http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/John_Brownlee_call_for_duty_to_US_Army_service%2C_16_Jan_2009

http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/John_Brownlee_early_release_from_duties_in_US_Army%2C_1_May_2009

Given his campaign hype about being a military veteran, the second document there is very interesting. Clearly, he was taken off of active duty during the war after only serving 3 months, while the other members of his unit served out a full year.

That’s not exactly a military record to brag about.

I wrote the JohnLBrownlee.com articles. You don’t like them? Email me.

John Brownlee is a faux conservative. His only credential is his claim to have been a prosecutor. All I did was look at his record as a prosecutor and his record as an Army officer.

He screwed up. Royally.

You guys talk like he served in Iraq or something. He was a white house social aide. He went to Ranger and Airborne schools, true, but he never served in a Ranger or Airborne unit. I’m proud of him for graduating, but he is not a combat veteran like his honorable father. Yes, I said honorable father. No hits against Les Brownlee. He was a good man. Too bad I can’t say the same of his son.

The fact is, John Brownlee has been the face of over-reaching federal government for the past ten years. Does that qualify him as a conservative?

I totally agree with the death penalty. I’m glad Brownlee advocates it. Hi mentor John Warner did too. But John Warner proved to be a thorn in the side of the Republican party repeatedly.

As far as I can tell John Brownlee is likely to be John Warner Jr. He has inherited Warner’s political machine, and that is where is support is coming from.

What does that mean?

Warner was:
- Pro gay rights
- Anti-gun - sponsored re-introduction of the assault weapons ban
- Rode the fence on abortion (neither side considered him an advocate)
- Opposed Bork’s nomination
- Broke ranks several times when Republicans were about to get their way in the Clinton administration
- Pro Death Penalty

Brownlee is pro-death penalty - just like John Warner. Good for him. That isn’t enough.

He prosecuted a 78 year old WWII veteran named Ronald Testerman for selling his private guns. At trial, Testerman was found not-guilty on all the counts but one - not having a license to sell guns. Brownlee asked the judge to sentence Testerman, 78 years old, WWII Veteran, to three years in prison.

This guy is not on our side.

Brian

You said, “First, the website takes shots at Brownlee’s wife and father….How do you defend the Cuccinelli’s of the world who malign and tear down American heroes and stay-at-home moms?” and “Don’t you think if he had done all the terrible things alleged by Cuccinelli and Gentry that he would have been removed from office?”

Again, where is your proof that Cuccinelli had anything to do with this site? There are LOTS of people out there who have huge problems with Brownlee and who don’t want to see him as AG, just like you have huge problems with Cuccinelli. You make allegations based on no facts. At least Gentry backed up several of his claims with outside media sources.

And a quick search of the Gentry site for the words “wife” and “Lee Ann” shows a few factual references to her as his wife, but none of them taking shots at her. Quit fabricating.

As for Brownlee himself, I think it is interesting that he was deployed in 2003, but served as US Attorney until 2008. Don’t you think if he had done all the terrible things alleged by Cuccinelli and Gentry that he would have been removed from office? Wouldn’t some form of disciplinary action been taken if there was any credibility to Cuccinelli’s claims? Of course, none was taken and Brownlee served as US Attorney for 7 years.

Cuccinelli is clearly worried about Brownlee and probably understands what is going to happen at the Convention. If he will attack a candidate’s wife and father, I can’t imagine what the next few weeks will bring from KC’s camp.

http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2007/01/15/the-safa-group/

Then why is he raising money for his Senate campaign then transfering it all to his AG campaign??? How is that “principled”?

Or how about during the Frederick mess where he said he was not taking a stance for “selfish political reasons”?

He’s as political as anyone.

There is nothing wrong with you, me, Gentry, or even Foster or Cuccinelli putting out relevant, factual information about a public figure seeking higher office, even if it is unflattering information. If you think it’s wrong, you shouldn’t be blogging, because that’s what you do every day. I went back and looked at the site, and Gentry provides lots of external citations for his claims. While that does not make the whole case, it certainly gives some compelling backup.

I certainly believe the information is relevant. It is about the possibility of a Constitutional violation at worst, and a Democrat-exploitable Achilles heal for the entire Republican ticket at best.

If the Gentry site is truthful, you shouldn’t have a problem with someone bringing the truth to light. If it is proven that the information and the claims made were false, THEN it’s time to malign EVERYONE involved in its publication. But until you have reasonable suspicion to believe it’s false, I don’t see how you can attack Gentry.

You claim the Cuccinelli campaign had something to do with the Gentry site. Show us proof.

Duecaster,

Read the Gentry site again. I believe Gentry was not talking about “partisan” politics because that was not the issue. The issue was instead how John Brownlee potentially violated posse comitatus by being a military officer engaged in civilian law enforcement.

As an aside, this is not a slight against Gentry, but I don’t think anyone should take Gentry’s site (or anyone’s) at face value on an issue as serious as this until there are more documented facts to prove something one way or the other.

All,

I have worked with Ken Cuccinelli for several years on legislation in the General Assembly, and although we don’t agree on everything, I have seen only a man who has stood up for principle. Consistently, he has bucked his own party members (when he was fighting for eminent domain reform — just one example), jeopardized his committee assignments, and risked his political career (fighting to preserve the 2nd Amendment — another example) when principles had to trump party or reelection chances. You may not agree with his principles, but suggesting that he would compromise his integrity for political gain just doesn’t fly.

My understanding is that the A.G. hardly ever deals with criminal cases. To me, Brownlees relative lack of civil litigation experience as a result of being a U.S. Attorney would seem to detract from his qualifications.

Speaking of Faisal Gill, as the first commenter does, remember that Cuccinelli was a big supporter of Gill, and has taken money from the shady Safa Group companies, as recently as last year. Both GWB and Hillary returned donations from the Safa Group after they were linked to several terrorist entities, but not Cuccinelli. He was number two in donations from them behind Dick Black, and stated that they donated to him because they share the same values. Nice.

Moving to qualifications, running an US Attorney office makes Brownlee a lot more qualified than Cuccinelli to be a truly effective AG, rather than a platform for furthering a political career.

Is this all you got? I believe Cuccinelli explained his discharge. Gee, you can tell the Brownlee campaign is experiencing a sense of desperation, when they send you out to do the attacks. How about talking about what makes the candidate qualified for the job?

At least Brownlee served his country honorably. Has Cuccinelli released his “discharge” papers yet?

How do you get this information is crap? Heck, I have to hand it to Mr. Gentry for taking the time to do what the Dems and the Mainstream Media won’t do.

Oh, did you say “factual information”???

Bryan Gentry is a shameless muck raker jwhom you are aiding and abetting.

This is the kind of “citizen journalism” we DO NOT NEED.
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr Duecaster. It is CRAP!!!

Mr. Brownlee’s duties in prosecuting criminals can hardly be considered partisan. Those duties are ministerial, having nothing to do with voting on an issue, electing officials, supporting a party etc.

Mr. Brownlee did not engage in partisan political activity as the MO senator did. There is no basis for your statement that he, “[M]ay have engaged in the same behavior that another federal official serving in the Reserves was convicted in a court martial.” This is a slime job on a good man. Mr. Brownlee retired honorably from the US Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps and should be lauded for that service, not vilified because someone thinks he maybe might have technically violated a law.

It’s crap like this that deters good people from entering service, or, if they already are in service, from becoming involved in issues. We should be encouraging both activities.

Let’s debate the issues. Not this horse hockey.