Army Secretary John McHugh Won't Pursue Discharges of Service Members Who Tell Him They Are Gay
The Secretary of the Army called it "counterproductive" on Wednesday to discharge service members who speak to him openly about their sexual orientation as the military reviews its plans on how best to implement "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", the NYT reports:
"Although Mr. Gates announced revised standards last week that make it harder for the military to discharge service members whose sexual orientation is revealed by third parties, gay men and lesbians who willingly reveal their sexual orientation still face ouster from the military, at least as the law is written.
But Mr. McHugh, who spoke at a breakfast with Pentagon reporters, said it made no sense to pursue discharges of service members as he speaks with them about the change in policy. Mr. Obama, Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen have all asked commanders to assess opinion within the military about the change in law. Mr. McHugh said it would be “counterproductive” to 'take disciplinary action against someone who spoke with me openly and honestly.' He said the Pentagon was still trying to devise a way to more formally poll large numbers of service members about their views on changing the law."
Meanwhile, the Department of Justice is furiously defending DADT using outdated quotes from Colin Powell, and misrepresenting the views of Palm Center experts in a brief filed earlier this week.
In related, baffling news, check out this piece from Chris Johnson at DC Agenda about how the Justice Dept. is distorting the views of DADT experts Nathaniel Frank and Aaron Belkin to fit its defense of the military gay ban.
Said Frank: “The way they portrayed me is preposterous and I’m not sure that any person in good faith hearing what I had to say could conclude what the [Department of Justice] concluded in their [request for] summary judgment. I specifically said having a concern about privacy is not irrational, but using that privacy concern as an argument for the need to ban gays is irrational.”
The Advocate's Kerry Eleveld asked White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs yesterday whether the White House is ducking pursuing the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", as has been suggested by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and others.
Watch Gibbs get defensive about it, AFTER THE JUMP...
Yeah, that is until these assholes decide that it's too "risky" to lift the ban, and all these gay service members that confided in this dude and "the process" are all singled out and tossed in the streets. That's the USA's game. Use you for their "review process" and then can ya when they're through.
This country is Fucked, with a capitol F! Can't wait to leave this shit-hole.
Posted by: Joey | Apr 1, 2010 8:00:59 AM
is the doj really part of this administration. time to relook at the ag his department seems to be going out of their way to insult the LGBT community. it also shows that obams needs to take more of a leadership role. he arm twisted health care through "as a fierce advocate" get we expect the same effort or more lip service.
Posted by: walter | Apr 1, 2010 8:39:57 AM
To John McHugh
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We need more officials on the inside like you who will stand up for what is right.
Posted by: ravewulf | Apr 1, 2010 8:52:36 AM
Here we go... obviously nothing was learned from the fumbling of health care. This would be a complete no-brainer to put in the defence appropriations bill, instead we are wasting time. Another disaster waiting in the wings is going to be the total mis-management of energy policy. Ugh!
Posted by: Mike | Apr 1, 2010 9:23:42 AM
Before everyone gets too happy, just to clarify, the article states that McHugh is only speaking about the soldiers the he had recently spoken with in official conversations he had had about repealing the policy and that he would not pursue DADT charges against soldiers who had been honest about their sexuality during those talks: "he had initiated the conversations with service members in recent months as part of the Pentagon’s review of how best to carry out a repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law". So he is saying he won't pursue discharges against any of those specific soldiers he had conversations with, not soldiers in general.
Posted by: Wayne | Apr 1, 2010 10:09:04 AM
Gibbs said the words of Mullen and Gates are not muddled. But that's not what Kerry asked. She asked about the White House. Gibbs sucks as press secretary on so many issues.
Posted by: LOL | Apr 1, 2010 10:13:02 AM
Hey! Don't blame Gibbs. People keep acting as if it's his job to tell the truth. WRONG!
It's the job of any PS to PRETEND to while covering the Administration's ass. As this one IS so muddled—he is, too.
And Secty. McHugh's latest symptom of schizophrenia is another example of how the first 14 months of Obama Inc. has been like a Keystone Cops / "Reno 911" marathon.
SO FAR: Contradicting virtually everyone else in the Pentagon's Jurassic Park, he declared that the Army could handle repeal with no problem. But, then, in the same breath, he said gay segregated units and assignments might be necessary.
Tuesday, contradicting his direct boss, Secretary of DEFENSE OF DADT Gates and the Chair of the Joint Chiefs, McHugh said rabid homophobe Lt. Gen. Mixon won't be reprimanded for a possible violation of the UCMJ/federal law ban on advocating for/against legislation when he urged people to contact Congress to oppose repeal...and a definite violation of the charade Gates is leading that they're FOR repeal.
Now McHugh, is contradicting them ALL...including Obama's DOJ...in saying he won't consistently enforce DADT.
