orders (as long as they are lawful orders), the VP or a senator can't do that. That is why the President is a member of the military.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-05-03 01:33am

Death from the Sea, do you have reading comprehension problems?

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-05-03 01:35am

Death from the Sea wrote:
Iceberg wrote:You're missing one little thing, DFTS: The President is part of the government, not the military. The President has to be impeached on charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" by the standards of the United States Code, not the standards of the UCMJ.
Look we keep going in circles here. But he is a member of the military. The only member of the military that is elected as a matter of fact. He is the only government official that can give military personel direct orders (as long as they are lawful orders), the VP or a senator can't do that. That is why the President is a member of the military.

The capacity to order the military around does not mean that he is a member of the military. It just makes him a civilian who can tell the military what to do. If he was a member of the military, soldiers would be required to salute him. They are not.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-03 01:36am

Court martialing Clinton - especially on such flimsy grounds as Article 134 - would set an EXTREMELY dangerous precedent: allowing the military to remove the president whenever they don't like him. That is a legalized military coup, and it removes control of the presidency from the hands of the civilian population and puts it in the hands of the military.

I don't think you want to be taking that step, DFTS.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:37am

Iceberg wrote:There's no provision in the Constitution to court-martial the President, for a VERY GOOD REASON: Such an action would constitute a military coup of the United States Government.

It would constitute a military coup if the general(s) doing the court martial took over the Presidency upon removing the court martialed pres. But the VP would take over so that negates a military take over.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:39am

Durandal wrote:The capacity to order the military around does not mean that he is a member of the military. It just makes him a civilian who can tell the military what to do. If he was a member of the military, soldiers would be required to salute him. They are not.

Actually they are required to salute him. I know because I was in the Marines.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-03 01:39am

The fact is such a court martial is unconstitutional and illegal. It can't and won't happen under today's laws. And especially lot on such flimsy charges.

Hell, Clinton did much worse than adulter anyways.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-03 01:42am

Death from the Sea wrote:
Iceberg wrote:There's no provision in the Constitution to court-martial the President, for a VERY GOOD REASON: Such an action would constitute a military coup of the United States Government.
It would constitute a military coup if the general(s) doing the court martial took over the Presidency upon removing the court martialed pres. But the VP would take over so that negates a military take over.

It doesn't matter; if they can do it to one president, they can keep doing it until they cycle somebody they WANT into the Oval Office through the chain of command.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-05-03 01:52am

Death from the Sea wrote:
Durandal wrote:The capacity to order the military around does not mean that he is a member of the military. It just makes him a civilian who can tell the military what to do. If he was a member of the military, soldiers would be required to salute him. They are not.
Actually they are required to salute him. I know because I was in the Marines.

This is true, but you're still wrong about his status. I suggest you brush up on your Marine Code of Conduct.

Conduct During Armed Conflict wrote:Who to salute

(1) Enlisted personnel must salute all officers:

Who to Salute.
(a) United States
(b) Foreign allied
(c) U.S. Merchant Marine
(d) Public Health Service

(2) Some civilians, such as the President, because of their position in the chain of command.

(3) An enlisted member performing a duty with the authority of an officer; for example, Officer of the Deck.

Emphasis mine. I only got the impression that the officers in the armed forces weren't required to salute the president because of some chain E-mail I got extolling the virtues of Bush's professed Christianity and how the armed forces saluted him even though they weren't required to (and of course, it did the obligatory Clinton bashing by saying that Clinton was never saluted). Imagine that, right wing-nuts making things up ...

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:52am

Stormbringer wrote:The fact is such a court martial is unconstitutional and illegal. It can't and won't happen under today's laws. And especially lot on such flimsy charges.

Hell, Clinton did much worse than adulter anyways.

I agree with everything except I don't believe it would be unconstitutional from the way I understand it. And I will admit I could be wrong, but for now I stand by the statement that the PUSA can technically be court martialed.

But you are right in todays legal environment, no it ain't going to happen hence the reason it did not happen. And it sucks that those flimsy charges are used against good men and women in the military too often.
Hell I was almost charged with ARTICLE 117. PROVOKING SPEECHES OR GESTURES which is:Any person subject to this chapter who uses provoking or reproachful words or gestures towards any other person subject to this chapter shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I was in an arguement with another Marine of the same rank and called him a cocksucker and then proceded to give him the bird. An officer(from admin) happened to walk by and see this and charged me. Luckily for me my JAG lawyer was on the ball and averted a court martial(I was never read my rights), although I did recieve Non-Judicial Punishment.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 01:56am

Durandal wrote:
This is true, but you're still wrong about his status. I suggest you brush up on your Marine Code of Conduct.

Conduct During Armed Conflict wrote:Who to salute

(1) Enlisted personnel must salute all officers:

Who to Salute.
(a) United States
(b) Foreign allied
(c) U.S. Merchant Marine
(d) Public Health Service

(2) Some civilians, such as the President, because of their position in the chain of command.

(3) An enlisted member performing a duty with the authority of an officer; for example, Officer of the Deck.

So wouldn't that include the U.S. Surgeon General? That is odd I don't recall that. Well I don't know so much odd as it is just weird.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-05-03 01:59am

Death from the Sea wrote:So wouldn't that include the U.S. Surgeon General? That is odd I don't recall that. Well I don't know so much odd as it is just weird.

I dunno. You're the ex-marine. You tell me. But like it or not, the president is a civilian, and trying to court-martial him is just begging for a military coup.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-03 02:05am

Death from the Sea wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:The fact is such a court martial is unconstitutional and illegal. It can't and won't happen under today's laws. And especially lot on such flimsy charges.

Hell, Clinton did much worse than adulter anyways.
I agree with everything except I don't believe it would be unconstitutional from the way I understand it. And I will admit I could be wrong, but for now I stand by the statement that the PUSA can technically be court martialed.

The President is NOT responsible to the military - the military is responsible to the President. The President of the United States is responsible to the voting public. The military is Department of Defense. The President is not part of the Department of Defense, or any of its susidiary departments, and DoD's internal court system has no jurisdiction over him. He holds no rank in DoD (there is no US Military rank insignia for POTUS; not even in time of war) and if an active-duty military officer is elected President he must resign from the military before taking office (this has only happened once in US military history, when General Eisenhower was elected President).

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-05-03 02:13am

Durandal wrote:
Death from the Sea wrote:So wouldn't that include the U.S. Surgeon General? That is odd I don't recall that. Well I don't know so much odd as it is just weird.
I dunno. You're the ex-marine. You tell me. But like it or not, the president is a civilian, and trying to court-martial him is just begging for a military coup.

Hey Durandal, there is not such thing as an ex-marine. As the saying goes; "Once a Marine, always a Marine.". The correct term would be former Marine

.