Unprecedented letter from Chair of Joint Chiefs suggests U.S. military does not want a President Hillary

Four days ago, on October 24, 2016, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joe Dunford sent a fascinating piece of communication, titled “Upholding Our Oath,” to every member of the U.S. Armed Services.


Note: General Joseph Dunford Jr., 60, was the 36th Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps. Nominated by Obama, Dunford became the 19th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on October 1, 2015.

This is what Gen. Dunford wrote:

“As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff…as our country again prepares for a peaceful transfer of power to a new administration, I write to share my views regarding our mutual obligations as military professionals and rights as citizens during this election season.

Every service member swears “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States” and to “bear true faith and allegiance to the same.” This oath is embedded in our professional culture and underpins the values that shape and define our all-volunteer force. Beginning with General George Washington resigning his military commission, our deliberate and disciplined commitment to upholding the principle of civilian control of the military underpins not only our warrior ethos but also the expectations of how we conduct ourselves while in uniform.

While we must always safeguard our professional integrity, extra vigilance is required during any political transition. Our individual and collective obligation during this election season is twofold. First, we must recognize that we have one Commander in Chief, and until authority is transferred on January 20, 2017, the Joint Force must remain clearly focused on and responsive to the existing National Command Authority. Second, the Joint Force must conduct itself in such a way that the new administration has confidence that it will be served by a professional, competent, and apolitical military. This is especially important in the context of delivering the best military advice.

Every member of the Joint Force has the right to exercise his or her civic duty, including learning and discussing — even debating — the policy issues driving the election cycle and voting for his or her candidate of choice. Provided that we follow the guidance and regulations governing individual political participation, we should be proud of our civic engagement. What we must collectively guard against is allowing our institution to become politicized, or even perceived as being politicized, by how we conduct ourselves during engagements with the media, the public, or in open or social forums.

We are living in the most volatile and complex security environment since World War II. Whether confronting violent extremist organizations seeking to destroy our way of life or dealing with state actors threatening international order, threats to our national security require a Joint Force that is ready, capable, and trusted. To that end, I have a duty to protect the integrity and political neutrality of our military profession. But this obligation is not mine alone. It belongs to every Soldier, Marine, Sailor, Airman, and Coastguardsman. Thank you for joining me in honoring our history, our traditions, and the institutions of the U.S. Armed Forces by upholding the principle of political neutrality.”

Even without reading between the lines, General Dunford clearly has concerns about politicization of the military and its obligation and commitment to political neutrality and noninterference in politics. That the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff must remind members of the Armed Forces that they must “uphold” their oath both suggests and implies that the opposite is going on, i.e., the military is politicized and there are fears that it will intervene in civilian politics.

If this pic (below) of a young U.S. Marine is any indication, Gen. Dunford has good reasons to issue the “Upholding Our Oath” communication.


A year ago, a Rasmussen Reports national survey of active and retired military personnel found that only 15% had a favorable opinion of Hillary Clinton, with just 3% who viewed her very favorably. A staggering 81% had an unfavorable opinion of her, including 69% who had a very unfavorable view of her.

A similar survey today is sure to find even higher unfavorable ratings for Hillary among those whom she would command as their Commander in Chief.

H/t GiGi and

See also:



19 responses to “Unprecedented letter from Chair of Joint Chiefs suggests U.S. military does not want a President Hillary

  1. Hopefully, many in the military will not be denied,their ballots as in years past.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Hopefully, our troops will not have to serve under Killary Clinton. She is unfit to be the Commander in Chief, unfit to serve as President of the United States. She is a lying, traitorous, thieving individual who needs to spend the rest of her natural life behind bars, incarcerated for the crimes she has committed.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. She really deserves to be hung on the front lawn of the White House and televised internationally.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Mrs. Clinton, the current occupant of the W.H., and others should be tried at The Hague for war crimes.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. looks like a weak male to me…just knowing he was nominated by and serves under obama is all I need to know..
    I wonder if he would have put out the same letter if the military-grade tsunami waves of disgust and mistrust were flowing in trump’s direction instead of the evil, evil, and wicked hellary (yeah, I meant “evil” twice).

