Democrat Senator Mark Kelly Faces Court-Martial After Department of War Launches Review of Allegations of Misconduct

[Darkwind]

I figured you wouldn't have an answer for that. Just like your fellow insurrectionists in congress, the Idiot Six.

lol

Most have taken to calling them the "Seditious Six."

 

[DonGlock26]

Democrat Senator Mark Kelly Faces Court-Martial After Department of War Launches Review of Allegations of Misconduct​

BREAKING: Democrat Senator Mark Kelly Faces Court-Martial After Department of War Launches Review of Allegations of Misconduct | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

The Department of War on Monday announced it is considering recalling Democrat Senator Mark Kelly for court-martial proceedings after he urged the military to defy President Trump’s orders.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

24 Nov 2025 ~~ By Cristina Laila

The Department of War on Monday announced it is considering recalling Democrat Senator Mark Kelly for court-martial proceedings after he urged the military to defy President Trump’s orders.
Without offering any specifics, Senators Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Mark Kelly (D-AZ), along with Democrat Reps. Maggie Goodlander (NH), Jason Crow (CO), Chris Deluzio (PA), and Chrissy Houlahan (PA) repeatedly stated, “You can refuse illegal orders,” or “You must refuse illegal orders,” in a viral video.
President Trump called for the Democrat lawmakers featured in the viral video to be locked up.
The Department of War is now reviewing allegations of misconduct.
Full statement from Department of War:

​

Commentary:
It appears that former Astronaut, Senator Mark Kelly may be headed for a Courts Martial. Article 32's are being prepared.
He's being charged with the following:
All individuals that military retirees remain subject to the UCMJ for applicable offenses, and federal laws such as 18 U.S.C. § 2387 prohibit actions intended to interfere with the loyalty, morale, or good order and discipline of the armed forces. Any violations will be addressed through appropriate legal channels.
It appears that Kelly's political ideology has become more predominate that his Loyalty to Navy, America and to the CIC...
His latest statements give the appearance of "Sedition". Though treason would be better.

Sounds like a plan.

 

[marvin martian]

Is it your position that Trump hasn’t issued any illegal orders?

What illegal orders has he issued?

Your fellow insurrectionists in Congress couldn't come up with any. Can you help them out?

 

[Marener]

It is everyone's opinion, and UNTIL you have a final court ruling that he has, then all you have is that you disagree with his actions.

That does not make it unlawful or illegal.

You do realize, right, that the duty to disobey lawful orders is married to the fact that the UCMJ and their oaths make it essential that all orders are presumed lawful until an authority in the chain deems them unlawful.

The Democrats are willing to hang the military out to dry if they are successful in getting members to doubt the chain of command.

So answer this:

Why don't you tell me what Trump is doing, and spell out the authority he has to do it, how often that authority was exercised under Democratic Presidencies, and then speak on what unlawful orders he has issued, orders that have been deemed ultimately to be unlawful.

Then look at the appropriate US Code that makes what the Democrats did borderline seditious and tell me what their intent was to inform people, who already knew the code better than they did, about hesitating or questioning authority without proper vetting of lawfulness.

Then there’s nothing to prosecute because Kelly said not to follow illegal orders.

Since no orders are illegal, Kelly never told anyone to disobey any orders.

 

[schmidlap]

Maybe they're starting to crack.

This is nuts.

With the blowhard now supporting Obamacare subsidies, praising Mamdani, and vilifying Taylor Greene, MAGAts are suspecting a Trump/Soros Vulcan mind meld!

 

[rightwinger]

Thanks for proving how little you truly understand regarding this issue.

Prove me wrong Skippy

Kelly is well within his rights to remind military members of the regulation

 

[Marener]

What illegal orders has he issued?

Your fellow insurrectionists in Congress couldn't come up with any. Can you help them out?

I don’t have to.

 

[Darkwind]

Then there’s nothing to prosecute because Kelly said not to follow illegal orders.

Since no orders are illegal, Kelly never told anyone to disobey any orders.

It was subversive. But you don't make the call.

He has specific duties as a former military member and can be recalled into active service for cause.

