Contemptuous Speech Against the President

Enlisted would be charged with article 134 the catch all article. Your article is clear it ONLY applies to COMMISSIONED OFFICERS. There are several articles like that.

I'm not really wanting to get into a discussion on which article covers it so much as if what the instructor said was correct.

Can a federal employee be fired or punished for discussing in public opposition to the policies of Congress or the President?

Yes.

Thanks for the answer...but I'd like to see a link and read it for myself. Seems there's a lot of ambiguity on this subject.

I hear threats from some that I really don't put much stock in. Mainly because the subject hasn't come up the last 9 years or so. Seemed that once Clinton was gone nobody had any problem with bashing Bush whatsoever.
 
A question was raised during an EEO class today about talking politics in the shop. Our instructor told us that as Federal Employees we weren't allowed to criticize the President's policies. I decided to look it up.



Military retirees fall under the article under some conditions. The only exception seems to be political conversations.



Nobody's ever been convicted for bad-mouthing the President. They have to have done it in an official capacity it seems for it to stick. Freedom of speech allows a member of Congress or civilian to criticize the President where as an active duty member or retiree cannot.

Harry Reid called President Bush a loser once. If he had been ex-military and receiving a pension he could have been nailed under Article 88 of the UCMJ especially because he was in an official capacity when he said it. It's still kind of shaky it seems.

So was the instructor full of it or was she telling it like it is. Are Federal employees prohibited from bad-mouthing the President and his policies?

Link

Article 88

Only applies to commissioned Officers. Enlisted are not covered by that UCMJ article.

Actually I read that Enlisted are included. It all seems to be a bit vague. Even the defenses are a bit vague because it doesn't go into detail on what is considered political discussion.

I know that while active duty I was prohibited from saying anything derogatory about President Clinton while acting in an official capacity....and a policy letter was released shortly after Obama assumed the duties of POTUS stating that federal employees may be punished under articles in the UCMJ.

It all seems a bit fuzzy. I was hoping somebody would be able to clarify it.

If you still have the letter I would suggest you frame it to use as an example of the stupidity of the Obama administration. The UCMJ only applies to military personnel, and article 88 only applies to commissioned officers, not NCOs or enlisted.
 
Things have gotten out of hand, I'd say since Reagan. There needs to be some rule in place. You have Generals shooting their mouths off attempting to politicize the military. I don't like partisan newscasters either. They shouldn't be on the air with the goal being to inflame, they should just do their freaking job and report the news, without any comment regarding their opinion.

Leave the opinion pages to their papers and online organizations.

TV stations have been running editorials for as long as I can remember, often accompanied by a disclaimer. Why do you want to change the rules now?
 
Actually I read that Enlisted are included. It all seems to be a big vague. Even the defenses are a bit vague because it doesn't go into detail on what is considered political discussion.

I know that while active duty I was prohibited from saying anything derogatory about President Clinton while acting in an official capacity....and a policy letter was released shortly after Obama assumed the duties of POTUS stating that federal employees may be punished under articles in the UCMJ.

It all seems a bit fuzzy. I was hoping somebody would be able to clarify it.

Enlisted would be charged with article 134 the catch all article. Your article is clear it ONLY applies to COMMISSIONED OFFICERS. There are several articles like that.

I'm not really wanting to get into a discussion on which article covers it so much as if what the instructor said was correct.

Can a federal employee be fired or punished for discussing in public opposition to the policies of Congress or the President?

No. If they could, no congressional staffer, White House staffer, or even Robert Gibbs, would be free to discuss anything political, even after they left their jobs. I would be careful about discussing it while at work, but on your own time you are free to say whatever you want.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNGOQ03KfTjSGmusmXfBQxDIl4mf6A&cad=rjt
 
Last edited:
I'm not really wanting to get into a discussion on which article covers it so much as if what the instructor said was correct.

Can a federal employee be fired or punished for discussing in public opposition to the policies of Congress or the President?

Yes.

Thanks for the answer...but I'd like to see a link and read it for myself. Seems there's a lot of ambiguity on this subject.

I hear threats from some that I really don't put much stock in. Mainly because the subject hasn't come up the last 9 years or so. Seemed that once Clinton was gone nobody had any problem with bashing Bush whatsoever.

Links I can't help you with. All I know is what I was told when I was one.
 

Thanks for the answer...but I'd like to see a link and read it for myself. Seems there's a lot of ambiguity on this subject.

I hear threats from some that I really don't put much stock in. Mainly because the subject hasn't come up the last 9 years or so. Seemed that once Clinton was gone nobody had any problem with bashing Bush whatsoever.

Links I can't help you with. All I know is what I was told when I was one.

Thanks...but I'm interested in something more the gossip.
 
I didn't think anybody was allowed to criticize the Obamster. Seems Jindhal got a good lashing over Obama not wanting to hear him complaining about anything.

Well your governor has his payback with his own whiney little book.
 
Thanks for the answer...but I'd like to see a link and read it for myself. Seems there's a lot of ambiguity on this subject.

I hear threats from some that I really don't put much stock in. Mainly because the subject hasn't come up the last 9 years or so. Seemed that once Clinton was gone nobody had any problem with bashing Bush whatsoever.

Links I can't help you with. All I know is what I was told when I was one.

Thanks...but I'm interested in something more the gossip.

Wasn't gossip. That's what they told me in orientation when I started the job.
 
Thanks...but I'm interested in something more the gossip.

Wasn't gossip. That's what they told me in orientation when I started the job.

I believe you. I was told the same thing but never saw anything in writing other then generalities.

This topic was not in policy letters.

Well, having watched the USPS in action for the few years I worked there, I'd say they were serious. They very much wanted you to keep your personal opinions just in general to yourself when you were on duty and/or in uniform, and I can't say I blame them. Also, although there was no hard and fast rule about political talking amongst the employees on break time, it was understood that you could wind up going through the complaint process or even fired if you were too offensive there, as well. My sense was that federal government offices feel the need to set some sort of example.
 
Wasn't gossip. That's what they told me in orientation when I started the job.

I believe you. I was told the same thing but never saw anything in writing other then generalities.

This topic was not in policy letters.

Well, having watched the USPS in action for the few years I worked there, I'd say they were serious. They very much wanted you to keep your personal opinions just in general to yourself when you were on duty and/or in uniform, and I can't say I blame them. Also, although there was no hard and fast rule about political talking amongst the employees on break time, it was understood that you could wind up going through the complaint process or even fired if you were too offensive there, as well. My sense was that federal government offices feel the need to set some sort of example.

I guess some people think saying the President was embarrassed at the G20 accord is offensive.

That's pretty much all I say.

However many feel that's being racist.

I keep it to a minimum but sometimes it slips out.
 
I believe you. I was told the same thing but never saw anything in writing other then generalities.

This topic was not in policy letters.

Well, having watched the USPS in action for the few years I worked there, I'd say they were serious. They very much wanted you to keep your personal opinions just in general to yourself when you were on duty and/or in uniform, and I can't say I blame them. Also, although there was no hard and fast rule about political talking amongst the employees on break time, it was understood that you could wind up going through the complaint process or even fired if you were too offensive there, as well. My sense was that federal government offices feel the need to set some sort of example.

I guess some people think saying the President was embarrassed at the G20 accord is offensive.

That's pretty much all I say.

However many feel that's being racist.

I keep it to a minimum but sometimes it slips out.

Personally, I just rarely talked to my co-workers at all, and that worked out just fine. And I made a point of never putting in for any jobs that involved the public or uniforms.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top