His name is David Aguina and he’s an Army reservist. His UCMJ claims against Soltz seem thin to me — Article 88 prohibits “contemptuous words” directed at the president, not criticism, and Article 91 seems to apply only to lower-ranking soldiers and only when on duty — but it’s hard not to be moved by his story about his experience with Iraqis.

Meanwhile, via LGF, one of the yKos panelists parries right-wing criticism of the incident with some clever stammering about chickenhawks. Unmentioned in his post: Glenn Greenwald, Atrios, Max Blumenthal, Ken Layne, and the countless millions of other military-age liberals who all presumably support the war in Afghanistan and yet inexplicably haven’t beaten a path down to the local recruiting station after 9/11. Charles Johnson notes in an update an irony I noted myself in my post about this on Friday: Kos himself recently complained about the regs prohibiting vets from wearing their uniforms to political events. Here’s a further irony for you: the dKos diarist who wrote this is himself a member of VoteVets, a group which, like Vets for Freedom, explicitly seeks to derive political advantage from the fact that they’ve worn the uniform. And so I repeat my question from yesterday. Did anyone there really think Aguina was “representing the military,” especially given the fact that he was outnumbered in the room by vets who oppose the war?