Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

General's Speeches Broke Rules (Boykin)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-20-04 04:49 AM
Original message
General's Speeches Broke Rules (Boykin)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14262-2004Aug19.html

<snip>
But Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, speaking at the time, praised Boykin for "an outstanding record" and kept him in his post. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Richard B. Myers likewise defended Boykin and told reporters that "at first blush, it doesn't look like any rules were broken" because "there is a very wide gray area" of what the rules permit.

The inspector's report, which is dated Aug. 5 but has not been released by the Pentagon, concludes otherwise. It found that Boykin failed to obtain clearance for his remarks, failed to clarify that his remarks were personal and not official, and failed to report reimbursement of travel costs from one of the sponsoring religious groups.

"We recommend that the Acting Secretary of the Army take appropriate corrective action with respect to LTG Boykin," the report says. But it adds that the Army should also take into consideration as a "mitigating factor" that Boykin said he repeatedly asked military lawyers about the propriety of making the speeches and he recalled no one advising him to obtain advance clearance for his remarks.

<snip>
The investigation determined that Boykin spoke about his involvement in the war on terrorism at 23 religious-oriented events since January 2002, wearing his uniform at all but two. His audiences -- mostly at Baptist or Pentecostal churches -- ranged from small groups to more than 1,000. Boykin's remarks followed a pattern, the report said, and he showed slides prepared with the help of two military aides. But it concluded that their assistance was legal because it was "insignificant."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Moderator DU Moderator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-20-04 04:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. Duplicate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC