Adm. Paul F. Zukunft: Coast Guard won’t break faith with transexuals
The Washington Post reports that the Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Paul Zukunft, during an appearance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on Tuesday, told the group that he would not “break faith” with transgender troops under his command;
Zukunft said that following the tweets, he had his office contact the 13 service members in the Coast Guard who identified as transgender, including Lt. Taylor Miller, the branch’s first openly transitioning officer.
“I reached out personally to Lt. Taylor Miller, who was featured on the cover of The Washington Post last week,” Zukunft said. “Now if you read that story, Taylor’s family has disowned her. Her family is the United States Coast Guard. And I told Taylor, ‘I will not turn my back. We have made an investment in you, and you have made an investment in the Coast Guard, and I will not break faith.’ ”
“That is the commitment to our people right now,” Zukunft said. “Very small numbers, but all of them are doing meaningful Coast Guard work today.”
Yeah, I don’t know what he’s saying, but it seems like the Obama appointee is pledging to ignore the orders of his commander-in-chief. I know President Trump likes to fire peoeple especially when they don’t do what they’re told.
From Military.com, the admiral seems to be threatening legal action;
“We stood up a tiger team of our JAG officers,” Zukunft said.
The next steps remain to be seen, as does how Coast Guard leadership plans to shield its troops in the face of an administration mandate.
So, he’s taking side of thirteen Coast Guard members against the President. Seems about right.
Thanks to Chief Tango and Mick for the links.
Category: Coast Guard
What was that famous saying from a post the other day about “killing an Admiral now and then”?
Pour encourager l’autres?
SJWs have no place in the military – even the Coasties.
It is never a good idea to challenge or defy your CiC. Admiral Paul Zukunft just may have some skeletons in the closet he might not want exposed…
My understanding is that the Pentagon has not yet received what, exactly, the President meant in his decree – does it impact people who wish to join, or people currently serving? That seems unclear. In effect, there was a tweet, but no policy was made yet.
And even if you make the case that transgenders shouldn’t serve, in light of having no order to that effect, I think there’s something to be said for having the head of the service stand up for his people who are, presumably, serving without issue. Loyalty to the those who took an oath to serve seems a good thing, no?
If there’s no orders or policy, then how is this anything other than shameless grandstanding?
I think one of the marks of good leadership is you take care of your own. If you’re in command of people who are serving honorably, doing their job well, and made a commitment to the service,.. well, you kind of have a responsibility to honor that commitment with one in return, no? At least until you’re literally given a lawful order to kick those people out.
It isn’t grandstanding, it’s supporting the people under your command.
Does this admiral has the same loyalty for his other troops?
Does he protect the people persecuted by the progressive liberals controlling our military bureaucracy?
Does he care about the costies accused of ethnic insensitivity, or of being too religious, or just to plain weird for the political correct social justice warriors?
LC, you pretend to be a nice moderate dude by the middle of the road, the grand savior that can bring us together, but in reality, you are just part of the problem.
Transgenderism is not just an evil sin in the eyes of most religions, but it is also a darwinian mistake.
We cannot select ourselves out.
I don’t know the admiral, so I can’t speak to what he thinks, but if someone puts the mission first, they shouldn’t be canned because someone else puts their personal distaste for that person first. I’m not religious in the least. Very religious people can irk me. But if someone tweeted that religious folk could no longer serve in any capacity in the armed forces, I hope to fucking god (yes, irony) that some commanders would stand by their people who are serving honorably, putting the mission first, and just happen to be religious. I certainly would.
Same goes for transgender to me. Why do we want to lose people who are serving honorably, putting the mission first and doing a good job? How does that help us? Now, if you’ve got a transgender person -or any person who puts their own personal issues ahead of the mission, well, that’s a reasonable cause for separation, I’d wager.
I’m not sure what you mean by ‘select ourselves out’, but following on from the ‘darwinian mistake’ comment, if you mean suddenly there will be an influx of transgender people, I’ll go out on a limb and say it’s not exactly a contagious thing. There will never be a time when straight people are in the minority. Natural selection doesn’t work that way.
I wonder, does he recognize and protect Christians in his command, them and his Protestant Chaplains that want to mention the name of Jesus Christ in sermans? Why is my first guess NO!
Know your troops and promote their welfare.
Someone serving loyally and professionally under my command is worth my career.
