Re: In California National Guard, whistleblower claims of retaliation go beyond Fresno

[Lock The FAGGOTS UP Like We Did The Japanese!]

In article <sfbjjs$iup$1...@news.dns-netz.com>
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Only believe CNN!

Allegations of retaliation against whistleblowers in the
California National Guard are more widespread than the
complaints made at a Fresno air base that led to a dramatic
leadership shakeup of the organization earlier this month, The
Times has found.

Interviews with current and former Guard members and an
examination of internal documents show that complaints go well
beyond Fresno and extend to the army side as well. The
allegations have come from fighter pilots, a top military
prosecutor, Special Forces officers and a colonel who hoped to
head the organization.

They allege a pattern of both retaliation against whistleblowers
and others who accuse their superiors of misconduct and a
failure of the Guard’s justice system to protect them.

“When a person blows the whistle on wrongdoing, they face almost
a guarantee of retaliation,” said Dwight Stirling, a reserve
judge advocate who heads the Center for Law and Military Policy
and alleges he was targeted for investigation after he reported
possible misconduct five years ago. “It’s meant, as in all cases
of retaliation, to send a message that if you hold the managers
to account, if you bring to light their misconduct, that they’re
going to make you pay for it.”

After a Times investigation detailed whistleblower complaints
and other misconduct allegations at the 144th Fighter Wing in
Fresno, an inspector general for the California Military
Department, which oversees the air and army branches of the
Guard, found that a culture of reprisal afflicted the wing.

The problems led to the recent ouster of the air Guard’s top
commander and two high-ranking officers at the Fresno base. The
department also directed the air Guard’s new commander to put
together “climate assessments” of the wing leadership.

In the wake of The Times’ reporting, state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-
Santa Ana) has proposed stronger protections for whistleblowers
in the Guard, something he had tried to do more than a decade
ago — without success — while in the state Assembly.

A bill Umberg introduced in February would require the Military
Department’s inspector general to report to the governor instead
of the adjutant general who leads the organization, his office
said. Umberg, a retired U.S. Army colonel, is also pushing to
include a provision that would allow whistleblowers to sue for
economic damages.

“I’m certainly troubled by the acts that I’ve read about,”
Umberg said. “As a career military officer, it’s antithetical to
the culture of the military, which demands respect for all
military members.”

A hearing on the bill is scheduled for Tuesday.

Someone urinated in a female sergeant’s boots. Now the
California Air National Guard faces coverup allegations »

The Military Department could not provide complete numbers on
alleged reprisals in California, so it’s difficult to quantify
the scope of the problem, including whether it has been growing.
The department declined to comment on the multiple reprisal
accusations.

In all but one of the last five years, the number of complaints
reported to the National Guard Assn. of California, a nonprofit
veterans group which is backing Umberg’s bill, has increased or
stayed the same, averaging more than a half-dozen annually in
recent years, said its legislative director, retired Col. John
Haramalis.

His review of them shows the allegations routinely are given a
cursory investigation, if any, then swept under the rug, he said.

Haramalis, who said he once interviewed with then Gov. Jerry
Brown to lead the Military Department, had his own experience
with making a reprisal complaint.

He alleges that the head of the Military Department, Maj. Gen.
David S. Baldwin, improperly blocked him from transferring to
another state to prevent him from promoting. When Haramalis
complained, he said, Baldwin questioned senior officers at the
National Guard Bureau for negative information to use against
him.

Inspectors general for the Department of Defense and each
military service are responsible for investigating misconduct
and whistleblower complaints.

“You either get no investigation or a sham investigation,” said
Haramalis, who spent more than three decades in the Guard. “The
end results are identical — case closed with no further action.
By shielding Guard senior leadership from any consequences of
their actions, the IG has become the enabler of the very
misconduct they were supposed to address. The system has
completely collapsed.”

Michael Wise says that’s what happened in his case. Wise, a
state deputy attorney general, retired from the Guard’s Special
Forces last year as a colonel and decorated combat veteran. He
said he faced retaliation for supporting a major in his command
who reported that soldiers were short-changed because of
persistent problems in the Guard’s payroll system.

