US military investigates navy for shaking hands with Trump at rally
The US military is attacking a young Navy from Georgia who dared to show his face during a Donald Trump rally in September.
What we do know is pretty straightforward: A man took the stage in civilian clothes at a “Safeguarding America Rally” with President Trump, introduced himself as Lance Cpl. Hunter Clark, said he was “the guy who pulled the baby over the wall” in Afghanistan, thanked the crowd for their support, shook hands with Trump and walked away. Now Task & Purpose is reporting that the military is investigating Clark to see if he violated Department of Defense policies.
The very existence of an investigation is a clear message that only partisanship on behalf of the left will be tolerated in the US military. This is the clear message sent by investigating Clark and others such as Space Force officer Matthew Lohmeier while military superiors like Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley openly lie to the president, commit treason. on behalf of China and stand up for anti-American neo-Americans. – Marxist teachings at the Congress.
It would be easy for the military to give the example of Clark for allegedly violating Department of Defense Directive 1344.10, “Political Activities for Members of the Armed Forces.” The excuse for harassing Clark is that he supported President Trump as a political supporter. It doesn’t matter that Clark wasn’t in uniform, didn’t support Trump or the Republicans or any other electoral issue (he didn’t even praise Trump) and didn’t say anything political at all. He was right there.
Or they could check to see if he violated a COVID policy while on leave, something that has been, in my experience and the experience of my military friends, selectively applied over the past year and a half based on rank. and personal relationships.
The use of administrative procedures like these keeps him in the realm of arbitrary judgment with no real remedy for Clark – the “wild west”, legally speaking, as my own lawyer in a similar situation once explained to me, where the law doesn’t really matter. This means that the whole decision rests with the commander’s judgment rather than clearly defined parameters for offenses.
The outcome of administrative proceedings is less severe than that of the military justice system, but it is much faster and easier, can be done with less oversight, and has essentially no burden of proof. The use of arbitrary administrative procedures instead of the military code is so common, in fact, that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis made a point of trying to use it less in 2018.
If Clark receives an administrative reprimand after all of this, it will stop his advancement until he is forced out of the Marines or force him out of the Marines simply with an administrative separation. This is how the US military has previously treated conservatives or people with traditional manners stupid enough to stage themselves publicly: harassment, administrative reprimands and public disgrace.
Such methods are, of course, used disproportionately for conservatives. Besides the public and recent examples of Milley and other senior officers enjoying refuge for rank and partisan betrayal as long as he supports the left, there are many other examples of this double standard. Here is just a close parallel with the Clark case in which the scenario went completely the other way, for clearly political reasons.
In 2017, about 12 months after Hillary Clinton lost an election, West Point sent its highest ranking caddy, a black woman who is now a well-known social justice activist in uniform, to meet Clinton at Teen Vogue. to talk about social justice. activism in politics. There, Senior Cadet Captain Simone Askew posed with Clinton, in uniform, for an article titled “We Resist.” This image was originally posted online, although it was quietly removed soon after.
Maybe people don’t remember how loaded our politics were back then and how “the resistance” declared open opposition to President Trump, promising to undermine him. And here’s West Point’s highest-ranking cadet posing in uniform with the Leader of the Opposition to the newly elected Commander-in-Chief, vowing to resist. Of course, she did not face any discipline or even any question from the military about it. The whole affair was put together by the West Point public affairs office. How does what Clark did compare?
Reasonable people who have watched recent events should be able to see by now that the US military is not the friend of American conservatives. Its leaders have openly declared their loyalty to a part of the American people, and if you are on that side, the same rules don’t apply to you. Just see which military academies promote or follow any of the official Twitter accounts of units and leaders on the other side all the services see of which side they or they are on. There is no shortage of pride flags, fists of black power, Pan-African flags and affirm that America is racist and full of extremists (i.e. Trump supporters).
– US Army (@USArmy) June 9, 2016
There is no part of the leftist narrative that the military establishment, including much of the base, does not fully embrace. If you support social justice and critical race theory, if you promote military adventurism and endless wars, the message the U.S. military consistently sends is that it supports you.
Clark’s mistake was to think that he, a white boy from Georgia who probably loves Trump, was protected by law and that decent leaders above him would take care of him. After all, he just returned from Afghanistan, where he almost certainly knew that some of the Marines had been killed.
The sad truth is that Clark’s service in the New Model Army has been in the service of an American regime that hates the way of life of its neighbors and family. His sacrifice was used to enrich the oligarchs who now rule and to strengthen the state of national security that protects them. It is sometimes called the Global American Empire for the degenerate, leftist policies it spreads abroad in the name of “democracy.”
Why a conservative American would send his children to join the military or encourage it is beyond me at this point. Many veterans are expressing this awareness now, especially after the debacle in Afghanistan. Yet many decent people still naively believe that only the highest ranks are brazen leftists, also willfully ignoring that this incompetent mercenary kleptocracy is a meat grinder for young men and women.
Just consider the psychological damage soldiers suffer from simply serving, let alone combat, suicide rates, abysmal failures overseas for decades, lying and weakening civilian leaders, open activism for the social justice, including vilification of whites and soon enlisted girls, all supported by the military establishment.
People should also watch the decline of the United States over the past 70 years and the attendant rise of the Pentagon’s permanent military conglomerate. Large established armies are still factions in politics, and volunteer and professional soldiers are still mercenaries. The republican form of government is incompatible with the mercenary military.
But to confront this is to confront one of the most deeply rooted myths in American civilian religion: Professional soldiers are honorable. The Conservatives do not seem to be up to the task. It strikes at the heart of our national and often personal pride.
This dilemma is what Clark faces in a very real way. He’s obviously proud to be a Marine and proud of what he’s done, but now the master he serves wants to punish him for standing next to Trump. He now learns that the US military hates mainstream American conservatives. U.S. too. And it is painful.
Bill Kilgore is the pseudonym of a writer who served in the United States Army. The author writes anonymously because conservative views are unpopular and dangerous for someone in his position. He also wrote for American Greatness. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the United States government.