Dear KAG!: 20191121 Open Topic

I am GRINNING!
President Trump NOW has a reason to fire their asses!
Sept 2016 (When Obama was purging the Military) Can Presidents ‘fire’ senior military officers? Generally, yes…but it’s complicated (Duke Univ. Constitutional law)

A journalist recently asked me whether a President could “fire” a general. The answer – pardon the pun – is generally, yes…but there are some legal complications.
The context we are addressing is not one involving criminal misconduct, per se, but rather a situation where the President has lost confidence in the leadership of a particular general or even a group of generals.
Frankly, it is literally unthinkable that any officer these days, and particularly a general officer, would not acquiesce to a President’s request to retire under such circumstances, but let’s consider the options if one or more refused to go.
Here’s the easy part: can the President relieve any officer from any command or, for that matter, any particular position in the armed forces?
In my opinion, yes. The power to do so is inherent in the President’s Commander-in-Chief authority under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, and it cannot be fettered by Congress. For example, the controversial relief from command of General Douglas MacArthur by President Harry Truman during the Korean War was, according to the conclusions of the Congressional committees that examined the case, “within the constitutional power of the President.”…..
A little history: up until the end of the Civil War, the President exercised virtually unconstrained power to dismiss military officers. However, in 1865 Congress passed legislation which purports to limit that power. That legislation was essentially the same as that found today codified in 10 USC § 1161(a).
The legitimacy of Congress imposing statutory restrictions on the authority of the President to remove military officers was initially “subject of doubt and discussion. It remains controversial even today, particularly since there doesn’t seem to be a case precisely on point as to the constitutionality.
Nevertheless, the better view does seem to suggest that Congress’ power to set some limits on the President’s dismissal power – at least in times of peace. That power would be properly founded in Congress’ Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 authority to “make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.” Still, the “President’s power of dismissal in time of war [is something] Congress has never attempted to limit.”
So what does 10 U.S.C. § 1161(a) provide? Here is the text:

(a) No commissioned officer may be dismissed from any armed force except—
(1) by sentence of a general court-martial;
(2) in commutation of a sentence of a general court-martial; or
(3) in time of war, by order of the President. …….

[…]
Although I would bet that most officers believe that they serve at the “pleasure of the President” in the sense that the President could remove them at any time, the actual words of the commission appear to loop in the current statutory framework that provides some limits on the President’s prerogative.
In short, although the process is somewhat tangled, it is currently possible for the President to dismiss officers from the armed forces, even in the absence of criminal misconduct. That said, the incentives are such – not to mention professional propriety – that it’s extraordinarily unlikely that any President in the modern era would be obliged to force officers out, as almost all would retire if asked. But if it became necessary to compel an officer to leave the military, the Constitution and the law provide a way to make that happen.

There is a lot more in the article. Remember we are currently AT WAR!