At the cost of all the others serving loyally and professionally under your command?
I am so effing glad I am not under your command, lieutenant Dan.
Cocksucker.
As opposed to obeying the lawful orders of the president, as specifically stated in his oath of office?
No lawful order has yet been given. If an order is given then he’ll either obey it (probable) or contest it as unlawful, get fired, and someone else will implement it.
But a tweet isn’t necessarily an order, and the Pentagon is awaiting a policy memo from the White House. That sounds reasonable to me, and throwing people who are serving honorably under the bus without an order to do so seems pretty unreasonable.
The admiral may be over-relying on the assignment of the CG under DHS as an attempt to avoid chain of command. I wonder if John McCain is advising him.
Wonder what his plans are for life after the Coast Guard? Oh well, you are disobeying a direct order from SECDEF and POTUS, what does this member of the Knee Deep Navy (sorry Coasties, I had too!) think is going to happen?
Get selected by the Democrat establishment as the winner of the democrat primary and run for President?
Gully Vern, they REALLY be the “hooligan Navy”!
He may soon find himself in command of a one man LORAN station 500 miles above the arctic circle. He may as well turn in his papers, he’s done.
That would be epic.
That and his papers being lost in the process for 12 months or so….
That was always the threat when I served. Shape up or you might find yourself on a one man LORSTA. In fact, there was even a cartoon that floated around the Guard that showed a tiny island with a single palm tree,a pup tent, a LORAN antenna with signage indicating that it was a USCG station.
Any, we can hope it will be so.
Correct me if I am wrong, although it is under DHS is not the USCG a armed service who functions under USMJ authority and whose commander in chief is the President? Then if so is not the Admiral declaring that he will commit insubordination instead of following a lawful order from the CiC? Also, who is he going to sue. He needs to be fired with loss of pension and replaced by someone who understands how the chain of command works. If a flag officer announced he would disobey an order from the obama administration the msm would have crucified him.
Eh, this may be a little premature. Has the president actually issued an executive order WRT transsexuals yet? From what I can tell, he sent out a “tweet.”
If and when the president issues an order, then Zukunft can decide whether he wants to implement the lawful order of his CinC or whether he wants to fall on his sword and become a martyr for the cause of social justice warring. Certainly he seems to be leaning towards the latter but, again, until an ORDER is actually issued, we won’t know.
Silly question: I remember hearing years ago that any time someone is appointed to a high level position in government, the first thing they are required to submit is an undated letter of resignation, which their superior keeps in his desk.
That way if the person ever steps on their crank, the boss can simply pull the letter out, put a date on it and say “It is with a heavy heart that I am regretfully accepting your resignation.”
Was that just a myth?
Under the Clinton debaucheries, resignation was occasionally effected by unusual circumstances without benefit of conventional corroborating documents.
Was gonna say same thing. This goes along with what Chairman of Joint Chief’s said last week that they hadn’t actually received an order to do anything. And with reporting that said the Pentagon hadn’t been informed that there would be an announcement and received no guidance or details from political leadership.
Or as some people like to say, the adults are back in charge.
For what it’s worth: I can’t find any evidence that the prior POTUS ever issued an Executive Order allowing transgenders to serve. If you can provide a citation to such an EO, please do so. I’d like to read the specific text.
Seems to me that a verbal directive from the POTUS to the SECDEF to change policy would be sufficient if the SECDEF were inclined to execute. My guess is that’s exactly what happened about a year ago, and the SECDEF simply “ran with it” afterwards.
Here’s the deal:
There is/was no law on the service of transgender servicemembers, just a DoD policy. That policy was rescinded.
The president tweeted his intent, but that is not a complete policy. Based on the tweet, should transgender service members be immediately separated, or is there a ban on enlistment/reenlistment, or can they stay in as long as they don’t need surgery? All of that remains unanswered.
The Chairman said this: “I know there are questions about yesterday’s announcement on the transgender policy by the president,” Dunford said in the statement issued Thursday morning. “There will be no modifications to the current policy until the President’s direction has been received by the secretary of defense and the secretary has issued implementation guidance.”
“In the meantime we will continue to treat all of our personnel with respect. As importantly, given the current fight and the challenges we face, we will remain focused on accomplishing our assigned missions.”
True, but irrelevant to the question I asked.