I continue to believe we must stop however many discharges we can by whatever means, but the evidence that O Inc. simply doesn't know what they're doing does not instill confidence. Or, less politely, what the Hell's going on?
If they want to stop discharges, rather than simply ignoring DADT [which IS better than nothing], why isn't McHugh's Commander-in-Chief using the powers Congress gave him to freeze gay discharges in the name of national security which he's said such discharges WEAKEN?
And McHugh's latest psychotic episodes are against the backdrop of the Obama DOJ's latest volcano of homophobia.
Even after the flood of bad gay AND mainstream press over their heinous DOMA brief last year [which, unfortunately, obscured the fact that a pretty heinous brief in its own right re DADT had been issued by the odious ODOJ a few days before], they've done it again, adding what appears to be some form of malpractice one would think could result in court sanctions were it not the virtually untouchable federal government.
First, we learned they had went out of their way to saturate the brief with arguably outdated quotes by homohating, unindicted war criminal Powell. Now we learn they have damaged the credibility of the two most tireless and eloquent opponents to the ban. I no more believe Belkin and Frank were accurately quoted than I believe Judy Garland will be singing Easter Parade at the White House Easter Egg Roll Monday. [Though given her huge gay following, O Inc.'s desire to exploit gay icons, AND their ignorance, there's probably an invitation in the dead person's dead letter box somewhere.]
Bottomline: they don't actually give a rat politician's ass for LGBT rights. If they did, they would not continue to make homophobic arguments in favor of these laws that aren't just read by the court but by Congress and the formal Antigay Industry. "Repeal? But, Mr. President, your DOJ just said...." If I were John McShame I'd be rubbing their noses in the stinky crotch of this brief at the next repeal hearing.
Look for some forthcoming statement from Jon Davidson, Legal Director of Lambda Legal, similar to what he said about that first DOMA brief. The details are different, but the devilish irresponsibility isn't.
"Whether or not the administration felt a need to defend, there are many ways one can defend. The administration could have rested on the first two arguments raised in their papers (jurisdiction and standing) that these plaintiffs were not entitled to sue without arguing at this point that DOMA is constitutional. Doing that would not have waived those arguments. What they need to be asked is why they gratuitously went out of their way to make the outrageous arguments they unnecessarily included such as that DOMA does not discriminate based on sexual orientation or that the right at issue is not marriage but an unestablished right to 'same-sex marriage' or that DOMA is somehow justified in order to protect taxpayers who don't want their tax dollars used to support lesbian and gay couples (while it's apparently fine to make lesbians and gay men pay the same taxes but be denied the benefits provided heterosexual couples). Their public statements about the filing try to sidestep these points. They absolutely knew they did not need to make these additional arguments, especially at this time and consciously decided to do so. I am seething mad."
If there were a moral Three Strikes law applicable to the DOJ, Obamaite Tony West and his fellow legal Munchkins would be the ones worrying about dropping the soap in the shower. Leavenworth anyone?
Posted by: Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com | Apr 1, 2010 1:03:34 PM
Mchugh is one hot silver fox daddy!
Posted by: Kevin | Apr 1, 2010 2:26:04 PM
Does this mean those conversations he may have while out at a bar, say with a gay serviceman, off the record, won't be pursued either?
It's pretty commonly thought among the Republican elite in this area - that John was a representative to the House of Representatives - that Mr. McHugh is gay.
It doesn't surprise me that we are seeing this change under his watch as Army Secretary. It wouldn't shock me to learn that he was selected just to keep some Republicans quiet about the change.
Posted by: ThomD | Apr 1, 2010 2:56:41 PM
How about the USA fixes the problem?? Every day that passes with all these discriminatory laws in place is another reason to leave the US. OK, so now the soldiers who personally talk to this guy are "safe" from being kicked out during this little window. What about all the previously kicked out soldiers? Their families? God, I wish more people were demanding justice in this country.
Posted by: X | Apr 1, 2010 6:22:27 PM
@ THOMD:
Repeat, this is NO "change" worth writing about. The guy's a loose cannon who can't make up his mind whether DADT is a good thing or a bad thing.
If you're a gay servicemember STAY AWAY FROM HIM.
Posted by: Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com | Apr 1, 2010 7:50:39 PM
Oooops!
McHugh has already recanted before the ink was barely dry on his bumble.
"WASHINGTON -- Reversing course, Army Secretary John McHugh warned soldiers Thursday that they still can be discharged for acknowledging they are gay, saying he misspoke earlier this week when he suggested the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy had been temporarily suspended. ...."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/01/AR2010040102908.html
Posted by: Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com | Apr 1, 2010 9:45:33 PM
Yeah Michael, seriously, already they backtrack: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6304VR20100401?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
Why are gay people defending a country that harms so many of us? I know the answers, but not every gay American can love their abuser.
Posted by: X | Apr 2, 2010 3:08:08 AM