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

You're right, but it isn't illegal to do so.
Well, normally I'd say no. But given the animosity toward the CnC, and the covert implications of the statements, they may be in some grey area.

The UCMJ is much stricter than civilian law, and if recalled to active duty, he'll be subject to it.

He will then have to provide a better and valid reason for his actions.
 

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

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.

Case dismissed.

Who's next?
 
Why shouldn’t they consider whether their orders are legal?
If you don't see the threat to the chain of command and the ability to maintain effective military discipline, I can't help you.
 
If you don't see the threat to the chain of command and the ability to maintain effective military discipline, I can't help you.
Haha, such terrible acting.

And the Oscar does NOT go to... Rawley
 
Well, normally I'd say no. But given the animosity toward the CnC, and the covert implications of the statements, they may be in some grey area.

The UCMJ is much stricter than civilian law, and if recalled to active duty, he'll be subject to it.

He will then have to provide a better and valid reason for his actions.
Anything could happen, but I don't think they'd waste the time and money on it. The law does exist and they are in their rights to mention it. They didn't do anything else. Sure its dirty politics, but it doesn't rise to the level of stupidity of what the democrats have done over the past 9 years. It will be yesterday's news in a week.
 
If you don't see the threat to the chain of command and the ability to maintain effective military discipline, I can't help you.
It’s literally in the UCMJ. Does the UCMJ threaten military discipline?
 
If you don't see the threat to the chain of command and the ability to maintain effective military discipline, I can't help you.
It is a law though. It was brought to the fore during the Calley trial re: the My Lai massacre in the mid 70s. It is incumbent on EVERY service member to disobey illegal orders. It opens a can of worms though because the guy that fails to follow the orders has to prove the order was illegal and he could be putting himself in legal jeopardy. Catch 22.
 
How is telling someone the truth, which it is, a threat to the chain of command?
Were you ever actually in the military? Or is the Admiral thing a cosplay?

You'd have no problem with Kelly telling people under you "You need to question every order from Admiral Tory and everyone in his chain of command"
 
15th post
Just another example of the low IQ rapist charity thief having to turn to corruption as the only way to reconcile being bested by a man that is better than him in every way imaginable.
 
He will then have to provide a better and valid reason for his actions.
The government will have to provide a better case for their accusations.

Your feelings aren’t grounds for prosecution.
 
What illegal orders has President Trump issued?

Your fellow insurrectionists in Congress couldn't come up with any. Can you help them out?
They never said that he did. Trump's name was not mentioned, nor was anyone specifically.

I don't like what they did any more than anyone else, but you cannot recall someone to active duty and prosecute them for telling the truth when nothing they actually said was wrong.

What laws under the UCMJ did he violate?
 
Back
Top Bottom