Politics The Trump Crazy Train! (5 Viewers)

[BigGameDamian]

 

[Chris Craig]

Mark Kelly Fires Back After Hegseth Launches Investigation Into Him: ‘I’ve Given Too Much to This Country to Be Silenced by Bullies’

Senator Mark Kelly fired back at Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Monday after the Pentagon announced it would be launching an investigation into Kelly.

www.yahoo.com

In a statement issued on Monday morning, the Department of Defense said that it had ” received serious allegations of misconduct against Captain Mark Kelly, USN (Ret.). In accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 688, and other applicable regulations, a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures. This matter will be handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality. Further official comments will be limited, to preserve the integrity of the proceedings.”

It continued:

The Department of War reminds 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.

All servicemembers are reminded that they have a legal obligation under the UCMJ to obey lawful orders and that orders are presumed to be lawful. A servicemember’s personal philosophy does not justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order.

In a statement of his own, Hegseth submitted that:

The video made by the “Seditious Six” was despicable, reckless, and false. Encouraging our warriors to ignore the orders of their Commanders undermines every aspect of “good order and discipline.” Their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion — which only puts our warriors in danger.

Five of the six individuals in that video do not fall under @DeptofWar jurisdiction (one is CIA and four are former military but not “retired”, so they are no longer subject to UCMJ). However, Mark Kelly (retired Navy Commander) is still subject to UCMJ—and he knows that.

As was announced, the Department is reviewing his statements and actions, which were addressed directly to all troops while explicitly using his rank and service affiliation—lending the appearance of authority to his words. Kelly’s conduct brings discredit upon the armed forces and will be addressed appropriately.

The investigation’s launch comes after President Donald Trump expressed his outrage over the video, which he argued was “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

Advertisement

Kelly responded to the development on X, where he wrote, “When I was 22 years old, I commissioned as an Ensign in the United States Navy and swore an oath to the Constitution. I upheld that oath through flight school, multiple deployments on the USS Midway, 39 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm, test pilot school, four space shuttle flights at NASA, and every day since I retired – which I did after my wife Gabby was shot in the head while serving her constituents.”

“In combat, I had a missile blow up next to my jet and flew through anti-aircraft fire to drop bombs on enemy targets. At NASA, I launched on a rocket, commanded the space shuttle, and was part of the recovery mission that brought home the bodies of my astronaut classmates who died on Columbia. I did all of this in service to this country that I love and has given me so much,” he continued. “Secretary Hegseth’s tweet is the first I heard of this. I also saw the President’s posts saying I should be arrested, hanged, and put to death. If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this administration accountable, it won’t work. I’ve given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution.”

 

[crandc]

Difference between hero and zero.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Great video explaining the Comey prosecution f' ups.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Karoline Leavitt says she has 'PTSD' over difficult choices with husband, 60

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt says she has 'PTSD' from canceling so many dates with her husband, Nicholas Riccio, with whom she shares a 1-year-old son

www.themirror.com

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Trump’s Energy Secretary Wants Walmart Backup Generators Powering U.S. Grid​

https://meidasnews.com/news/trumps-energy-secretary-wants-walmart-backup-generators-powering-u-s-grid

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[e_blazer]

Given his usual propensity to name things after himself, I would have thought “Ass” and “Hole” more apropos.

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[crandc]

Karoline Leavitt says she has 'PTSD' over difficult choices with husband, 60

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt says she has 'PTSD' from canceling so many dates with her husband, Nicholas Riccio, with whom she shares a 1-year-old son

www.themirror.com

Gee, I wonder how mothers and fathers deported without their children feel.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[Chris Craig]

Doesn't mean that at all.

 

[crandc]

How does this little Nazi expect to get elected with zero female votes? Does little Nazi understand procedure for repealing constitutional amendment? Or is little Nazi just thinking he will own the libs and feminists because, you know, he is so important we lose sleep over him?

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[Everything Beagle]

He is a burbling pot of creamed corn.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[Everything Beagle]

 

[crandc]

The annual US Human Rights Report used to be a respected guide to state of human rights worldwide.

Used to be.

Trump announced legal abortion, hate crimes laws, support for trans youth and affirmative action policies will now be listed as human rights violations.

Dismembering journalists, concentration camps, invading sovereign country, all apparently OK.

 

[Chris Craig]

That would give the insurance companies all the power.

 

[Everything Beagle]

I suggest Trumplicker.

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[crandc]

Out of nowhere Trump said he will "fix" the century old reflecting pool at Lincoln Memorial, referencing "Biden filth". Will he gold plate it? Or replace with portrait of himself?

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[Phatguysrule]

An actual villain. A real world Lex Luther, but dumber...

 

[crandc]

Trump fired every member of board that is supposed to oversee White House renovations. So no one can object to his gold playing and Marie Antoinette ballroom.

