Swizzle

Sounds like story time! Care to share?

Congressional inquiries seem to circle back to ask the trusted agents for advisement - Commanders or Investigators. Where else would the evidence they seek come from? The complainant? A Congressional investigation? That's why the IG corps exist, to solve everyday problems. Ask yourself these...Is this a broad problem which requires Congressional oversight of the USAF? Could your case be used for political advancement, advocacy of an current hot topic, or correct a huge or systematic injustice? Or does it go against Congressional mandates or intentions? I think to understand the majority of the implications of these Qs and As, but know that sometimes just the threat of a case is enough to prompt change. So only time will tell, but don't think a Congressional complaint is a sure thing; mainly, just don't hang your hat on it. Your case seems mostly an individual's concern and against the grain of some hot topics. Procedural error or violation of core rights seem viable paths. Procedural error would be ADC or equivalent lawyer or IG, Congressional seems excessive option but with parity versus your CC's referral OPR path. Core rights issues would be Congressional or lawyer. On the IG system, remember where complaint enters their system is a tactical matter, ie base level, MAJCOM level, or higher. Local people tend to know each other, word of mouth is commonplace amongst those who know each other.

I echo what others above have said. And... New rules of evidence apply to LORs, as well as other NJP types. Rules of preponderance now stands I believe. Plus, who saw it? The CC, I believe a CC can't punish you if they were the finder of the evidence, needs to be impartial person, like next higher up the chain.

PPM isn't normally allowed for Transocean PCS', requires a big waiver Mailing was HHG for me, USPS shipping receipt listed price and weight for reimbursement. That was 12 and 8 years ago

...can't imagine the runway which the 4 Horsemen could've form-landed ...near Edward's maybe? Oh yeah, ...A long time ago in an Air Force far, far away...dinosaur Herk pilots ruled the sky in 4 ship fingertip form

..."and weather forecaster"... Wonder if he knew his forecast was cloudy with chance of $h1tstorm?

Yup

It came from thin air, and biased preference. Simple economics, think recruitee supply and demand. I know a guy who got a 4 yr AFROTC scholarship for a BA in Psychology, 2005 commission era. He DG'd 3 flying formal schools, so the system wasn't so abrasive to/of him. Seems an engineering degree isn't required to do well in flying courses. Perhaps pedigree is more important in later career, only time will tell ...or not. My $0.02 on the real reason and answer to your question - perception. Its predominantly perceived that doctors and engineers are capable, responsible, and accountable. Mother Blue wants the best she can get (the moment the board decides)[because most important AF decisions are boarded by a panel to mitigate bias], who wouldn't; so she accepts the best she can when she can, which in an ideal state, is the perceived best. Biases are strong, but time can prove them wrong; sometimes a career's worth of time. Othertimes a generation-long or even an inter-war period. It all depends. What is your context? Here's to moonshine and sunshine, and COVID for the opportunity! God rest those not so fortunate. Drink responsibly and to those at peace and those not, a 6' distance, if prudent. BTW - what do any of us really know? Philosophically speaking that is...

They still doing these...? https://www.afpc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1330125/retired-air-force-pilots-welcomed-back-on-active-duty/ https://www.afpc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/940896/vlpad-adds-multiple-career-fields-vacancies/

A Bait and Bleed strategy has been and is being used against us for at least two decades; It will continue. However, we "swatted" and squished a nuisance - onlookers will take note that the irritation is working and likely double-down on their subversive strategy to bleed us into weakness (i.e. loss of global influence/power/quality-of-life/way-of-life). Its a slow, progressively weakening strategy meant to engage on level below significant threat to the engagors self-preservation. A new political line was drawn, a new standard set inferring what is significant. What will the new response be to that line? Keeping in-line with their strategy and weaker position most likely more subversive actions?

https://www.sipapu.ski/active-military-ski-free/ North of Santa Fe

Checks with how I read that legal'ese, outside their "window-of-opportunity"

Wonder if 5 year-buckets are because some O-4(S) two boards ago were 8APZ... 100% promotion "opportunity" (98% in reality was it?) had some interesting effects.

Stray thought: Was she in the "co-pilot" car seat? ... wingman dont let wingman drive drunk and all that jazz. That was probably asked by Zoo leadership already...if yes, had to be at least a verbal Wonder how each MAJCOM would treat that these days, opinions anyone?

Good record, sorry man. With what info you provided, I question the #12/71 O4s and #2/8 I/APZ...makes me think BPZ took the DPs from the Wing and not you. The WG/CC gambled. Look around to your 1&2BPZ competitors if you want to know, but know the past is unchanging. There are paths forward towards what you want, just make sure in pursuit of them to keep your options open as much as possible.