Captain Kelly (USN, Ret.) and Senator Brings Suit against DOD

WorldWatcher

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
17,357
Reaction score
7,616
Points
365
Location
VA
You can follow the case at the first link. The actual filing is the second link.

Capt. Kelly (USN, Ret.) and current US Senator is bringing action against SecDef Hegseth on 6 principle grounds which can be addressed in Federal Courts outside the military structure:
  • First Amendment,
  • Speech or Debate Clause,
  • Separation of Powers,
  • Due Process,
  • 10 U.S.C. § 1370,
  • Administrative Procedure Act.

First Amendment is pretty obvious.

Speech and Debate Clause - prevents actions against members of Congress for political speech.

Separation of Powers - the Executive branch is attempting to interfer with/punish a member of the Legislative Branch from communicating with constituants.

Due Process - Capt. Kelly was never allowed to respond to charges and the outcome of the "investigation" was predetermined based on political powers and statements clearly in the public record. A pre-determined outcome vioates due process.

10 U.S.C. § 1370 - Govern's final grade determination for military officers and that is a decision that is made at the time of retirement and for conduct while on active duty. That 1370 does not allow for reopening final grade determination and for speech after (many years after) retirement. There have been cases where retired member were recalled for disciplinary action, but - IIRC - those cases were about conduct prior to retirement that came to light after retirement.

Administrative Procedures Act - to quote from the filing: "Under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), courts shall “hold unlawful and set aside agency action” that is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)." Bascially that there was no "procedure" used, that the outcome was predetermined and retaliation.

WW




 
You can follow the case at the first link. The actual filing is the second link.

Capt. Kelly (USN, Ret.) and current US Senator is bringing action against SecDef Hegseth on 6 principle grounds which can be addressed in Federal Courts outside the military structure:
  • First Amendment,
  • Speech or Debate Clause,
  • Separation of Powers,
  • Due Process,
  • 10 U.S.C. § 1370,
  • Administrative Procedure Act.

First Amendment is pretty obvious.

Speech and Debate Clause - prevents actions against members of Congress for political speech.

Separation of Powers - the Executive branch is attempting to interfer with/punish a member of the Legislative Branch from communicating with constituants.

Due Process - Capt. Kelly was never allowed to respond to charges and the outcome of the "investigation" was predetermined based on political powers and statements clearly in the public record. A pre-determined outcome vioates due process.

10 U.S.C. § 1370 - Govern's final grade determination for military officers and that is a decision that is made at the time of retirement and for conduct while on active duty. That 1370 does not allow for reopening final grade determination and for speech after (many years after) retirement. There have been cases where retired member were recalled for disciplinary action, but - IIRC - those cases were about conduct prior to retirement that came to light after retirement.

Administrative Procedures Act - to quote from the filing: "Under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), courts shall “hold unlawful and set aside agency action” that is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)." Bascially that there was no "procedure" used, that the outcome was predetermined and retaliation.

WW




As are many of the meritless criminal investigations........Comey, Schiff, James, Powell.........the one against Kelly is being done to harass him. And to cause a costly disruption in his life. They are the textbook definition of vindictive prosecutions.
 
"Free speech" is out the window when you're sowing doubt and dissent in the ranks.

At that point, you've crossed over into UCMJ land....Once there, the legal rules that apply to civilians are also out the window.

Do you support punishing SecDef Hegseth for essentially the same comments as Capt. Kelly that he made in 2016?

WW
 
As are many of the meritless criminal investigations........Comey, Schiff, James, Powell.........the one against Kelly is being done to harass him. And to cause a costly disruption in his life. They are the textbook definition of vindictive prosecutions.
irony_meter3.gif
 
As are many of the meritless criminal investigations........Comey, Schiff, James, Powell.........the one against Kelly is being done to harass him. And to cause a costly disruption in his life. They are the textbook definition of vindictive prosecutions.

Agreed.

President Trump and SecDef Hegset don't care about the actual punishment, they want the news cycle headlines. They could care less that they will likely lose the case months or years down the road.

WW
 
Agreed.

President Trump and SecDef Hegset don't care about the actual punishment, they want the news cycle headlines. They could care less that they will likely lose the case months or years down the road.

WW
Kelly is a whining loser.
 
You can follow the case at the first link. The actual filing is the second link.

Capt. Kelly (USN, Ret.) and current US Senator is bringing action against SecDef Hegseth on 6 principle grounds which can be addressed in Federal Courts outside the military structure:
  • First Amendment,
  • Speech or Debate Clause,
  • Separation of Powers,
  • Due Process,
  • 10 U.S.C. § 1370,
  • Administrative Procedure Act.

First Amendment is pretty obvious.

Speech and Debate Clause - prevents actions against members of Congress for political speech.

Separation of Powers - the Executive branch is attempting to interfer with/punish a member of the Legislative Branch from communicating with constituants.

Due Process - Capt. Kelly was never allowed to respond to charges and the outcome of the "investigation" was predetermined based on political powers and statements clearly in the public record. A pre-determined outcome vioates due process.

10 U.S.C. § 1370 - Govern's final grade determination for military officers and that is a decision that is made at the time of retirement and for conduct while on active duty. That 1370 does not allow for reopening final grade determination and for speech after (many years after) retirement. There have been cases where retired member were recalled for disciplinary action, but - IIRC - those cases were about conduct prior to retirement that came to light after retirement.

Administrative Procedures Act - to quote from the filing: "Under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), courts shall “hold unlawful and set aside agency action” that is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)." Bascially that there was no "procedure" used, that the outcome was predetermined and retaliation.

WW




He created this mess for himself
 
When the nation called. Senator Kelly answered the call.

When the nation called. Trump got daddy to pay a doctor for a letter regarding bone spurs.

WW
.
.
.
View attachment 1205212

View attachment 1205214

View attachment 1205213
***** not given.

Juan McQuisling was an unquestioned hero, for not allowing himself to be used as a propaganda prop when offered a release from the Hanoi Hilton....All of that was negated when he decided to be a corrupt, treacherous, ghoulish son-of-a-***** of a Senator.
 
"Free speech" is out the window when you're sowing doubt and dissent in the ranks.

At that point, you've crossed over into UCMJ land....Once there, the legal rules that apply to civilians are also out the window.
Except of course, he is: 1) not in the military; 2) he is a member of Congress; 3) he said the exact same thing as the Dec of Defense; 4) he literally recited military law.
 
15th post
As are many of the meritless criminal investigations........Comey, Schiff, James, Powell.........the one against Kelly is being done to harass him. And to cause a costly disruption in his life. They are the textbook definition of vindictive prosecutions.
To harass him, and to intimidate others. That's how authoritarian regimes roll.

If America escapes this, it will be by the skin of our teeth.

Maybe Hegseth should go after whoever put this up:

C5q5Bil.jpg
 
To harass him, and to intimidate others. That's how authoritarian regimes roll.

If America escapes this, it will be by the skin of our teeth.

Maybe Hegseth should go after whoever put this up:

C5q5Bil.jpg

Gee...

..... ..... ..... Where and who would have put up such as stupid plaque.

WW
.
.
.
Sarcasm Warning.webp

.
 
Back
Top Bottom