Free speech, Art. 88, and the Air National Guard

The Wisconsin Code of Military Justice, which applies to National Guard personnel in "title 32 status," provides:

322.088  Article 88 — Contempt toward officials. Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the president, the vice-president, members of congress, the secretary of defense, the secretary of a military department, the secretary of homeland security, or the governor or legislature of the state of Wisconsin shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

Adam Kinzinger, a Republican Member of Congress who is an officer in the Wisconsin Air National Guard, has been cleared of allegations that he erred in criticizing the state's Democratic governor, Tony Evers, for withdrawing state troops from the US-Mexico border. Details here, thanks to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Excerpt:

Capt. Joe Trovato said Wednesday the guard determined Kinzinger was "not speaking as a commissioned officer, but as a U.S. congressman" when last month he called into question Evers' decision to pull troops away from the U.S. border with Mexico through tweets and an appearance on Fox News.

It's not at all clear that the point is well-taken. Is the suggestion that the tweets and Fox News appearance were protected by the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution? (They're not.) Article 88 would certainly seem to apply to public comments such as these (as opposed to dinner-table conversation). Whether Rep. Kinzinger's comments were contemptuous is another matter. For that one would need to see the precise words used. Even more fundamentally, does the Wisconsin Code even apply to National Guard personnel who are not in a duty status? Consider this provision:

322.005  Article 5 — Territorial applicability of this code.
(1)  This code has applicability in all places, provided that either the person subject to this code is in a duty status or, if not in a duty status, that there is a nexus between the act or omission constituting the offense and the efficient functioning of the state military forces; however, this grant of military jurisdiction shall neither preclude nor limit civilian jurisdiction over an offense. [Emphasis added.]