Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Sep 30, 2020 5 tweets 1 min read Read on X
This 👇🏻is sort of technically true but misleading. Most people & articles discussing this are talking about discharges for enlisted personnel. The rules for officers- which Hunter Biden was - are a little different. /1
There isn’t really a “dishonorable discharge” category for officers. Drug use by an officer is mandatory grounds for involuntary separation from USN however. Whether that is General (Under Honorable Condutions) or Under Other Than Honirable Conditions, depends on the facts. /2
To say the separation was “administrative” is technically correct, but w/o knowing the Navy procedures, that word tends to made to sound like it’s less serious than it really is. A separation for drug use is considered a separation for “misconduct.” /3
An officer who is being separated on that basis who voluntarily sought out treatment, however, could still be assigned a discharge characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions), as the USN strives to encourage treatment. /4
An officer can also be separated from the USN on a “punitive” basis (rather than administratively) thru the court martial process. The separation there is part of the penalty for conviction on criminal conduct & is called a “dismissal.”/5

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸

Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @McAdooGordon

Jun 27
I’m late to the SCOTUS party today because we are moving today!

But I wanted to let you guys know that the decision today about the SEC is a huge win for liberty lovers. The case is Jarkesy.

The Court ruled the govt can’t impose fines on people for alleged fraud w/o a jury.
This decision is constitutional & therefore should directly affect all the other administrative agencies that have civil fraud penalty schemes too, like HUD, HHS & a bunch of others.

This has been one of the most common constitutional violations perpetrated by the federal govt.
As a young lawyer I was astonished these schemes were considered legal. It seemed obvious to me that they were unconstitutional.

The first one I worked on I was horrified because the SEC lawyers were so tyrannical- precisely because there was no check on them, judge or jury.
Read 6 tweets
Jun 14
Donation Opportunity.

(I never ask for money for myself on social media, nor do I do any affiliations.)

I wanted to bring to your attention a good cause if you have the inclination & ability to donate some money.

It’s a GiveSendGo acct. givesendgo.com/1APMediaDefama…
1st Amendment Praetorian (1AP) is/was a nonprofit organization that I represented (pro bono) prior to Jan6 & before the congressional J6 Committee. They provided security for speakers at various events before & after the 2020 election.
If you followed me then, you will know that I lodged formal written objections on behalf of 1AP to the J6 Committee because the Committee was trying to violate 1AP’s 1st Amendment right to freedom of association by demanding information & testimonies from this nonprofit.
Read 13 tweets
Jun 3
I’ve now listened to Mark Levin’s argument about SCOTUS taking DJT’s case by writ. I agree it’s at least possible, tho as Mark agrees, rare. I said this in my Daily Wire interview this morning.

The statute he cites 28 USC 1651 is right but he’s not right that it can be done now.
SCOTUS’ writ power is “in aid of” its appellate jurisdiction. So, 1. there must be a federal issue in the case, which I think there is.

But 2. there must also be a judgment that the writ is seeking review from.
I see only 2 ways that there could be such a judgment:

1. A judgment in the criminal case - which only comes once the sentence is rendered - &/or the failure of Merchan or other judges to stay any sentence; &
Read 9 tweets
Jun 1
DJT NY case.

Having gotten the actual jury instructions (thank you @KingMakerFT), it now comes clear what DJT was charged with/convicted of. Most of the reporting on this has been wrong because reporters don’t understand the law.
He was charged with 34 counts of violating NY penal section 175.10, a falsification of books & records offense that becomes a felony if you do it with intent to cover up a second crime. 👇🏻 Image
Bragg’s office said & the judge clearly instructed the jury that the second crime was NY code section 17-152, a misdemeanor conspiracy statute prohibiting promoting the election of any person by “unlawful means.” Image
Read 15 tweets
May 30
Some perspective.

1. There are multiple, well founded grounds for actual reversal on appeal in the DJT NY case. Unlike in most ordinary cases where as a practical matter there are few.
2. The conviction does not preclude DJT from running for President or serving as President.

3. Any sentence will likely be stayed pending appeal under normal legal principles, if not by Merchan, then by a courts of appeals.
4. Thus, as a practical matter, this verdict very likely does not change anything between now & Nov.

Except there will be more legal maneuvering in this case & the others.
Read 5 tweets
May 30
Free speech. In the coming years, I think we're going to see a lot of free speech cases. It is one of the most important aspects of our liberty based republic. We must defend it at all costs. Literally no other rights can be defended w/out it, at least not nonviolently.
It is vital that the Right of Center understand and insist upon having free speech. It is both a legal right against the govt (First Amendment) AND a social, civil value that makes our civilization work.
The First Amendment restricts the govt's power to suppress free speech. Most people know this in a general way - you can't be jailed for your views.

An increasingly important issue, however, involves the govt's speech/views, esp when it is in conflict with those of citizens.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(