I asked if the prior POTUS had issued an Executive Order regarding allowing transgenders to serve in the military. Martinjmpr seemed to imply he had, but I can’t find any evidence of such an EO being issued without doing far more research than I have time to do – e.g., reading every EO issued by the previous POTUS.
FWIW: I agree with you. I don’t believe a Presidential EO ever was issued by the prior POTUS on the subject, or that one is required. All that IMO is required would be a verbal directive by the POTUS to the effect of, “SECDEF, change DoD policy. Put transgender/gender dysphoria back on the list of disqualifying medical conditions for military service.” The SECDEF can take it from there.
Hondo,
The previous administration never actually got around to issuing all the regulation/guidance for permitting transgender individuals to serve, so there really isn’t a single over arching “transgender” policy that SECDEF can cancel at this point.
FWIW, I believe that POTUS and SECDEF discussed the policy and have a pretty good idea on where the military wants to end up on this (TG can serve but the taxpayer isn’t ponying up for your voluntary surgery). The tweet was all about anchoring the discussion with Congress and the public from a strong conservative negotiating position.
Prior to Trump’s Tweet there was no Executive Order, presidential policy or federal law from any president. There was only DoD policy.
The Tweet indicates what policy the President wants, but it is not enough information to actually implement.
FWIW, the policy DoD was developing prior to the latest guidance/tweet would have allowed drug treatment and surgery, but with a catch: Servicemembers would be responsible for meeting all standards for service in their current gender even during transition (with normal surgical convelescence).
The services were finding that very few were actually having the bottom surgery, however.
The policy did not address enlistment. The indications were that we would not allow enlistments for people that had a diagnosis but had not completed transition. SO, serving people could transition, and people who had transitioned could serve, but you couldn’t enlist if you were diagnosed but hadn’t transitioned.
My guess would be that someone who hid their intention would be separated for fraudulent enlistment or condition existing prior to enlistment if they went to the docs in their first term.
Dumbass
What? The puddle pounders are mutinying?
Say it ain’t so! Who’s going to cut the ice on the Great Lakes this winter if they do that?
Oh, wait – this is just another ploy for attention from someone who should have kept his yap shut, isn’t it?
Wait……what?
Ice on the Great Lakes come this winter?
Haven’t you heard, there’s GloBull Warming, zooming temperatures up 10+ degrees, and no snow or ice for the next century?
Seems like Al the Gore-acle has put the Coasties out of a job.
(Oh, and lest I forget…../sarc)
Yeah, I know. It does seem odd, what with the Larsen C ice shelf and all, but – well, 2014 isn’t so long ago. http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/05/lake_michigan_finally_thaws_af.html
And then, there’s the most recent 2016-2017 ice break-up (finally) after Lake Michigan got the cold chills last winter. It’s – well, brutal. I don’t know what we’re gonna do.
http://www.nbcchicago.com/multimedia/Awesome-Frozen-Photos-239105121.html
Put a fork in him.
Hey Admiral, use that imminent retirement pay to buy a vowel for your last name
Something about Article 88 of the UCMJ jumps out at me as well. Yes, contempt seems pretty obvious here.
You maybe the Boss of the Coast Guard, but you ain’t the Boss.
So the Commandant reassured the personnel under his command that comments made during one of the President’s early morning twitter tantrums aren’t considered an official policy. BZ for the Commandant.
MSGT
Air Farce I assume
Not surprising
How the fuck do you infer Air Force from that? Like me saying you’re another Commissar cause you’re an O4. Eat a bowl of dicks
No fuck stick
It’s no surprise your branch if “service” is and has been more concerned with political correctness, feel good policy and voluntary social engineering the last 30 years
If anyone is going to eat a bag of dicks chances are it’s someone in blue. Hell you’ll shove someone out of line to get to the dick.
Fuck you buddy
Yeah, no, you’re not my type, princess. Another illustrious graduate of Organized Chicken Shit, I see.
O-4E? That’s not even a pay grade.
Saw that, too, MSGT. Is rather fishy, isn’t it?
You know that he chose that name as a joke right? Probably because most Mustangs don’t make it past O3…just saying.
O4-E is a paygrade. O4 with prior enlisted time.
You’re all in timeout for 30 minutes. And no cookies after storytime.
Really? Have you actually never looked at a payscale…ever?
