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

[Conservative from Georgia]

To the point, do you actually believe that citing the UCMC's provision regarding "illegal orders" is “seditious behavior, punishable by death!”

Please try to respond directly and honestly.

He's just copy and pasting to prove he can google.

 

[eagle1462010]

The 6 Senators didn't claim Trump has previously issued illegal orders. Strawman.

If none were violated then they need TO STOP IMPLYING.

They do this to UNDERMINE THE CNC.

PERIOD

 

[schmidlap]

If none were violated then they need TO STOP IMPLYING.

They do this to UNDERMINE THE CNC.

PERIOD

"Implying"?

A subjective perception of "implying" is “seditious behavior, punishable by death!”???

 

[schmidlap]

I served. I know the rules. I made the oaths.

I know it better than any of you hacks will ever know.

Military Veterans Call Out Trump, Hegseth and Pentagon in New Video | Military.com

www.military.com

 

[eagle1462010]

Military Veterans Call Out Trump, Hegseth and Pentagon in New Video | Military.com

www.military.com

Im a Vet and dont give a flying ****.

 

[Hollie]

That would not have violated the UCMC, either, and the narcissistic blowhard might not have thrown a tantrum, but who can say.

UCMJ.

 

[schmidlap]

Im a Vet and dont give a flying ****.

You might want to respect the fact that opinions differ - or maybe not.

 

[schmidlap]

UCMJ.

Thank you.

 

[schmidlap]

The blowhard said that citing the UCMJ provision that illegal orders need not be obeyed is seditious behavior punishable by death. That is obviously deranged.

Instead of parroting such nonsense, the paranoid narcissist's toadies may want to do something about his elusive Black immigrants eating pet cats and dogs in Ohio.

 

[Mack The Finger]

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

That will be real can of words !

 

[Care4all]

We were given several examples based on court cases and hypotheticals based on court cases.

There was a soldier who refused a humiliating order, turned down an Article 15, and was court-martialled. I can't remember if he won his case or won on appeal. They taught us about the My Lia massacre in officer training.

None of them included "if Democrats are mad because Bad Orange Man won an election" None of them were about being ordered to be deployed and refusing for any reason.

That's because the people training us wanted us to follow the law and stay out of trouble. They were not political assholes who wanted us to get in trouble to help them score political points and who refused to give examples because they did not want to be accountable when we did.

If the courts rule Trump's command illegal and Trump ignores the court ruling and commands the troops to do again what the court ruled unconstitutional/unlawful, what should the soldiers do?

 

[eagle1462010]

If the courts rule Trump's commands illegal and Trump ignores the court ruling and commands the troops to do again what the court ruled unconstitutional/unlawful, what should the soldiers do?

Oh STFU

WHAT ******* ILLEGAL ORDERS?

I hope they Frag the Seditious 6.

 

[Care4all]

Oh STFU

WHAT ******* ILLEGAL ORDERS?

I hope they Frag the Seditious 6.

Guessing you don't keep up with the news?

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/20/national-guard-washington-dc-00663137
The judge postponed the impact of her decision until Dec. 11 to give the Trump administration time to appeal her decision.


https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judge-rule-trumps-portland-troop-deployment-2025-11-07/

US judge rules Trump illegally ordered National Guard to Portland, Oregon​

• Summary
• Ruling blocks Trump administration from deploying National Guard to Portland
• Judge finds protests were not a rebellion against the government
• Trump administration likely to appeal, case could reach US Supreme Court

Nov 7 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump unlawfully ordered National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, a federal judge ruled Friday in a legal setback to the administration's use of the military in American cities.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut is the first to permanently block Trump's use of military force to quell protests against immigration authorities. Trump is also attempting to do that in Democratic-led Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington, D.C. It replaces her interim order that had prevented the Portland deployment.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Guessing you don't keep up with the news?

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/20/national-guard-washington-dc-00663137
The judge postponed the impact of her decision until Dec. 11 to give the Trump administration time to appeal her decision.


https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judge-rule-trumps-portland-troop-deployment-2025-11-07/

US judge rules Trump illegally ordered National Guard to Portland, Oregon​

• Summary
• Ruling blocks Trump administration from deploying National Guard to Portland
• Judge finds protests were not a rebellion against the government
• Trump administration likely to appeal, case could reach US Supreme Court

Nov 7 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump unlawfully ordered National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, a federal judge ruled Friday in a legal setback to the administration's use of the military in American cities.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut is the first to permanently block Trump's use of military force to quell protests against immigration authorities. Trump is also attempting to do that in Democratic-led Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington, D.C. It replaces her interim order that had prevented the Portland deployment.

again you moronic simp that is appealed and the movement orders to go there are not illegal at all. If a service member refused that order they would get court-martialed and convicted.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Precisely the sedition six's intent. Soldiers questioning "If I follow this order from my command in the Trump administration, am I going to go to prison for it?"

Well, except they never said that.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

They're choosing to not believe that many people across the political spectrum and throughout the military simply don't trust the erratic, impulsive, punitive, emotional and otherwise profoundly damaged Trump.

A mind as disordered and unwell as his has to be taken into account. That's just a fact.

They can't bring themselves to admit it, or perhaps they lack the capacity to see it. Either way, it's a fact.

That is why military recruiting is going like gangbusters. They obviously loved Biden by staying away in droves.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

#1 As a signatory to the UN Charter (an international treaty), use of deadly force in international waters.

#2 Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act in attempting to use the military for civilian law enforcement.

WW

Really? What did we do to the Somalis who attacked the Maersk Alabama? Remember Captain Phillips or has TDS rotted that part of your brain also?

Where is the military doing law enforcement? Is TDS making you imagine things again?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He was found in federal court to have violated the Posse Comitatus Act in deploying military for civilian law enforcement.

The descion is currently on administrative stay while the ruling is being appealed.

So the courts are working on it.

WW

How many of those have been overturned already? Did you forget? TDS takes such a toll on the memory and ability to Google the truth.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If none were violated then they need TO STOP IMPLYING.

They do this to UNDERMINE THE CNC.

PERIOD

Implying is not illegal because it is like beaty being in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Seymour Flops]

If the courts rule Trump's command illegal and Trump ignores the court ruling and commands the troops to do again what the court ruled unconstitutional/unlawful, what should the soldiers do?

It depends on what the goal of each individual soldier would be in that situation.

Can you give me an example of a soldier in that situation and what that soldiers goal would be?

For example, if the goal is to stay out of trouble and continue their service to their country, the clear choice is to obey orders and read in the news later about any final resolution of legal cases in the USSC.

If the goal were to make his commander in chief look bad, somehow, and that soldier were willing to sacrifice his or her career, freedom, standing in the community, and all federal benefits, in order to make some kind of political statement, I suppose those congressfolk's advice might be taken.

If he or she were one of their consituents, then they - especially Mark Kelly, who knows better than to act like he's acting - would serve him or her best by advising him to take the first option.

But, I could be wrong. Are there precedent cases of soldiers rightfully disobeying orders because political opponents of the CiC are trying to stall military actions through the courts?