All of this is nothing more than setting a stage to undermine the authority of the President of the United States as Commander-in-Chief.

That is a serious thing. It will be up to a military Tribunal to determine the legal line they may or may not have crossed.

But no one is fooled by what they are doing, and it is reprehensible that you are defending it.

 

[Doc7505]

Insurrection Chic​

Democrats now celebrate the very nullificationist tactics they once decried, embracing a neo-Confederate defiance of federal authority to undermine a president they despise.​

Insurrection Chic › American Greatness

Is Jeff Davis the Model? Who is the real, or fictional, inspiration for the new insurrectionary wing of the Democrat Party? The fictitious Hollywood insurrectionist, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of…

amgreatness.com

24 Nov 2025 ~~ By Victor Davis Hanson

Is Jeff Davis the Model?
Who is the real, or fictional, inspiration for the new insurrectionary wing of the Democrat Party?
The fictitious Hollywood insurrectionist, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, “James Mattoon Scott” (Burt Lancaster), who in the 1964 film Seven Days in May attempted to overthrow the presidency?
Or perhaps Jefferson Davis? He ultimately ordered the attack by South Carolina state forces against the federal garrison at Fort Sumter, which ignited the Civil War.
Or is the better inspiration the “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door?” Alabama Governor George Wallace likewise vowed to use his state’s law enforcement to nullify a federal law.
Yet how odd that the left, which had lectured us so often about a January 6th “insurrection”—a charge that not even the Javert-like special counsel Jack Smith ever lodged against Donald Trump—now talks frequently about the proud nullification of our nation’s federal laws.
The New Confederacy
Democrats weirdly boast of the subordination of the Constitution to international statutes. Our governors and mayors in blue states and cities take neo-Confederate vows to oppose the national government’s right to protect its own property, to direct its own employees, and to enforce our shared federal laws.
Over a decade ago, some 600 “sanctuary cities” declared that they were immune from the full enforcement of federal law. They further boasted that they would not hand over illegal aliens, detained by state or local authorities, to federal agents.
These were strange threats. Not long ago, at the 1992 and 1996 Democratic conventions, liberal grandees like Bill and Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi had vowed to stop all would-be illegal aliens from unlawfully entering the U.S.
~Snip~
Fort Sumter?
Democratic officials are also currently calling for organized and state-sanctioned opposition to the federal government, in near-Bleeding Kansas or Fort Sumter insurrectionary fashion.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson claims he will use his city resources to actively thwart ICE duties. In deranged fashion, he threatens to call in the UN to prevent federal law enforcement. He apparently treats the Constitution as nothing, as if Johnson were elected not by fellow citizens but by global voters from Iran to North Korea.
Johnson’s idiocy is no mere boast: when a trapped convoy of ICE vehicles was recently besieged by violent protesters, local Chicago-area police were told to stand way out.
In Portland, the local police sometimes advise violent Antifa-related protesters on strategies for their anti-ICE street activities, presumably to help them avoid arrest.
~Snip~
As a de facto insurrectionist, Mamdani would claim that international human rights activists, or the International Criminal Court (?), deserve greater legal authority inside the U.S. than do Americans’ own elected federal government.
~Snip~
The common theme?
The desperate left feels the more insurrectionary tensions they can gin up, the more that the ensuing domestic crises hurt an elected president whom they loathe.
They assume they are exempt from following the law because they believe they are our moral and intellectual superiors.
And so for the next four years, they will once again insist they can ignore or violate with contempt any federal law they please—as the nation is heading toward widespread civil insurrection of the left’s own neo-Confederate making.


