6 Dem congressmen/woman call for INSURRECTION against the trump administration

[EvilCat Breath]

What logic?

They are trying to instigate an insurrection, Simp.

No they aren't. They are trying to instigate a revolution beginning with a military coup.

This is what disobeying orders should look like. If you intend to do it at all, you better win.

Medal of Honor Recipient Roasts Dems Who Told Service Members to Disobey “Illegal Orders”

Dakota Meyer says the Democrats who urged service members to disobey “illegal orders” are causing servicemen to doubt their chain of command.

thenewamerican.com

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

What illegal orders?

Wake up, Simp.. We all know WTF these scumbags are doing.

.

Political theater.

It's all the murder cult has left.

Political theater, terror and desperation.

.

 

[schmidlap]

No American patriot who has sworn allegiance to the Constitution should ever feel compelled to follow illegal orders from anyone.

No one who reaffirms that principle should be threatened.

 

[ChristisKing]

ICE agent arrested in sex trafficking sting told police, "I’m ICE, boys"

"When he was arrested, he said, 'I'm ICE, boys,'" Bloomington Police Chief Booker Hodges said.

www.newsweek.com

He was hired underneath the Biden/Harris administration. Enough said.

Riiiiiiiiiiight

Because Trump has been such a stand up guy on democrat abuses of power

When has Trump ever lied?

.

And what actual order has President Trump made that's illegal?

Why won't they answer this?

.

Again, they can't.

Yes, I agree with this

View attachment 1186196

Me too, but he never called for anybody to be hanged.

a lot

The dims want the military to disobey Trump's orders. That's treason.

They claim that everything he does is illegal and every order he gives is illegal.

If he farts it's illegal.

every single one said ILLEGAL.

Yet not a single one said what was ILLEGAL.

 

[Nostra]

No American patriot who has sworn allegiance to the Constitution should ever feel compelled to follow illegal orders from anyone.

No one who reaffirms that principle should be threatened.

What illegal orders, Shitlips?

Show the class why you are pissing your panties.

 

[mudwhistle]

I don't have to. They 6 didn't say there was one. They said the US military is not supposed to obey illegal orders. Thats LITERALLY THE MILITARY LAW.

If you've ever been in the military you already knew that. We had annual classes on the subject.
Every one of these assholes know that as well.
They're clearly involved in a textbook CIA psyops operation. The CIA isn't allowed to operate inside the US, so they got Rep (D) Slotkin to do it for them.

Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their motives and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and large foreign powers.

The purpose of United States psychological operations is to induce or reinforce behavior perceived to be favorable to U.S. objectives. They are an important part of the range of diplomatic, informational, military and economic activities available to the U.S. They can be utilized during both peacetime and conflict. There are three main types: strategic, operational, and tactical. Strategic PSYOP includes informational activities conducted by the U.S. government agencies outside of the military arena, though many utilize Department of Defense (DOD) assets. Operational PSYOP are conducted across the range of military operations, including during peacetime, in a defined operational area to promote the effectiveness of the joint force commander's (JFC) campaigns and strategies. Tactical PSYOP are conducted in the area assigned to a tactical commander across the range of military operations to support the tactical mission against opposing forces.

Psychological operations (United States) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

What illegal orders, Shitlips?

Show the class why you are pissing your panties.

.

If they could just once show us what illegal orders they're talking about, it might be possible to enter real conversation with them.

They never will.

.

 

[Lesh]

It is up for debate, questionable even, but not patently illegal. If a court rules it as such, the soldiers can choose not to follow the order. Simple.

So they have to go to court first?

 

[Lesh]

In principle, a soldier may, actually must, refuse to follow an illegal order, but as a practical matter he must assume all orders are legal or discipline will break down and the military will not be able to function.

Those are two diametrically opposed statements

 

[hjmick]

He was hired underneath the Biden/Harris administration. Enough said.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

.

If they could just once show us what illegal orders they're talking about, it might be possible to enter real conversation with them.

They never will.

.

They can't. They can only INSINUATE. Democrats practice SATAN'S tactics. This is what evil looks like

 

[mudwhistle]

.

If they could just once show us what illegal orders they're talking about, it might be possible to enter real conversation with them.

They never will.

.

They knew exactly what they were doing.....and are using the UCMJ as a defense.
Frankly, any officer that conducts themselves in such an unethical manner would be drummed out of the military.
They're clearly being critical of the Commander In Chief......and I remember Obama very politically firing one of his generals for questioning his orders.

Barack Obama Fired Stanley McChrystal Over Criticism of His Administration

General Stanley McChrystal was fired in 2010 after criticizing the Obama administration, leading some to wonder why he was fired then.

www.distractify.com

Why did Obama fire McChrystal?​

According to reporting from the BBC at the time, McChrystal was apparently fired after he was quoted in a Rolling Stone article making disparaging comments about the president and those around him. McChrystal described the period where Obama was slowly moving toward adding more troops in Afghanistan as "painful." An aide to McChrystal also described meetings between Obama and the general saying that Obama "didn't seem very engaged. The boss [Gen McChrystal] was pretty disappointed".
The article also suggested that McChrystal "pretended not to know" Vice President Joe Biden, and that he "felt betrayed" by U.S. ambassador to Kabul Karl Eikenberry. Additionally, one of his aides described National Security Advisor James Jones as a "clown."

McChrystal was dismissed following a meeting at the White House to discuss the article, which was perceived as damaging at the time, although it seems mild by today's standards.

At the time, Obama said that he made the decision to replace McChrystal "with considerable regret" but also said that he had failed to "meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general." He also said that the article had "eroded trust" and "undermines the civilian control of the military that's at the core of our democratic system."