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Pingback: Unprecedented letter from Chair of Joint Chiefs suggests U.S. military does not want a President Hillary — Fellowship of the Minds | kommonsentsjane

  7. This letter of Dunford’s bears his name and perhaps his signature, but in truth would have been published only if all (or almost all) of the Joint Chiefs were behind him. It is a not-so-veiled warning to a President Hillary Clinton that she, if she becomes President, will have to honor the Constitutional and ethical boundaries that the Armed Forces. Pushed to its logical extremes, it is a warning that if she violates those boundaries—at least beyond a certain point—that they will, if necessary, move to remove her as Commander-in-Chief. And this would necessarily include any new Joint Chiefs, should Dunford be relieved of command.
    This letter represents a radical (at the root) departure re.: protocols, be they publicly announced or not. It is a deeper and more profound divide than the rift that devolved between Truman and MacArthur, for MacArthur was confronted with a military order he alone could not or would not, in conscience, abide. Dunford’s letter warns a future administration (read: Hillary) not to violate boundaries that have existed since Washington, and it is significant for its publication—never has such a missive ever been issued before—and for its concealed ultimatum: Violate our historical boundaries, and we will move to arrest you. It is meet and just, given Hillary’s ultimatum that “when the order comes from the President, it must be obeyed.”
    In Plain English, Dunford is saying that the Joint Chiefs of Staff WILL NOT wage a nuclear war against Russia. BRAVO FOR THEM!

    As I write this, both DOJ and the FBI have announced they have discovered additional e-mails and evidence re.: Mrs. Clinton and her aide-de-camp Human Abedein and her husband Anthony Weiner, and that they have notified Congress of their intent to reopen their investigation. This means that a Grand Jury is likely to be convened. Not that FBI’s Comey or DOJ’s Lynch are to be excused, necessarily, but they most likely strategized to release this news at this time, given Bill Clinton’s conversation with the latter in the airplane on the tarmac: Revenge is a dish best served cold, and timing is everything. Clearly, their intent is to save their rear ends, and that would necessarily demand this timing to abort a Hillary Presidency.

    Conclusions to be drawn: As Yogi Berra once said, “It ain’t over ’til it’s over,” and a Hillary Presidency is to be avoided at all costs. This also necessarily means that there is a shadow secret government puppeteering our elected officials. Hillary has become Icarus and her pride took her too high, and her wax wings are melting!
    As published on Dr. Henry Makow’s site yesterday, it can be surmised that Donald Trump may be the President to take us to war, should it happen, because the Nation WILL NOT follow Hillary into war. A little cynicism of this sort is called for, for to be forewarned is to be forewarned. Not that a President Trump would want a war: He does not. But even the puppet politicians and their elites have woken up to what is at stake.

    We are witnessing the TRIANGULATION of Hillary Clinton. The Endgame is nigh. Like a large number of world figures before her, once she has served her purpose, Nature or Nature’s God, shall remove her from the World Stage. Sayonara.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. How pathetic. He calls on the troops to honour their oat while he never upheld his. Typical Obummer appointee. Does oath not mean defend US citizens against all foreign and DOMESTIC enemies. Did he ever stand up to those well known domestic enemies or did he just take his pay while licking Obummers A**. Now he is afraid that the good times are over and his own troops might stand against him, as they should.
    Anyway, he should only worry for his failures to act properly as Killary is not going to be around for much longer. She knows what is coming in all the releases yet to come and will not wait for result. Why do you think she and rapist have shifted $1.8 billion to Quatar?

    Liked by 2 people

  9. He omits “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” part in discussion of the oath to defend the Constitution… political neutrality (unwritten tradition, though key principle) is superseded when suitable folk violate the Constitution; the founders designed it that way, the Constitution takes priority. (The letter glosses right over this.) Other than that, it’s a “be professional” speech about not being political on the job during the upcoming election.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Pingback: Unprecedented letter from Chair of Joint Chiefs suggests U.S. military does not want a President Hillary | renematosruiz6663

  11. General Dunford, with all due respect, that horse has already left the barn. The military has become politicized by the likes of Gen. Allen and Gen. Flynn, and others. What you conspicuously left out of your memo is the fact that the military is empowered to refuse to comply with UNCONSTITUTIONAL orders. When will that begin?

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Pingback: The message for the Khazarian mafia is trick or treat, surrender or die | I am a Malaysian

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s