Turns out I work with a friend of Sgt Stein's defense counsel, who in turn has been very vocal on his own FB regarding this case.
He has confirmed that Sgt Stein was up for Administrative Separation due to his inability to maintain his MOS, having lost his security clearance as a result of his financial problems. While it is non-punitive, servicemembers with over 6 years are authorized counsel when facing those proceedings, which he opted for. The decision to separate was part one, and they determined in favor of his separation. Part two was recommending status of separation. In the absence of NJP proceedings or Courts Martial, they can only recommend Honorable, General or General under Other Than Honorable condition. The latter is rarely used, and when used, the board members can be vetted by the defense counsel to determine bias. To use an extreme example, if all 3 members of the board were card carrying Black Panthers members, and he's a Tea Party activist, bias would be assumed, and another board would be requested. So far, the defense has not advised Sgt Stein to contest the board.
The contest is over the recommendation for OTH characterization, which will effect his ability to receive VA benefits. He has reenlisted, which means he has an honorable discharge on record already. He also has Good Conduct on record, and appropriate awards, for the duration of his service. The debate is solely over whether or not his internet participation can be used to determine OTH characterization. Again, since this is entirely administrative, the General alone has final determination. In the absence of an actual NJP or Courts Martial, it would be a brave General indeed (or activist) that would set such a precedent. He'd be literally assuming the voice of the DOD to condemn this Sgts actions, without the full backing of a judicial process.
