Sen. Mark Kelly Is A Great American

[Trump_is_Mentally_fit]

6 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Well, the bombings of the "drug smugglers" in the Gulf and Pacific are of very questionable legality. I'd say illegal unless I see a better justification than what Trump has given.

The DOD lawyers have apparently written a memo (not released to the public) providing this justification (which is quite different from Trump's public one):

- Drug smuggling activity funds the Mexican/international cartels, which in turn have been characterized as international terrorist organizations; hence, the bombings are aimed at international terrorism. It's a very, very shaky theory that's never been tested in anyone's courts.

Trump's justification is just flat-out not a justification at all.

And deploying troops to cities has been found to be illegal. 

 

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/court-finds-trumps-use-soldiers-los-angeles-illegal

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

Everybody discussing the "Seditious Six" needs to understand this:

 

They are being investigated because they purposely started with a false premise and then use a proper comment as a conclusion.  

 

Like if someone says: "Whenever you eat dog feces, PLEASE brush your teeth before kissing your children."   

Yes.  Obviously, if someone were to eat feces they should be brushing their teeth.  But who the hell is doing that?  

 

In this instance, their false premise was not "eating dog feces", but a false claim of the President issuing umconstitutional orders. This false claim is a potential violation of 18 USC 2387.

 

 

[Trump_is_Mentally_fit]

3 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Everybody discussing the "Seditious Six" needs to understand this:

 

They are being investigated because they purposely started with a false premise and then use a proper comment as a conclusion.  

 

Like if someone says: "Whenever you eat dog feces, PLEASE brush your teeth before kissing your children."   

Yes.  Obviously, if someone were to eat feces they should be brushing their teeth.  But who the hell is doing that?  

 

In this instance, their false premise was not "eating dog feces", but a false claim of the President issuing umconstitutional orders. This false claim is a potential violation of 18 USC 2387.

 

 

No, they are being targeted for rightly speaking out. 

[sherpa]

Is anyone else thinking this is just a silly exercise?

No illegal orders have been directed.

Nobody needs to tell military personnel that are are not to abide by illegal orders.

They know that, certainly at the commissioned officer level, where such things would originate.

 

Looks to me like an attempt to orchestrate a completely political exercise for publicity.

 

On to the next crisis.

[The Frankish Reich]

2 minutes ago, sherpa said:

Is anyone else thinking this is just a silly exercise?

No illegal orders have been directed.

Nobody needs to tell military personnel that are are not to abide by illegal orders.

They know that, certainly at the commissioned officer level, where such things would originate.

 

Looks to me like an attempt to orchestrate a completely political exercise for publicity.

 

On to the next crisis.

Yes, it's a political exercise.

And of course El Presidente has just insured that it will work as intended through his comic overreaction.

[BillsFanNC]

5 minutes ago, sherpa said:

Is anyone else thinking this is just a silly exercise?

No illegal orders have been directed.

Nobody needs to tell military personnel that are are not to abide by illegal orders.

They know that, certainly at the commissioned officer level, where such things would originate.

 

Looks to me like an attempt to orchestrate a completely political exercise for publicity.

 

On to the next crisis.

 

Of course

 

It's one thing if it's started by X accounts ..

 

Another if by reliable media.

 

But elected leaders? One who is retired military himself?

 

Hang em high!

[Joe Ferguson forever]

3 hours ago, sherpa said:

Is anyone else thinking this is just a silly exercise?

No illegal orders have been directed.

Nobody needs to tell military personnel that are are not to abide by illegal orders.

They know that, certainly at the commissioned officer level, where such things would originate.

 

Looks to me like an attempt to orchestrate a completely political exercise for publicity.

 

On to the next crisis.

Ochestrated by whom?

Edited 15 hours ago by Joe Ferguson forever

[nedboy7]

By Rachel E. VanLandingham, Lt Col, USAF (ret.)