The E designation was on the pay scale in the 70s when I was a 73C20. As I recall, 40+ years later, the designation had to do with adjustments for time in grade as well as time in service.
Lots of misinfo here.
1. A spot-check of DFAS published pay-scales indicates that the E suffix for selected officer pay grades began in 1958 and has continued continuously ever since. Disclaimer: I spot-checked, but didn’t check exhaustively.
2. O-1E, O-2E, and O-3E seem to be the only such pay grades for which an E suffix was ever used. Again: that’s based on a spot-check, not an exhaustive search of published official pay tables.
3. The purpose appears to be – as indicated by Tallywhagger below – to provide an increased pay scale in compensation for personnel in grades O1, O2, and O3 with 4 or more years prior service as enlisted. I believe that’s done to ensure that a SNCO with several years service doesn’t take a pay cut if they accept a commission.
4. The E suffix appears to have never been used for officer pay grades O4 and above. Again: this is based on a spot-check, so it’s at least theoretically possible it was used briefly with O4 and then later discontinued.
5. Even if the E suffix was never used with the O-4 pay grade, it’s rather obvious what is implied by the informal use in O-4E’s screen name above. Well, it should be obvious to anyone who has actually ever looked at a published DFAS pay scale in detail, anyway.
https://www.dfas.mil/militarymembers/payentitlements/military-pay-charts.html
Doh
Didn’t infer. MSGT is a USAF specific rank. Army would be MSG.
What MSGT_RET said is asinine I grant you, but dude, lay off the Air Force. Understand there’s is always shit eating between branches, but am sick to death of having the Air Force talked about like its worthless. Like I always tell people who pull this shit, not my fucking fault you went into the wrong recruiters office. I respect your service so quit demeaning mine.
Then police your folks and tell them to stop doing shit that makes your branch the butt if everyone’s jokes
It’s not like the reputation isn’t earned
I spent nearly 8 years in a joint Army-Air Force unit
Great folks. Great NCOs in fact.
Biggest bunch of spoiled rotten cry babies I’ve ever been around in uniform.
Truly a corporation that wears uniforms with few exceptions.
When off duty volunteer service is a major block on your personnel evals and your troops are chasing the MOVSM to make rank you are fucking doing something wrong
You know, I don’t like to go “there” with other branches, but FUCK YOU. Kiss my Air Force loving ass. Last I checked fucker, the highest rates of rape/sexual/domestic/b&e occur on Marine and Army fucking posts. So check your shit ass munch. Guess it’s a good thing we are all retired/former active duty. Again, don’t blame me because your dumb ass walked into the wrong recruiter office. FUCK‼️
Don’t even know what you are complaining about there, O-4E. But for sure, I can match each of your perceived USAF screw-ups with at least 2 Army troopers, and maybe even an occasional Marine.
But, we will continue to provide top cover for you infantry types, move your tanks around, and even refuel everybody’s planes no matter what names you call us. Gratitude isn’t expected.
Obviously the chair force spent a lot of time on sensitivity training. You get butthurt with the swiftness.
No shit…issue at hand is a grandstanding “leader” leaning too far forward in the saddle or lifeboat or whatever metaphor is service appropriate…I’d like to think that all of us on this forum care/cared about our subordinates…dipshit admiral has an agenda beyond that…perfectly ok to say he’ll work with DHS/DOD to clarify policy and do the best he can by his people and the mission…and then move on to some real problems like building affordable and mission worthy cutters
Keep the A-10s (and other air support) on call, and enthusiastically effective, and this former 11B will overlook a multitude of things.
Humm nope.
The A-10 is completely obsolete in any modern battlefield.
If you want an airframe that only works against terrorists, then I would say yes, but we do need shit that works against any enemy.
You do understand that low altitude attack runs are out of the picture against any level 4 opponent, right?
So, long live the F-35!
At least until it becomes obsolete.
Well, there ya go – let’s get rid of what is working today against the enemy today because some day in the future we might be fighting an enemy that will conform to the new weapons inventory.
Valid point.
On the other hand, we do need to maintain our technological advantage over the Chicoms and the Rooshians.
Shouldn’t you be working with the Soldiers on Thursday morning Sergeant’s Time instead of pounding away on the keys of a smart phone?
Get to work, Damnit.
“So, he’s taking side of thirteen Coast Guard members against the President. Seems about right.”
