Allison Bailey / AP

Air Force Major Who Protested Trump Faces Criminal Charges

21

Comments

CNN (“Trump criticism leads to rare criminal charges for Air Force officer who called for impeachment“):

A US airman who was arrested twice, once on the steps of the US Capitol while calling for the impeachment of President Donald Trump, was officially criminally charged Monday for his comments, according to a charging document his attorney shared with CNN.

Maj. Jason Watson faces the following charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, according to the document: three violations of Article 88 for alleged “contemptuous” remarks about Trump, five violations of Article 92 for allegedly disobeying orders and two violations of Article 133 for alleged conduct unbecoming an officer.

The rare Article 88 charges are connected to the Air Force officer’s June interview with the Defenders of our Republic Substack newsletter, his July 1 protest in uniform at the US Capitol, and an August 17 CNN interview.

It can be considered a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to participate in uniform in any overtly partisan activity, such as a political protest, or to use “contemptuous words” against the president and other high-ranking civilian officials. Many low-level offenses of these rules are resolved informally, but Watson’s violations were unusually high-profile.

Watson was first arrested in July while protesting in uniform at the US Capitol, and he was then arrested again last week just days after criticizing Trump again during a CNN interview. One of his attorneys, Chris Mutimer, told CNN that his client was ordered to remain in “pre-trial confinement” — an action analogous to a denial of bond in civilian court — pending legal action against him.

“Not only is (Trump) a failure as president, he is flagrantly violating the Constitution, breaking the law, engaged in rampant corruption, and is killing Americans,” Watson told CNN’s Erin Burnett during the interview. “And that is unacceptable to me.”

[…]

The disobeying orders charges against Watson allege that he violated Defense Department regulations barring troops from speaking out in favor of partisan causes; “wrongfully” wore his uniform at a Capitol press conference; broke leave regulations by traveling to Washington, DC; and refused to wear his uniform to work the morning after his CNN interview.

Air Force prosecutors also alleged that Watson’s Capitol protest and CNN interview constituted “conduct unbecoming an officer.”

Mutimer, Watson’s attorney, told CNN’s Erin Burnett on “OutFront” that he spoke with his client Monday and “he is basically in solitary confinement for his safety.”

Officers have drilled into them, from the time they are cadets and midshipmen, the requirement to be nonpartisan and to avoid having the uniform associated with domestic politics. When Watson was arrested a second time, I was shocked that he was still in uniform after the first incident. Whatever one thinks of Trump or his policies, it is conduct unbecoming of an officer to protest in uniform.

My strong guess is that he did this precisely in order to be arrested and create a spectacle.

Mutimer said, “He truly believes in everything about our constitution and what it represents, and the oath that he swore, and he stands by the fact that he did this so others wouldn’t have to, and to share that to anyone who’s scared and feels alone.”

The founder of the organization that organized the protest in July, Jessica Denson of the Removal Coalition, told CNN at the time that Watson was aware of the risks of what he was doing and had reached out to them via email.

“We started having conversations and took this desire that he had to come out very seriously and thought about the best way to make his sacrifice worth it,” Denson said.

Texas Democratic Congressman Al Green accompanied him for the July protest. Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan, a Pennsylvania Democrat, used her official page to praise Watson:

“It says a great deal about the conviction of Major Watson that he is willing to make this statement while in uniform,” she said.

“He is undoubtedly aware of the consequences of his actions and is willing to sacrifice likely his career and possibly his freedom for his beliefs about this now twice-impeached President.”

That’s a shameful politicization of the military by an elected official. Watson’s violation of his oath, and of federal law, will have zero impact on the election. But it further diminishes the standing of our armed forces with the public, which increasingly sees the uniformed military as partisan actors.

As to Watson, I can find very little about him. Several sources say he’s been in 17 years. Unless he’s prior enlisted, he should be a lieutenant colonel by now.

Regardless, he will almost certainly be stripped of his commission, his rank, and any veteran benefits he might otherwise have been entitled to. And rightly so.

Military courts-martial leading to “contempt of officials” charges are rare — a CNN review only identified two such convictions that have occurred since the modern Uniform Code of Military Justice was enacted in 1951.

In 1965, an Army lieutenant was convicted of the charge after he participated in an off-base protest against the Vietnam War in El Paso, Texas. Lt. Henry Howe was sentenced to a dismissal from the service — the equivalent of a dishonorable discharge for an officer — and a year in the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara ultimately granted parole to Howe, ending his sentence early.

The most recent Article 88 conviction came in 2021, when former Marine Corps Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller pleaded guilty to contempt of officials and other charges linked to a series of social media videos he published criticizing the Biden administration’s handling of the US military’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. Scheller, who was confined to the brig for a period of time before his trial, was sentenced to a $5,000 pay forfeiture and resigned from the Marine Corps sans-pension as part of a plea agreement.

Many others, though, have been forced to resign or punished under different articles. I have made frequent reference over the years to former LTC Terrence Lakin, a highly-decorated Army flight surgeon who threw his career away in 2010, refusing to deploy until he saw President Obama’s birth certificate. He was sentenced to six months in prison and discharged, forfeiting the pension he would have had coming upon retirement.

