June 15th, 2010
09:45 PM ET
4 years ago

Update: Kirk camp responds to concerns about campaigning while on duty

(CNN) - In a timeline, the Kirk for Senate campaign states Rep. Kirk's comments during the Blagojevich controversy were consistent with his role as a congressman and permissible by military rules regardless of being on active duty.

They also say Department of Defense rules do allow for some civilian political activities - particularly while in civilian clothes and acting in a civilian capacity outside of military facilities. Kirk did not make any statements during deployments to Afghanistan, according to the campaign.

Related: Kirk violated military rules on partisan activity

Kirk campaign press secretary Kirsten Kukowski also released the following statement:

"These questions have been addressed by the campaign in the past and had there been any issues documented in Congressman Kirk's military record, the Department of Defense would not have issued a second waiver for his deployment to Afghanistan. The campaign has made all of the Congressman's military fitness reports available for review and no concerns were documented."

The statement continued:

"The reality is that voters will have a clear contrast on Election Day between someone who served honorably as a legislator and service member and someone who lost millions of dollars of other people's money due to his recklessness and incompetence. Putting all of the posturing aside, Alexi Giannoulias represents the very same brand of politics that led to corruption, waste, abuse, historic debt and 11-percent unemployment. Voters in Illinois want a change and will stand with Mark Kirk, a thoughtful, independent leader who has a track record of delivering for the state."


Filed under: Mark Kirk
soundoff (7 Responses)
  1. Marge

    Silly silly. When I worked for the federal government we were told WE as employees could not campaign etc for a politician per the Hatch Act. And I am darn sure that no one in the armed forces, be it even if he wasn't on active duty, would not be given permission. He says what he wants to say trying to convince people. But of course the dumb bunny republicans who believe any thing THEIR TYPE of politician says is true will believe him no matter what.

    June 15, 2010 09:59 pm at 9:59 pm |
  2. Victim of GOP Taliban

    Illinois or South Carolina? Neck and neck for most scandals of the week. Something must be in the water.

    June 15, 2010 10:55 pm at 10:55 pm |
  3. Jeff Brown in Jersey

    Just another right wing scoundrel! All the same... SAD!

    June 15, 2010 11:05 pm at 11:05 pm |
  4. ehwilson429

    let's talk about Blumenthal!

    June 16, 2010 12:02 am at 12:02 am |
  5. Richard Larson

    In an era where politicians consider the truth to be whatever serves their political ends and is as maleable and elastic as modeling clay, the statements made aren't surprising. In my military career, a person was always on duty. There was never a time when the UCMJ did not apply to personal activities. The notion that just changing from a uniform into civilian clothes removes the proscription of an active duty service menber from participating in active political activities is totally without merit. If you wear the uniform, the proscription applies. This is one of the main reasons Joe Biden refused to run for political office while he was an activated member of the Army Reserve.

    The Congressman is in error and should immediately seek counsel from his command JAG office regarding how to conduct himself in the future. He may be subject to charges if his commander wishes to make an example.

    June 16, 2010 12:41 am at 12:41 am |
  6. Aaron

    Mixing the military and politics is a democracy asking for trouble. That has been one of the major reasons for frequent, and often violent, changes of governments in developing countries.

    June 16, 2010 01:27 am at 1:27 am |
  7. vwrtb

    That doesn't matter to republicans... Bush W. Did it while he was AWOL...

    June 16, 2010 01:45 am at 1:45 am |