Typical Liberal idiot … it’s what they do. Tilting at phantom windmills. Give him his walking papers.
Dude looks transgender himself/herself.
You thought so too eh?
And man, he really went Alpha male with that standing up a “tiger team” bullshit…
Since when is a coterie of “lawers” called a “tiger team.” Give me a break. I’ve worked with civilian attorneys for over 36 years, and most of them are a bunch of pussies. They should be called a “shark” team.
Two words: Law Tigers
See TV ads for them all the time when watching the Rockies ball games.
Lawers on hogs./smile
“Lawers on Hogs” ,, When I saw that the first thing I thought about was the asshat that bought the term to TAH.
Ron Mailhan… on a ” hog” in this case the hog being one of those fat skanks he picked up off of fat slut bondage sites.
Err, could you forward that link to fat slut bondage sites? I’m conducting, ahem, research
I think it’s warmed over Total Quality Management shit from the 1990s..and he’s flashing back. I was at a joint command and it was synonymous with Process Action Teams and it was all well meaning, trendy, but disheartening…”away the tiger team or PAT!” as an approach to every given problem that somehow our military had managed to do without for a couple of centuries…Deming would have shit…apologies if this doesn’t read right as the typing window on my smart phone is minuscule
What a political hack. He’s making a grandstand move to curry favor of left. As of now, policy remains the same…but it’s going to change…to what degree has yet to be determined.
They won’t be recruiting any trans…you can take that to the bank. The only question that remains is what to do with those already serving? I say they can stay as long as they serve according to their birth gender, or get out. Done and done.
There is an issue with one administration telling trans troops they can serve openly. So they do. Then the next saying they can’t serve.
Additionally, since transgender is a protected category with respect to equal protection the administration will face legal challenges that may delay implementation of any attempt by the DoD to implement any actual order that results from the intent the administration expressed in Trump’s tweet.
PS, I understand that the Coast Guard is DHS not DoD but the lawsuit coming out of this is likely going to result from any DoD implementation.
Additionally, it is possible the DoD could attempt to implement a ban on transgender folks and the administration could decide that the nature of the Coast Guard is such that transgender folks are not an issue.
You keep claiming that “transgender is a protected category with respect to equal protection”. Please cite whatever Federal law (statutory or case) you believe mandates that.
I’m pretty sure that you won’t be able to do so.
For someone who claims to be so astute, you seem to not understand “for the good of the service.” If DOD decides for the good of the service that no left-handed people could serve, guess what happens to all the southpaws? It’s all spelled out in the contract.
This guy needs to be gone today
And his shit packed up in his office and sent to his mailing address
One thing Trump has failed to do is get rid of Obama socialist appointees rapidly
He needs to start the bloodletting post haste
These fuckers need to be gone now
And all 13 of his goddamn trannies
You wanna get rid of the Trans already serving? I hope you realize that Gender Dysphoria is a recognized medical condition and unless it was diagnosed before they joined, you’re looking at medical discharges/retirements for all of them and automatic service connected qualifications. They’ll get their treatment while they serve or for life from the VA.
That 13 amounts to about 0.03 percent (not 3 percent)of the roughly 43,500 active and selective reservists in the USCG.
So 3 hundredths of one percent???
Lets say that double that percentage exists in the other branches of service ie 0.06 percent
If there are 2 million uniformed members of the Defense establishment that means about 1200 folks which is considerable less that the 10,000 – 15,000 I’ve seen bandied about in the press.
I saw a report from I think the Rand corporation, and that may be incorrect, that the actual number of gender benders in military service is 2855.
That 15000 number was liberal made up horseshit.
I have seen multiple numbers tossed around too and honestly have no idea – and, generally, feel the smaller the numbers the less anyone should care, so I don’t get why the higher numbers are pushed by sympathetic groups.
That said, I’d say 13 is the known number – some aren’t open about their issues, I imagine, and I’d wager the larger number is calculated from various extrapolations. I just googled and got a number of 1.4M transgenders in the US out of ~320M people, which when applied to 2M servicemembers gives 8750. Some people claim trans people are more likely to serve, which could raise that number, but when you get into things which are represented as < 1% of the population, and rarely admitted to, the stats get a bit sketchy.