The court, rightly, would not allow him to present evidence that Obama was not a natural-born U.S. citizen. It turns out that military officers are not the ones to make that determination.

Alas, there’s a coda to the Scheller story:

The Trump administration has since appointed Scheller to serve as a senior adviser to the Pentagon’s undersecretary for personnel and readiness.

One doubts Watson will be appointed to a senior executive post in the next Democratic administration. But maybe there’s a spot for him on the speaking circuit.

21 responses to “Air Force Major Who Protested Trump Faces Criminal Charges”

  1. I agree with everything you said. Having said that, I do have a grudging admiration for this officer. Everything he is doing is with eyes wide open and is willing to suffer the consequences.

    And, as with the Scheller case, the politization of the military under Trump is, unfortunately, a sign of things to come. More signs of a growing authoritarianism.

    1
  2. But it further diminishes the standing of our armed forces with the public, which increasingly sees the uniformed military as partisan actors.

    One side has fomented violent insurrection, has ordered the military to commit war crimes, and is actively purging female and non-white officers from the armed forces.

    Watson is not the primary problem when it comes to the politicization of the military.

    And so far as he is the problem, he is willing to take his punishment – contrary to the open criminals in the White House and Pentagon.

    (And they absolutely are open criminals. I am not being figurative here.)

    5
    1. This. Watson has not diminished the military image, he’s done the opposite. President Trumpstein Files once called for the “termination” of the Constitution, drawing rare rebukes from Republicans — who then, of course, promptly let Trump continue shredding said Constitution.

      Trump and his agents have expressed admiration for Mao, Hitler, and Hitler’s generals. Trump was once rightly compared to Hitler both by his own lazy and incompetent VP JD Vance, and by public health threat and friend-of-measles RFK Jr. — before these weak cucks sold out to MAGA’s un-American, white supremacist fascism.

      Trump, Vance, Jr., and the Republicans referenced above are all violating the oath they swore to protect the US Constitution. They care more for the Jan 6 terrorists than for their oath. They commit and enable war crimes, they destroy our alliances, they comfort our enemies, make a mockery of justice, ignore the rule of law. Trumpers love Trump; they hate America.

      Watson’s resistance show some in the military remember their ultimate oath is to the Constitution and thus to We The People. Watson’s apparent willingness to accept the consequences shows he also respects his actions are an affront to military order and readiness. So all the way round, he understands his assignment.

      That makes him wholly unlike the authoritarian-wannabe orange bastard Trump, his apologists, and the SCOTUS conservatives led by John Roberts — another pathetic coward and the worst Chief Justice in history, Taney can now rest — who think all of government must genuflect to a Tyrant,* what with their phony, anti-Constitutional “unitary executive theory” counterrevolution. (*Except when said tyrant threatens the bottom line of the oligarchs who bought the corrupt Federalist Society hack justices their seats.)

      It strengthens the military’s standing when the public knows uniformed officers will not all meekly assist in making Americans slaves to the right’s neofascist wet dream. It’s what Hitler’s officers should have done when the chips were down.

      It’s actually against US law and their oath to follow illegal orders “Because chain-of-command,” “Because rules and norms,” and “Because it was drilled into us.”

      1. @drj I’m not arguing that Watson is “the primary problem.” But the uninformed military is professionally bound to remain outside the bounds of partisan politics. Politicians have no professional ethic to uphold, unfortunately.

      2. @DK Were Watson to have been issued an illegal order, he would have been obligated to respectfully refuse to follow it. There’s not evidence that was the case. He just holds strong views about the administration and is using his uniform to grandstand.

        1. Respectfully, it does no good to wait until after the bullets are fired to act against a deranged maniac waving a gun around. Watson seems to recognize this. There’s plenty of evidence Trump and Hegseth are dangerous, incompetent, fascist criminals already ordering illegal war crimes. Watson recognizes this as well.

          To me, you’re grandstanding when you pretend this low level officer’s low level protest is diminishing the military, because he has the gift of basic recognition.

          1
  3. There’s not anything shameful about Rep. Houlahan acknowledging that Watson has to face consequences while praising him for signaling that not all servicemembers will blindly abet fascism. If everyone in the German military of yore had thought like Watson, the Holocaust would not have happened.

    Whats shameful is that there are a fee more who could take a similar stand and are not. If Americans weren’t so weak, Watson would not be one of one.

    This corrupt, crooked, criminal, murdererous, warmongering pedo president deports military family members while signaling indifference to the unnecessary suffering of sailors deployed to feed his narcissistic incompetence. Trump, a pathological liar who is unfit for office and whose malfeasance would not be tolerated were he not a white male, daily attacks our constitutional order. He is threat to the republic, an abnormal cancer, and he should be treated as such. He does not deserve normal treatment.

    Watson deserves his consequences for his illegal, the military cannot abide his behavior. But from civilians and our representations, he also deserves praise for refusing to act as a lazy brownshirt. To praise his rightly placed morals is our right and duty as civilians in a democracy — the president and the military (should) serve us, not vice versa. And sometimes what is ethical is not legal.