Commentary:
Another insightful thesis by Victor Davis Hanson... .
Many intelligent American citizens saw this happening during the Biden regime.
The regime used inflammatory rhetoric against President Trump and those around him to prepare the citizenry for its lawfare against the same. But they couldn’t help mention how they felt about the people who voted for him. The regime did what Obama always wanted to but didn’t have the guts to until he had a stooge in the White House to do his dirty work for him. Even then, the regime waited for its lawfare to work, which its minions were sure it would. But hubris for politicians is as much of an Achilles’ Heel as it is for authoritarians when they make enemies out of the wrong people. It’s why President Trump survived to bring down the Democrats’ house of cards, a deed about which they are absolutely furious. The imperative for Constitutionalists is to prevent Democrats’ election fraud at all costs and keep the public well-informed about their lawless behavior.
Should Democrats steal another national election, they will eventually plunge the country into instability for the sake of taking revenge against President Trump and the people who voted for him, and they will blame everyone else except themselves.
The factor in play is merely arrogant ignorance.
The City States believe they hold all the cards in a winning hand while failing to account for Presidential power granted by the Constitution. They rely on lawyers and judges to make foolish decisions based on faulty interpretation of the law.

 

[Rawley]

All of the people who said they cared about lawfare 5 seconds ago should be up in arms over this. Mark Kelly has a First Amendment right to express his opinion. This administration truly detest freedom of speech.

As retired military, he actually doesn't.

 

[Darkwind]

Prove me wrong Skippy

Kelly is well within his rights to remind military members of the regulation

Again, you are flat out ignoring all the conversation for why it is wrong and looking at his free speech rights. No one has said he doesn't have the right to speak out. He does NOT have the freedom from the consequences of that speech.

Isn't that the standard you clowns always want to hold the Right to? Suddenly, you are against the consequences being applied?

I am not surprised.

You think that Democrats should be 1000% free from the consequences of their words as long as they are against Trump.

 

[Marener]

It was subversive. But you don't make the call.

He has specific duties as a former military member and can be recalled into active service for cause.

All of this is nothing more than setting a stage to undermine the authority of the President of the United States as Commander-in-Chief.

That is a serious thing. It will be up to a military Tribunal to determine the legal line they may or may not have crossed.

But no one is fooled by what they are doing, and it is reprehensible that you are defending it.

it’s impossible to consider it subversive. His statements were entirely consistent with law and regulations.

Trump’s administration is again trying to attack free exercise of speech. It’s reprehensible alright.

 

[marvin martian]

I don’t have to.

LOL!

You're such a rube.

 

[marvin martian]

Prove me wrong Skippy

Kelly is well within his rights to remind military members of the regulation

What illegal orders has President Trump issued?

Your fellow insurrectionists in Congress couldn't come up with any. Can you help them out?

 

[debbiedowner]

It depends on the level of the court martial. There are different regs for summary, special and general courts martial. You really shouldn't comment on things you clearly have no knowledge.

I do have knowledge and don't answer me with your bullshit if you were not a paralegal in the JAG office when you served. I doubt you served anybody other than a trump boot licker.

 

[Winston]

So yeah, put it on a 20 year old soldier to defy his commanding officer and chuck his career. That's just super advice. FFS you people are nuts.

Is that not required from them now, under their oath. I especially like this part, "I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.". Shit, we are already requiring that 20 year old to be a full blown JAG officer.

 

[Concerned American]

I do have knowledge and don't answer me with your bullshit if you were not a paralegal in the JAG office when you served. I doubt you served anybody other than a trump boot licker.

Unless Kelly was subject to a summary court martial, he would be judged by a panel of officers, Again, now take your juvenile vocabulary down the road. You don't know what you're talking about. Fact of the matter is, he likely would not be recalled.

 

[Darkwind]

it’s impossible to consider it subversive. His statements were entirely consistent with law and regulations.

Trump’s administration is again trying to attack free exercise of speech. It’s reprehensible alright.

Impossible? Impossible to NOT see it as subversive.

There is absolutely no need to remind the Military of their duty under the UCMJ.


NONE AT ALL.

 

[Zincwarrior]

You don't know what you're talking about. Mark Kelly is a retired Navy captain and as such he is subject to recall and there ARE restrictions on free speech rights of military members as well as members of congress. LOL, You apparently don't understand security clearances.

The rights of Congress under the Constitution trump.

A reminder, he retired decades ago.

 

[BULLDOG]

The only thing Kelly did was disagree with trump. The childish revenge presidency continues.