Americans should know when foreign powers pay retired military officers

B

BidenPresident

Verified User
A bipartisan bill introduced by Sens. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) would close several loopholes identified by The Post in an investigative series published last fall about hundreds of retired U.S. military officers taking lucrative jobs advising foreign governments known for human rights atrocities and political repression. The Retired Officers Conflict of Interest Act would require public reporting about who is working on behalf of which foreign governments and for how much.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/27/military-foreign-payments-disclosure/
 
Seems kind of pointless to me.

I mean if the government suspects a crime they can find out who they are working for anytime they want.

This seems more like an intrusion into civilians personal lives.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Seems kind of pointless to me.

I mean if the government suspects a crime they can find out who they are working for anytime they want.

This seems more like an intrusion into civilians personal lives.
Click to expand...

That US military are working for a foreign government? Seems like they are no longer loyal to the US.
 
"Someone who works for a foreign government without authorization risks losing retirement pay, but fewer than five people have received this punishment. One of them was retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn, who accepted $38,557 to speak at a 2015 gala for a Russian propaganda outlet where he sat next to Russian President Vladimir Putin. This scandal led Congress to pass legislation in 2019 and 2020 requiring the Pentagon to submit annual reports to lawmakers about retired flag officers working for foreign powers. But these reports include only a few lines of information and don’t name the generals and admirals."
 
BidenPresident said:
That US military are working for a foreign government? Seems like they are no longer loyal to the US.
Click to expand...

They don’t work for the US government, they are retired which means they are civilians.

Why should civilians have to report to the government who they work for?

You don’t see that as a problem?
 
Tinkerpeach said:
They don’t work for the US government, they are retired which means they are civilians.

Why should civilians have to report to the government who they work for?

You don’t see that as a problem?
Click to expand...

Former diplomats and retired intelligence employees aren’t subject to the emoluments clause because they cannot automatically be called back into service, whereas retired military officers retain their commissions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/27/military-foreign-payments-disclosure/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top