    Meanwhile, jackass racist and lowlife anti-American traitor Trump deserves contempt.

    2
    1. @DK Houlahan is not only a former Air Force officer herself, but a member of the HASC. She should absolutely not be praising officers for violating federal law and the core ethos of military subordination to civil authority.

      1. She is a democratically elected civilian representative and thus part of the civilian authority you reference. She is a member of government branch with authority to both impeach the commander-in-chief and conduct military oversight. She is not the president’s slave, apologies to the made-up “unitary executive theory.”

        In her House role, she has a duty to represent and speak for her constiuents — who agree with Watson and with her, not with lawbreaking thugs Hegseth and Trump, a killer who incited a terror attack on Congress.

        The constitution opens with We The People for a reason and goes on to create three co-equal branches of government. The military can or must subordinate themselves to the chief executive, but that’s their core ethos not ours. For civilians, our ethos is our elected representatives should praise Watson if that’s what We The People want them to do. They answer to us. So does the president and the military, and they should remember that. Trump and Republicans are in political trouble because they’ve forgotten.

        1. @DK She has every right to call for Trump’s impeachment and otherwise call out his actions. Praising a military officer for violating his professional ethics, on the other hand, is highly problematic as it encourages other members to similarly engage in partisan politics. Once we normalize it—but just this once, because this duly-elected commander-in-chief is bad—it becomes routine.

  4. I agree with you James. He will suffer consequences. However, I am going to bet he serves real time and wont get much of a plea deal.

    As an aside, I am somewhat surprised that you haven’t mentioned the firing of the people at Stars and Stripes. They were the ones who initially broke the story about the Lincoln. Hegseth and the official military denied all of the claims in the story. The editor was fired for subordination after he had an interview where he said he thought it would cross a red line if the paper was ordered to not cover those kinds of stories.

    It seems pretty clear to me that this was related to the Lincoln story. The reporter who was also fired, was the one who reported that story. The also fired the publisher who was retiring in September after he also publicly reaffirmed the independence of the paper. As I understand it, the paper was explicitly made independent of Pentagon interference so that they could have true independent reporting. It’s pretty clear that under Trump and Hegseth that is a thing of the past. Eisenhower’s claim that those in uniform deserved honest reporting is a thing of the past.

    Steve

    1
  5. This is civil disobedience. He is using the fact that he knows he is breaking the law and will be punished as an attempt to draw attention to the political corruption of the administration.

    There is no doubt he is breaking the UCMJ, but he is doing it anyway, and he knows what he is putting on the line.

    3
    1. @sltaylor The military is in a unique position in our society. The core values of the profession are vehemently opposed to acts of civil disobedience, as they undermine civil-military relations.

      1. @drjjoyner But that just amplifies the civil disobedience of it all, does it not?

        Engaging in an act of defiance against an injustice that maximizes the attention one receives, knowing one will be punished, is the idea.

        The fact that it so shocks the conscience would be a feature, not a bug, if that is his goal.

        I understand why the act is seen the way it is, and I can understand why one might be opposed to it, or even think it inefficacious, but I don’t see how it still isn’t civil disobedience.

        I can think of two examples of people who have set themselves on fire as a way to protest regimes they thought unjust. I would not recommend it and question whether such acts are worth the price, but they are quite clearly a form of protest.

      2. @drjjoyner I would agree, by the way, that the politicization of the military is a very bad thing.

        But I would hasten to add that the Trump administration took us down that path, and it is hard for me to then cast too much ire at this individual in terms of assigning blame. Or, at least if I am going to allocate his share of blame, it is small in reletative terms.

        1
  6. Charley in Cleveland Avatar
    Charley in Cleveland

    Now the politicization of the military will get the “both sides do it” treatment. Meanwhile, Hegseth continues to purge women, minorities, and Low T white guys.

    3
    1. @Charley in Cleveland The civil-military relationship is intentionally unequal. The military is far more bound by its norms than are civilian leaders.

      But, yes, firing Biden-appointed generals on the basis that they are presumed disloyal to the MAGA agenda is politicization of the military at a severe level. Purging women and minorities from leadership on the presumption they are DEI hires is highly problematic, but in something of a different bucket.

  7. I say if he gets Republican politicians to complain about politicizing the military, it will have been worth it.

    And I will tip my hat to that person in Congress who can say, without sarcasm, “Oh gosh, I don’t much like politicizing the military either. Let’s work together to reduce this!”

    It is so common for people to have a hard time putting the shoe on the other foot. Sometimes they need a bit of a nudge. Sometimes they need a boot up the ass.

    (Which they then take out and put on the other foot. Thank you very much. I’ll be here all week.)

  8. How about if he gets Republicans to complain about Democrats politicizing the military (a far more likely outcome, imo)?

  9. I support the next president pardoning him and restoring his benefits.

    1. @Gustopher It would complete the circle of Trump pardoning his cronies. It would also complete the circle of rendering the uniformed military a partisan tool.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.