Obama was quick to clarify, though, that David Petraeus, who was installed as McChrystal's replacement, would be carrying out the same policies.

Obama's Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years

Defense: What the president calls "my military" is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving... Read More

www.investors.com

Obama's Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years Defense:What the president calls "my military" is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving the compliant and fearful.
We recognize President Obama is the commander-in-chief and that throughout history presidents from Lincoln to Truman have seen fit to remove military commanders they view as inadequate or insubordinate. Turnover in the military ranks is normal, and in these times of sequestration and budget cuts the numbers are expected to tick up as force levels shrink and missions change.

Yet what has happened to our officer corps since President Obama took office is viewed in many quarters as unprecedented, baffling and even harmful to our national security posture. We have commented on some of the higher profile cases, such as Gen. Carter Ham. He was relieved as head of U.S. Africa Command after only a year and a half because he disagreed with orders not to mount a rescue mission in response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.
Rear Adm. Chuck Gaouette, commander of the John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group, was relieved in October 2012 for disobeying orders when he sent his group on Sept. 11 to "assist and provide intelligence for" military forces ordered into action by Gen. Ham.


Other removals include the sacking of two nuclear commanders in a single week — Maj. Gen. Michael Carey, head of the 20th Air Force, responsible for the three wings that maintain control of the 450 intercontinental ballistic missiles, and Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, the No. 2 officer at U.S. Strategic Command.


From Breitbart.com's Facebook page comes a list of at least 197 officers that have been relieved of duty by President Obama for a laundry list of reasons and sometimes with no reason given. Stated grounds range from "leaving blast doors on nukes open" to "loss of confidence in command ability" to "mishandling of funds" to "inappropriate relationships" to "gambling with counterfeit chips" to "inappropriate behavior" to "low morale in troops commanded."


Nine senior commanding generals have been fired by the Obama administration this year, leading to speculation by active and retired members of the military that a purge of its commanders is under way.


Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, an outspoken critic of the Obama administration, notes how the White House fails to take action or investigate its own officials but finds it easy to fire military commanders "who have given their lives for their country." Vallely thinks he knows why this purge is happening.


"Obama will not purge a civilian or political appointee because they have bought into Obama's ideology," Vallely said. "The White House protects their own. That's why they stalled on the investigation into Fast and Furious, Benghazi and ObamaCare. He's intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged."


Another senior retired general told TheBlaze on the condition of anonymity, because he still provide services to the government and fears possible retribution, that "they're using the opportunity of the shrinkage of the military to get rid of people that don't agree with them or do not toe the party line. Remember, as (former White House chief of staff) Rahm Emanuel said, never waste a crisis."


For President Obama, the military of a once-feared superpower is an anachronistic vestige of an America whose exceptionalism and world leadership require repeated apologies. It must be gutted and fundamentally transformed into a force wearing gender-neutral headgear only useful for holding the presidential umbrella when it rains. It is to be "his" military and used only for "his" purposes.

 

[schmidlap]

What illegal orders, Shitlips?

Any illegal order, Grasshopper.

Show the class why you are pissing your panties.

I have no reason to emulate any incontinence you may be experiencing.

I affirm an American's right to refuse to obey illegal orders, and don't know why that stresses you so.

​

Military members have the right and duty to refuse illegal orders. This principle is enshrined in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and is supported by legal precedents:​

1. Do I have the right to refuse illegal orders?

Yes! All members of the military have the right, and in some cases have the duty, to refuse illegal orders. Your oath is to the Constitution (which incorporates international treaties ratified by the U.S. on human rights and the law of war), not to the Commander-In-Chief or to any other individual in the chain of command.​

• MILITARY LAW TASK FORCE

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Any illegal order, Grasshopper.

I have no reason to emulate any incontinence you may be experiencing.

I affirm an American's right to refuse to obey illegal orders, and don't know why that stresses you so.

​

Military members have the right and duty to refuse illegal orders. This principle is enshrined in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and is supported by legal precedents:​

1. Do I have the right to refuse illegal orders?

Yes! All members of the military have the right, and in some cases have the duty, to refuse illegal orders. Your oath is to the Constitution (which incorporates international treaties ratified by the U.S. on human rights and the law of war), not to the Commander-In-Chief or to any other individual in the chain of command.​

• MILITARY LAW TASK FORCE

.

So, no illegal order has been made.

Screech louder.






.

 

[TNHarley]

The dims want the military to disobey Trump's orders. That's treason.

Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. They said illegal orders. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Do you understand now? Illegal. Illegal.

 

[Oddball]

What illegal orders?

Wake up, Simp.. We all know WTF these scumbags are doing.

There have been no orders...This is a passive-aggressive setup and call for fake "whistleblowers" -like Eric Ciaramalla- to fabricate more crap for the next raft of impeachments the seditionists are cooking up.

And no, "seditionists" isn't hyperbole...

 

[ChristisKing]

Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. They said illegal orders. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Do you understand now? Illegal. Illegal.

Yes but Trump didn't give any illegal orders. Do you understand now?

 

[Oddball]

Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. They said illegal orders. Illegal. Illegal. Illegal. Do you understand now? Illegal. Illegal.

Yet they pointed out no such illegal orders as examples, nor stated any when called out to cite specifics.

They're playing a ******* dangerous game, and they know it.

 

[TNHarley]

Yes but Trump didn't give any illegal orders. Do you understand now?

They said illegal. It's not treason. Grow up.

 

[TNHarley]

Yet they pointed out no such illegal orders as examples, nor stated any when called out to cite specifics.

They're playing a ******* dangerous game, and they know it.

Neither does their oath or the USMJ