I take it the admiral doesn’t like his job very much…
And there are Admirals in the Coast Guard right now, getting their shit in order in preparation for the chance of being the next Commandant.
Runs into house, “Hey honey I got a shot now! You won’t believe what Zukunft did today.”
His tour as Commandant ends in May 2018.
Or earlier.
Entirely possible. Just ask Gen. Dugan, USAF (Ret) – who was releived as CSAF after 79 days.
How likely? Dunno.
Secretary Gates decapitated the Air Force leadership in 2008 partly for publically bucking him…fumbling nukes was the last straw
True, but there were multiple incidents involved in those removals – particularly in the case of the CSAF.
Dugan’s relief as CSAF was based on a single incident, if I recall correctly – and I also seem to recall it was a public statement by Dugan that Cheney cited in relieving him.
Gen Dugan, and the other service chiefs were frustrated by reforms after Vietnam that rendered them into being almost strictly administrators & advisors as part of the JCS. Unlike say CMC Al Grey, Dugan couldn’t keep his displeasure to himself.
SECDEF Cheney had given Gen Dugan repeated warnings about staying in his lane & keeping his mouth shut. Cheney eventually secured Pres Bush’s permission to relieve him.
Pres. Bush apparently really loved the guy, as he approved Dugan’s retirement as a 4 star even though he only wore the rank for about a year, and permitted him to stay on active duty for several weeks beyond 60 days without reverting to 2 star rank as the law demands – in order for Dugan to boost his retirement pay.
Rick Atkinson had a passage about Gen Dugan’s firing in his book about Desert Storm.
Or sooner…
FIRED!
A tweet is not an order.
Exactly!
No, it isn’t. But a senior commander publicly running their suck before policy is established, and stating unequivocally that they will disobey that order when it is issued, is a clear indication of lack of trustworthiness in a senior leadership position.
Exactly wrong!!!1
Morning Joe?
Wow. TAH is famous or something?
Imagine if anyone did this during Obama……
Yeah this turd factory needs to go ASAP. He wants to play politics then he can suffer the consequences of it.
Good point.
Think he is setting himself up as the next Democratic Senate candidate from XXX.Hopefully he will be eligible to run for office August 2017.
This would be a good reason for the Secretary of Transportation to relieve this SJW for Lack of Confidence in Ability to Lead (i.e., missing backbone).
CG is under DHS.
And Admiral Zukunft’s former boss General John F. Kelly USMC(Ret) just left his position as Secretary of Homeland Security, and General Kelly is now serving as the White House Chief of Staff.
As such, I doubt that Admiral Zukunft’s recent statements on this issue are playing very well right now with either General Kelly, or with the Commander in Chief.
My guess is that Admiral Zukunft’s days are numbered as the Commandant of the Coast Guard.
Call me a softie, but whatever happens I believe that the Transgenders now in service who have done honorable service should be given a substantial seps package if they are forced out.
If they are discharged for a medical condition that was undiagnosed before they joined the service (Considering Trans was not openly allowed under DA/DT, I will assume most of them fit this description), then discharging them for said condition entitles them to a Medical Board same as any other soldier. If said condition (gender dysphoria) is found to be unfit, they will be discharged, but it will be ruled as service connected and thus enable them for lifetime treatment for it at the VA.
If your concern is paying for treatment, you’re going to be doing so either way.
They can ask 0bama for that.
I hear he got an stach.
Did I miss the memo about “ORDERS” needing particular forms of communication? Every boss I had whether in the military or outside the military expected us to follow through with every suggestion he or she made, in whatever form it was transmitted.
Sure, there are a lot of details to work out in this apparent change of policy, but a tweet telegraphing the forthcoming change sure seems clear enough to me to at least start planning for it. Maybe even to generate a few contingency plans. it’s not as if that is a foreign concept to the military.
This clown is a hoot. Doesn’t matter which department USCG falls under, his chain of command is in the Executive Branch, thus ultimately reporting to the oval office.
Hope you enjoy your next job more than you apparently liked this one, Admiral.
Honestly, given his stated intent not to comply, I don’t think Trump needs to wait to relieve him for cause. He has clearly stated his intent to disobey the president when this order is given.
“Admiral Zukunft, you’re fired.”
Admiral Zucker needs his ass fired.
Meanwhile, “Frontlines of Freedom” is advertising him being a guest on the radio show this week. Could be interesting.