- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
The Pentagon says it is investigating Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona for possible breaches of military law after Kelly joined a handful of other lawmakers in a video that called for U.S. troops to refuse unlawful orders.
The Pentagon’s statement, which was posted on social media on Monday, cited a federal law that allows retired service members to be recalled to active duty on orders of the defense secretary for possible court-martial or other measures. Kelly served in the U.S. Navy as a fighter pilot before going on to become an astronaut. He retired at the rank of captain.
It is extraordinary for the Pentagon, which until the second Trump term has usually gone out of its way to act and appear apolitical, to directly threaten a sitting member of Congress with investigation.
You must log in or register to comment.
This is treason.
Ok so they’re investigating Mark Kelly because he might be treasonous?
Without even going into the benign and responsible content of his words, let’s just talk about possible signs that you might be on the wrong side…
Again, they’re questioning a retired Navy officer and NASA astronaut on his professional and patriotic integrity… Hmm
Without even going into the benign and responsible content of his words,
Right? And the Penty gets all riled up and barking at him. . .
…after the douchebag occupying the POTUS chair publicly made a literal death threat against our own countrymen for advising the military to. . . (Flips papers) " Not do illegal things if ordered to do illegal things.
We need to investigate those in the Pentagon that are giving out illegal orders.
We need to investigate those in the Pentagon that are giving out illegal orders.
Something, something, we investigated ourselves and found no wrong doing?
So they’re not investigating the guy who sucked off a horse being blackmailed by Putin?
“Fascists Attempt To Prosecute Citizens For Supporting The Rule of Law”
“Kelly’s conduct brings discredit upon the armed forces and will be addressed appropriately,” Hegseth said on his personal X account. Of the wider group, he added that “their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion — which only puts our warriors in danger.”
Hmm. It would seem that if you’re only giving blatantly lawful orders, this wouldn’t sow doubt and confusion.
I forget what part of the constitution says that the government has carte blanche authority to airstrike random Columbians. Maybe that’s what’s sowing the doubt and confusion?
I think they discredited it themselves when they put a Fox News talk show host in charge.
https://www.militarydefense.com/tag/ucmj-article-92/
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 92, service members are required to obey lawful orders. However, not all orders are lawful, and military law draws a clear distinction between orders that must be followed and those that must be refused.
An unlawful order is one that requires the commission of a criminal act or violates the Constitution, U.S. federal law, or applicable international law.
Examples of Unlawful Orders:
Targeting or intentionally harming civilians Torturing or abusing detainees Falsifying operational or legal records Engaging in unauthorized political or domestic law enforcement actions
Guarantee they change the UCMJ within the next few years.
Oh that last one, lol.
Important Note: All military orders are presumed lawful. The burden falls on the service member to establish that an order is manifestly unlawful. This is a high standard, and hesitation or refusal can carry serious consequences—even if ultimately justified.
Because of this legal complexity, service members should consult with legal counsel as soon as they suspect an order may be unlawful. Do not disobey an order without first seeking guidance from a qualified military attorney, unless the order is clearly illegal on its face (e.g., ordering you to shoot unarmed civilians).
Do understand that it’s not an easy thing to do and that they will go through hell fighting the unlimited resources of the United States government defending themselves should they refuse orders.
Then if shit gets real then we need to make sure the extrajudicial consequences for committing war crimes are way, way worse than spending some time at Leavenworth.
You may be untouchable behind that perimeter, with all that firepower, with a thousand over guys, but you’ll have to go home sometime and the war will still be waiting for you there. That’s the thing about civil wars.
This UCMJ seems like woke propaganda!
This is a sentence in 2025.
What about blowing up boats in international waters cuz they have plant material I deem toxic.
cuz we claim they have plant material
There’s been zero evidence presented that the flimsy excuse for extrajudicial execution is even true.
Not toxic. Terrifying. They are terrorists after all.
TRAITOR!!!
Let’s look at the logic here: If we don’t expect troops to defy illegal orders, that means some commanding officer could order his troops to kill the president 🤔
That’s illegal but… The Trump administration thinks orders should be followed no matter what.
People were saying a similar thing about what Biden should do when we found out Trump won.
Looks like nothing happened so I can only assume the same result will be there and Trump will still chug a long until his fish o filet heart finally encrusts over.
Upvoted for “fish o filet” heart
Kelly told troops “you can refuse illegal orders,” and other lawmakers said they needed troops to “stand up for our laws … our Constitution.”
…
“Kelly’s conduct brings discredit upon the armed forces and will be addressed appropriately,” Hegseth added.
Days after the video was released, President Donald Trump accused the lawmakers of sedition “punishable by DEATH” in a social media post.
…
Troops, especially uniformed commanders, do have a specific obligations to reject orders that are unlawful, if they make that determination.
So he told the troops to do things everyone agrees they are sworn to do, and Republicans complain he’s bringing the military into disrepute and call for his imprisonment and execution, and the Dept of Defense (War?) then pursues ways to achieve this. I guess the USA isn’t doing that whole constitution thing any more.
That isn’t even completely accurate, it’s not that they can refuse unlawful orders, they are literally required to refuse them.
The sooner the majority of Americans realize that we are dealing with actual, real life traitors operating our federal government, the sooner we can deal with them.
I’m hoping that moment comes sooner than later, but I’m not crossing my fingers.
Y’know when things were relatively less crazy with Russia, I remember lotsa military fiction (or maybe just Modern Warfare 1 idk) using "Russian Ultranationalists " as the “never-ending military bad guy goon-squad terrorist faction” that’s okay to fight and kill in an entertainment product while still saying “Any resemblance is coincidental.”
…My point is that the highest offices of the U.S are controlled by a US “ultranationalist” terrorist goon squad faction. They’re such ridiculously overt bad guys that they’d be considered too outlandish for a Michael Bay movie.
…and everybody’s like “Oh my! So shocking! Well, you know, this is just politics.”
They just don’t want to believe that a violent fringe cult is right there in front of them, ransacking and demolishing centuries of progress.
They must be stopped or they won’t stop.
For these types of stories, I always think of traffic laws and speed limits, specifically because most people are familiar with breaking those laws.
“The speed limit here is 30 miles per hour. You should not drive over the speed limit.”
“We need to investigate this person because he is telling people to follow the law.”
This reasoning is sort of unthinkable and unfair.
Well, not THAT constitution anyway.
sounds like a nazi thing to do
“I was just following orders”
“Good soldier. Now, here are your next set of orders: Stand right there on those gallows and put that noose around your neck.”
That’s what I hope they’ll say to anyone who tries to use the Nuremberg Defense when they get prosecuted for blowing up civilian boats in international waters.
Funny how the administration keeps bringing this up in the news cycle, repeatedly reminding troops that they should not obey illegal orders. If they’d just ignored the video, everyone would have forgotten about it by now.
It’s as if they either A) have never heard of the Streisand Effect, or B) are trying to distract everyone from something else.
Anyway, how about them Epstein Files?
They keep bringing it up as a lesson to servicemen. “We can do it to this influential person so you don’t have a chance, young marine. Now attack those civilians.”
Senators: “Hey if your boss tells you to do something illegal you should not do it.”
Trump administration:
They gonna find a way to kill these people