Wise and the major, John Trent, said the Guard accused them of
improperly recommending denial of a soldier’s request for a
transfer to another state, which would allow him to avoid a
combat deployment overseas. Wise and Trent filed inspector
general complaints alleging reprisals.

“They dismissed my IG complaint without interviewing my
witnesses,” Wise said. “The IG system as a whole has been
absolutely worthless. … Whistleblowers are not tolerated in the
Guard, that’s the bottom line.”

Trent said he is still pursuing his case. He said the decision
to challenge his superiors ended his chances of promotion to
lieutenant colonel, even though he’s the most-senior major in
the Guard’s Special Forces. The last time he applied, Trent
said, a lesser qualified candidate got the position.

“They have a good ol’ boy system in place, and anything that
attacks that system, they’re going to defend against with all
their might,” he said.

“Once they were called on the carpet for that pay issue, they
just retaliated against me and attempted to end my career.”

At the 144th Wing, at least five Guard members, including a
pilot who was killed in October in a crash during a training
mission in Ukraine, have filed retaliation complaints, The Times
found. Two of the complaints stemmed from a March 2015 incident
in which Staff Sgt. Jennifer Pineda found that someone at the
Fresno base had urinated in the boots she had left in a bathroom
overnight.

The incident and its aftermath fueled suspicions that high-
ranking officers mishandled two investigations to find the
perpetrator and tried to bury the episode to protect someone who
may have been involved, according to interviews and Guard
records obtained by The Times.

Pineda and Lt. Col. Rob Swertfager, a pilot who spoke up for
her, filed complaints.

The Times investigation led to the removal earlier this month of
Maj. Gen. Clay Garrison, the top commander of the air Guard. He
was pushed out because the Military Department had lost “faith,
trust and confidence” in his ability to lead, a spokesman said.
Two 144th commanders — Col. Dan Kelly and Col. Victor Sikora —
were also ousted.

A report by the Military Department’s inspector general said
there’s at least “the perception of reprisal” at the 144th. The
new commander of the air Guard, Brig. Gen. Greg Jones, was
instructed to work to “restore the confidence and trust in the
IG system” at the Fresno base.

Stirling said he wrestled with a similar lack of confidence and
trust.

“I’d say the vast majority of people who know about wrongdoing
don’t dare to say a word,” Stirling said. “They are faced with a
conflict of, do they do what’s right and blow the whistle? Or do
they look out for their career and their livelihood?”

He enlisted in the Army Guard after the Sept. 11 attacks,
eventually becoming its head prosecutor.

Supervisors praised him in evaluations as having “limitless”
potential and being “more than a first-rate” judge advocate,
according to his evaluations.

He said that all changed in 2014, when he reported that a
handful of military lawyers in the Guard were not licensed to
practice law in the state. One had failed the bar exam in
California, Stirling said, but later passed it in South Dakota.
He was then hired as a judge advocate in the California Guard.

“That’s just blatantly against the rules,” Stirling said. He
took his complaint to to the state bar that year.

Within months, he said, he was put under a sham investigation.
Three years went by, he said, before he’d learned the details of
the inquiry, which barred him from promotions while it remained
open.

Stirling said he never was given an opportunity to challenge the
allegations, which focused on a court-martial where he and his
supervisors sought the immediate imprisonment of a soldier
convicted of sexual assault.

He said the judge who signed off on the incarceration later
launched an investigation into Stirling and accused him of
failing to disclose that case law prohibited the judge from
imprisoning the soldier without first getting approval from the
commander who convened the court martial.

Stirling said the judge himself should have known about the law,
but cleared himself of wrongdoing and blamed Stirling instead.
Stirling said he received a career-blunting letter of reprimand.

“I was on the way up. All my evaluations were outstanding,” he
said. “I report the use of attorneys who are unlicensed, and the
whole trajectory of my career starts to take a tailspin.”

He filed a whistleblower complaint, he said, but no one
investigated it.

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-california-air-
national-guard-whistleblower-retaliation-20190423-story.html