 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth should be impeached for his abusive threats to court-martial Navy combat veteran Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., in retaliation for the senator’s participation in a videoreminding service members of their extant legal duty to disobey unlawful orders. His behavior is unconscionable and unbecoming for the leader of the U.S. military, and Congress shouldn’t tolerate such an unwarranted attack not only on a decorated combat veteran, but also an attack on the legislative branch itself.

 

Secretary Hegseth’s dangerous blustering ignores the Speech and Debate Clause and attempts to exploit Sen. Kelly’s status as a military retiree who is still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Relevant to this discussion, the UCMJ contains military-unique crimes and fewer First Amendment protections than civilian law does.

But Sen. Kelly’s video is nowhere near criminal — even under the more expansive military code of crimes. Hegseth claims the  video Kelly contributed to undermines good order and discipline, and is service-discrediting, conduct criminalized under the UCMJ’s “catch all” crime.  Yet the exhortation to follow the law by disobeying unlawful orders isn’t prejudicial to good order and discipline. Nor does reminding service members of their legal duty cast discredit upon the military. However, following illegal orders would surely bring discredit.

The video does not encourage military members to disobey lawful orders, nor otherwise suborn mutiny, which is the collective disobedience of lawful orders. It speaks to the exact opposite: the duty to disobey unlawful orders.

 

https://www.ms.now/opinion/pete-hegseth-mark-kelly-pentagon-military-orders

[nedboy7]

16 hours ago, sherpa said:

Is anyone else thinking this is just a silly exercise?

No illegal orders have been directed.

Nobody needs to tell military personnel that are are not to abide by illegal orders.

They know that, certainly at the commissioned officer level, where such things would originate.

 

Looks to me like an attempt to orchestrate a completely political exercise for publicity.

 

On to the next crisis.

 

 

I guess it's a perspective.  And knowing how MAGA reacts to judges they dont agree with you could make the argument that this judge is a marxist communist socialist fascist woke pretender....

 

 

A federal court has ruled that President Trump’s use of the National Guard around Los Angeles violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the military from participating in civilian law enforcement unless doing so has been expressly authorized by Congress. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ordered the administration to stop using soldiers in California for activities such as arrests, searches, traffic or crowd control, and interrogation.

[JDHillFan]

12 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

 

 

I guess it's a perspective.  And knowing how MAGA reacts to judges they dont agree with you could make the argument that this judge is a marxist communist socialist fascist woke pretender....

 

 

A federal court has ruled that President Trump’s use of the National Guard around Los Angeles violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the military from participating in civilian law enforcement unless doing so has been expressly authorized by Congress. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ordered the administration to stop using soldiers in California for activities such as arrests, searches, traffic or crowd control, and interrogation.

In a development shocking to no one, you are completely unaware:

 

A three-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled Thursday that District Judge Charles Breyer erred last week in issuing a temporary restraining order requiring Trump to return control of around 4,000 California National Guard troops to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D).

 

pedo, cult, blah blah, etc

[sherpa]

Again, I don't have a view that anything has been done that should trigger anyone.

Military officers do not need to be told that they are not to abide by illegal orders.

Cabinet members do not need to threaten people, until something happens.

 

So far, and that may change, this is nothing other than yacking.

[B-Man]

 

 

REMINDER:

 

On 11/25/2025 at 9:51 AM, B-Man said:

Senator Kelly responds to the latest by posting a tweet that details his military service (which is exemplary)

 

Of course there is a flaw in this .

 

No one's calling out his record, just his recent judgment, which seems to be tainted by a case of TDS.

 

 

 

 

[sherpa]

14 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

REMINDER:

 

 

 

As an ex military officer, it always bothers me when people raise that resume as though their current views are to be more weighted because of service.

Everything this man did was voluntary. He chose.

I have no objection to him stating the obvious, which is that one should not execute an illegal order.

Everybody knows that.

I don't like using military service to promote political opinion.

Shut up and do your job, which you and the US Senate failed at during the shutdown.