 

[e_blazer]

From a Facebook post by “Texas Reporter”:

“What an Illegal Order Actually Is — And Why the Venezuelan Boat Shootings Might Qualify

People are yelling “treason!” at Senator Mark Kelly for reminding troops of something every recruit learns on DAY ONE:

Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), U.S. service members must obey lawful orders — and must refuse unlawful ones.

That isn’t “treason.”
That isn’t “defiance.”
That isn’t “undermining the chain of command.”

That is literally the LAW.

It’s the cornerstone of military professionalism.

And since so many folks are pretending they suddenly don’t understand what an “illegal order” is, let’s do the work they refuse to do and walk people through it.

⸻

1. What the UCMJ actually says about unlawful orders

Under Articles 90, 91, and 92 of the UCMJ, troops must follow lawful orders.
But the military’s own doctrine is even clearer:

Troops must refuse “manifestly unlawful orders.”
If they follow an illegal order, THEY can be prosecuted.
“Just following orders” is not a defense. That principle comes straight from post-WWII law and is baked into every modern military on Earth.

The idea is simple:

The U.S. military follows the Constitution and the law — not the whims of a politician.

So what’s an illegal order?

Let’s be specific.

⸻

2. What makes an order illegal? (The real definition)

An order is illegal when it requires a service member to:
• Use lethal force where lethal force is not legally justified
• Harm civilians or noncombatants
• Break domestic criminal law
• Violate the Law of Armed Conflict
• Treat noncombatants as enemy combatants
• Use military power as law enforcement without legal authorization
• Engage in disproportionate or unnecessary force
• Commit acts prohibited by treaty or U.S. statute

These standards don’t disappear because a president gets angry, or because social media influencers yell about “toughness.”

The law doesn’t care about vibes.

⸻

3. When is it LEGAL to fire on vessels?

This is where it becomes obvious why people are suddenly uncomfortable.

Under U.S. and international maritime law, you can only use lethal force against a vessel if:

A. The vessel poses an imminent threat

Examples:
• It is firing on U.S. forces
• It is attempting to ram
• It is demonstrating clear hostile intent

B. The vessel is a lawful military target in an armed conflict

This only applies if:
• The U.S. is in a declared or authorized war
• The vessel is an enemy warship or armed combatant

We are NOT in an armed conflict with Venezuela.

C. The vessel refuses lawful commands and poses a threat that cannot be handled by non-lethal means

Even in law-enforcement situations (like drug interdiction), the rules are strict:
• You must hail the vessel
• You must attempt non-lethal compliance measures
• You must try to board
• You must escalate force only when absolutely necessary
• Lethal force is LAST resort and only if there is a threat to life

Drug smuggling suspicion does not make someone a combat target.
Ever.

⸻

4. What is NOT legal?

Here’s what is not allowed:

Shooting a boat because it “might” have drugs
Destroying a vessel because it fled
Using lethal force as a shortcut to interdiction
Treating smugglers as enemy combatants
Blowing up civilian vessels in international waters
Acting like the high seas are a free-fire zone
Using military force without congressional authorization

None of that becomes legal just because the administration spins it after the fact.

⸻

5. Now let’s talk about the Venezuelan boats.

The government is now publicly admitting that U.S. forces have shot Venezuelan vessels out of the water, with the justification that they were “drug boats.”

Even if they were, that doesn’t magically transform those boats into:
• Combatants
• Military targets
• Enemy vessels
• Armed threats

Drug smuggling is a CRIME.
It is not an act of war.

There is no legal theory under which drug suspicion authorizes sinking a vessel.

Which means:

If troops were ordered to destroy those boats without an imminent threat, that is a manifestly illegal order.

Exactly the kind of thing the UCMJ requires troops to refuse.

And this is why the people screaming “treason!” at Mark Kelly don’t want to talk about details. Because once you understand what an illegal order actually is, you realize this isn’t abstract at all.

Some of these orders may already be crossing the line.

⸻

6. Why the political outrage is backwards

Telling troops:
“You must refuse illegal orders”
is not treason.

Ordering troops:
“Shoot that boat even though we’re not in a war, it’s not a threat, and the law doesn’t allow it”
—that’s the thing the UCMJ is designed to prevent.

It’s not complicated:
• Lawful orders must be obeyed
• Unlawful orders must be refused
• Political fantasies do not override law
• Congress controls war, not the president
• The U.S. military is loyal to the Constitution, not individuals

If ExSeth’s Department of Defense is leaning into a “shoot first” posture that doesn’t follow maritime law, then they’re the ones issuing potentially illegal orders, not the people warning troops to follow the law.

⸻

7. Final point

You don’t fix the military by telling troops to obey illegal orders.

You fix the military by making sure the people giving orders understand the law — or are replaced if they don’t.

This isn’t treason.
This is civics.
And the people yelling the loudest are the ones most afraid you’ll learn it.