Image: Wikimedia Commons with screenshot of OSD memo
Service members applaud the Department of Defense’s latest move, hoping it brings them one step closer to holding accountable those who implemented and enforced former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s tyrannical COVID-19 shot mandate.
While Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently stated that the COVID-19 shot mandate was “unlawful,” The Gateway Pundit previously reported that his comments were not in writing. From a legal perspective, it is important to note that video and verbal statements are admissible in the same manner for court cases.
The Department of Defense (DoD) wasted little time putting his choice of words to paper. On May 7, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (OSD) Personnel & Readiness sent a “MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS,” noting that the now-rescinded 2021 COVID-19 shot mandate was “unlawful as implemented.”
TGP spoke to whistleblower and “forced into retirement” Navy Medical Service Corps officer Lt. Ted Macie. According to Macie, “Those responsible for forcing the shot on service members can no longer deny their acts were unlawful, which will be a great benefit to ongoing cases or any litigation that’s on the way.” Since the mandate was “unlawful as implemented,” he said, “the persons responsible now have no top cover for implementing the mandate that violated the law. Period.”
In a recent X post, he also pointed out the alleged conspiring between Department of Defense, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Pfizer to “push” the COVID-19 shot mandate.
Bombshell email:
From: ROBERT J. PRESTON II, SES, USAF
Director, Civil Law and Litigation
The Judge Advocate General’s Corps
Possible conspiring between DoD/FDA/P*izer to push the DoD mandate.
“General,
The wording of the FDA update removed the “legal distinction”… pic.twitter.com/Ie8Oh5Wacn
— Ted (@ted_macie) May 8, 2025
According to Macie, “Whoever was involved in implementing the mandate should be held accountable, and some of those people should be court-martialed or face another appropriate trial if they were a civilian, like in the case of the Director of Civil Law and Litigation, Robert J. Preston, who argued that the interchangeability of the EUA and the unavailable FDA Approved shots was legitimate enough to mandate the EUA version, clearly against the law (as noted in the above X post).” In Macie’s opinion, “The most egregious cases need to be investigated and be given a proper trial, if necessary.”
Kacy Dixon, a former Air Force intelligence officer and Judge Advocate General (JAG), agreed. She told The Gateway Pundit that “when you are aware of unlawful actions taking place within the Department of Defense, the next natural step is to investigate that unlawfulness, and depending on what the investigation bears out, take appropriate action based on that information. This action could come in the form of administrative punishment, grade determinations, or even criminal charges, she explained. “Depending on what information the investigations reveal, that would determine what appropriate accountability looks like.”
In her opinion, “The most egregious offenders should be held accountable first—and to the greatest extent of the law.” As investigations “trickle down” the military chain of command, she said, “it would get a little more complicated, [determining] the varying levels of culpability.”
“For instance, who acted in knowing contravention of the law, who was derelict even after service members had raised concern about the mandate being unlawful, and who was merely ignorant of the legal issues?” she offered. Concerns raised by many servicemembers were “totally disregarded” and “service members’ careers were ended with their lives turned upside down.”
“[Commanders] issued punishment and discharges without flinching, she asserted. “Secretary Hegseth should also be quick to initiate thorough, fair investigations and ensure swift true justice in the same unflinching manner,” she noted
Macie also shared his thoughts about the accompanying Supplemental Guidance to OSD’s memo. Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records were provided further guidance for considering requests from service members adversely impacted by the mandate.
After reviewing the guidance, he argued, “the burden is much heavier for the service member to right the wrongs made against them.” He explained, “The DoD should carry a greater burden to right their wrongs.” For example, he personally knows “people fighting to fix their records and get back in and no one is helping them, [and] there’s even a lack of response from recruiters.”
Macie suggested, “there needs to be a more active pursuit of all servicemembers, not just the 8,700 and those who took a deal, which is a form of coercion in itself.” He explained, “They (referring to DoD) offered separation in exchange for a possible honorable discharge, which in some cases the DoD didn’t live up to and separated some with less than honorable discharge statuses or they were marked with ‘misconduct – serious offence.’”
In addition, he said, “It’s important to point out the different ways people were separated, as everyone who was offered the deal to get out should be covered, which includes members who took the deal, members who didn’t take the deal and made it to the time a court injunction (preventing separation) was in ordered, and lastly, the many instances similar to mine where commands found roundabout ways to separate them from service.”
By his estimation, “This is the majority and we’re failing to recruit them, all while making it more difficult than it has to be for them to return.”
“For the people who upheld their Oath and resisted the unlawful order, they should be awarded,” Macie argued. “Many were willing to end their career and do right by the Constitution and their Oath, and those are the kind of people we want to serve our country. Until there is some accountability or display of trust, many won’t return.”
“Secretary Hegseth and his team have expressed that they want to remedy the situation through several avenues,” and in Macie’s opinion, “using the ‘unlawful’ language implies sincerity, but there is still much that needs to be done, and the sooner they realize that they need the assistance of those who understand the nuances, the sooner actual remedy is a possibility.”
“This is the reason many of us [affected by the shot mandate] have lobbied for COMCAP (a proposed executive order), which addresses everything in a comprehensive and fair manor,” he offered.
The post Secretary Hegseth Paves the Way for Department of Defense Accountability appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.