US Navy removes Captain Brett Crozier who raised alarm

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I knew you'd ignore the rest of it. You know, the part where he said he had no contact with anyone at the White House directing he be fired. Not to mention he reportedly told a colleague.

even though he never received a message directly indicating that to be the case.

Anything to blame Trump.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Modly reportedly told a colleague that Trump "wants him [Crozier] fired,

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Again, reportedly. Who did he tell? When did he tell them? Where's the corroboration? Reportedly is the key word there.

a reply to: Zaphod58

IDK man, you posted it as a rebuttal to my post, expressing my suspicion that the acting NavSec is a Trump yes man. It seems to make my point.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well, except that your "Trump yes man" was just passed over by Trump to become permanent SecNav. So that's certain to make him want to do whatever Trump says. I mean knowing that your tenure is limited would absolutely make you want to do what you're told.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Probably because he couldn't pass Congress' vetting process.

Oh look!

The Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly blasted the now ousted commander of the USS Theodore Roosevelt as "stupid" in an address to the ship's crew Monday morning, in remarks obtained by CNN.

Modly told the crew that their former commander, Capt. Brett Crozier, was either "too naive or too stupid" to be in command or that he intentionally leaked to the media a memo in which he warned about coronavirus spreading aboard the aircraft carrier and urged action to save his sailors.
……
"It was a betrayal. And I can tell you one other thing: because he did that he put it in the public's forum and it is now a big controversy in Washington, DC," Modly said, according to a transcript of remarks Modly made to the crew, copies of which have been provided to CNN by multiple Navy officials.

www.cnn.com...

Doing Trump's dirty work! Can't have a "controversy" in DC!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Good God you have it bad, don't you? Embarrassing the Pentagon has always been a firing and worse offense.

"If he didn't think, in my opinion, that this information wasn't going to get out to the public, in this day and information age that we live in, then he was either A, too naïve or too stupid to be a commanding officer of a ship like this," Modly said. "The alternative is that he did this on purpose."

He sent the letter to people that didn't need to see it, because he didn't think the admiral in charge of the group would let him send it up the chain. He bypassed the chain of command, blindsiding his immediate superiors, allowing it to be leaked to the media. Whether he deliberately leaked it, or deliberately sent it in a way that ensured a leak without leaking it himself, it was a stupid move.

It's not up to the Captain of a carrier group to play politics, which is exactly what he was doing. I applaud him for looking out for his crew, but he deserves at least an Article 32 for the way he went about it. Modly went too far with his comments, but that's one reason he was passed over.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Modly went too far with his comments

Ya think?

It looks to me like Modly himself is giving the Pentagon a black eye in shameful statements like this, to a crew mourning the loss of their Captain.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yet it doesn't change the fact that Crozier was wrong to send the letter the way he did, and the removal was the correct decision(without it being ordered by Trump).

a reply to: Zaphod58

President Trump does things that are wrong, and even illegal.

In this case I don't think the punishment fits the crime. And I certainly do think that the NavSec's suggestion that the Captain is guilty of "betrayal", for which he can be court martialed, just illustrates this administration unabashed vindictiveness.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The punishment absolutely fits. Commanders have been relieved for far less than breaking the chain of command. They just fired a commander because a simulated missile target was cut loose near Okinawa, because it wasn't loaded correctly in the sling. Violating the chain of command is almost one of the worst things you can do. And it absolutely is a betrayal that you can be tried for.

Breaking the chain of command, which he absolutely did, violates multiple articles under the UCMJ and constitutes insubordination, or even dereliction of duty. It doesn't matter what administration was in place, his career would be done no matter what.

a reply to: Zaphod58

One might say the same about Eddie Gallagher. Too bad Captain Crozier wasn't a war criminal. His chances would have better.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You can't pardon someone that hasn't been convicted. Gallagher had his sentence overturned after his trial. When did Capt. Crozier get sentenced at trial?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You really need a Dr or else your a troll and I expect thats it.

KAG

originally posted by: skybandit
The commander of the USS Theodore Roosevelt has been removed after saying the US Navy was not doing enough to halt a coronavirus outbreak on board the aircraft carrier.
More: www.bbc.com...

Time to shut up the sheeple perhaps?

Don't bite the hand that feeds you, especially not when your an Officer.

When your in the Military it's time to shut up and Play the game, you don't get paid to run your mouth especially not to the Media thats's a big no-no you get paid to follow orders until its your time to give orders and even then stfu and follow orders, if you don't like it then don't reenlist .

originally posted by: Zaphod58

Yet it doesn't change the fact that Crozier was wrong to send the letter the way he did, and the removal was the correct decision(without it being ordered by Trump).

I can't even suggest Trump cared one way or the other. We all know Trump has no filter and if he did care he would have told us he fired him in all of Trump's glory as he does...lol

People can't have it both ways where people say Trump has no filter, but then when it supports their interest he is in full filter mode.

Being prior military for 28 years it didn't take Trump to fire him... Many leaders in the Navy would be fuming within seconds of that letter getting out. People are removed for much less recklessness, and that is what it was recklessness 100%.

Think of the 100s of parents all screaming at the Navy to get their children off that ship, or other countries thinking our Navy is shut down by the virus... Lots of bad repercussions because of one stupid letter.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Sookiechacha

The punishment absolutely fits. Commanders have been relieved for far less than breaking the chain of command. They just fired a commander because a simulated missile target was cut loose near Okinawa, because it wasn't loaded correctly in the sling. Violating the chain of command is almost one of the worst things you can do. And it absolutely is a betrayal that you can be tried for.

Breaking the chain of command, which he absolutely did, violates multiple articles under the UCMJ and constitutes insubordination, or even dereliction of duty. It doesn't matter what administration was in place, his career would be done no matter what.

Yep

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You can't pardon someone that hasn't been convicted. Gallagher had his sentence overturned after his trial. When did Capt. Crozier get sentenced at trial?

Whelp, they've announced that they're doing an investigation, and Modley declared him a "betrayer", which is a threshold for court martial. My money is on Crozier being charged and probably sentenced, especially since reading Modley's blame shifting, excuse laden address to Crozier's whiney crew, who just need to do their jobs, here: www.scribd.com...&from_embed

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Modly can bring charges against him, but in this case the investigation will recommend any action, most likely to CINCPACFLT, who will then decide whether or not to bring charges against him. With the comments already made by Modly, if he tried to bring charges Crozier's attorney would have grounds for dismissal, or appeal for unlawful command influence.

For him to be sentenced he has to have charges referred, and then be convicted. Apparently you've already decided he's going to be found guilty because SecNav was mean. The SecNav office wishes they were that powerful.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Even if Charges are filed and there is a court martial, that’s not a guarantee of conviction. I’ve been court martialed a couple of times. Serious charges have a higher burden of proof under UCMJ. The worst I ever walked away with was 1 article 15 on my record. You can’t predict the future based on personal fears.