- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
This is what Trump should nail Slotkin with:
Posted on 11/20/25 at 5:48 pm
Posted on 11/20/25 at 5:48 pm
U.S. Codes
Chapter 439
TITLE I
Secti on 1. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person, with intent to
interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline
of the military or naval forces of the United States—
(1) to advise, counsel, urge, or in any manner cause insubordina-
tion, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the
military or naval forces of the United States; or
(2) to distribute any written or printed matter which advises,
counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of
duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United
States.
(b) For the purposes of this section, the term “military or naval
forces of the United States” includes the Army of the United States,
as defined in section 1 of the National Defense Act of June 3, 1916,
as amended (48 Stat. 153; U. S. C., title 10, sec. 2), the Navy, Marine
Corps, Coast Guard, Naval Reserve, and Marine Corps Reserve of the
United States; and, when any merchant vessel is commissioned in the
Navy or is in the service of the Army or the Navy, includes the master,
officers, and crew of such vessel.
Sec . 5. (a) Any person who violates any of the provisions of this
title shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $10,000 or
imprisoned for not more than ten years, or both.
Loyalty and Morale should be the main focus.
There are plenty of servicemen who would gladly testify about being negatively influenced...
Convict them and put them behind bars for a year along with nine years of probation.
Chapter 439
TITLE I
Secti on 1. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person, with intent to
interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline
of the military or naval forces of the United States—
(1) to advise, counsel, urge, or in any manner cause insubordina-
tion, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the
military or naval forces of the United States; or
(2) to distribute any written or printed matter which advises,
counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of
duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United
States.
(b) For the purposes of this section, the term “military or naval
forces of the United States” includes the Army of the United States,
as defined in section 1 of the National Defense Act of June 3, 1916,
as amended (48 Stat. 153; U. S. C., title 10, sec. 2), the Navy, Marine
Corps, Coast Guard, Naval Reserve, and Marine Corps Reserve of the
United States; and, when any merchant vessel is commissioned in the
Navy or is in the service of the Army or the Navy, includes the master,
officers, and crew of such vessel.
Sec . 5. (a) Any person who violates any of the provisions of this
title shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $10,000 or
imprisoned for not more than ten years, or both.
Loyalty and Morale should be the main focus.
There are plenty of servicemen who would gladly testify about being negatively influenced...
Convict them and put them behind bars for a year along with nine years of probation.
This post was edited on 11/20/25 at 6:29 pm
Posted on 11/20/25 at 5:51 pm to Chip82
Slotkin's response to Trump's post was actually craftily measured... I think Kelley and the other dude might have talked themselves into a corner though with their "clap backs".
Slotkin is worrisome. She's the smart one in that bunch. The dudes are retards.
Slotkin is worrisome. She's the smart one in that bunch. The dudes are retards.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 5:53 pm to Chip82
Thank you for doing the leg work ;)
Posted on 11/20/25 at 5:59 pm to whereishobson
There should be a federal crime for being fugly and stupid.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:15 am to SallysHuman
quote:
Slotkin is worrisome. She's the smart one in that bunch.
She is Jewish
This new version of the Democrat Party passed on Shapiro for VP..
She has a limited ceiling as well.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:16 am to Chip82
quote:
There are plenty of servicemen who would gladly testify about being negatively influenced...
By being reminded to follow the law and Constitution?
Unpack that for me
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:24 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
By being reminded to follow the law and Constitution?
From the same party that routinely dismisses the 2A as if it doesn't exist? How's that for "following the Constitution'? Unpack that, Counselor.
I have said it before, and I'll say it again...maybe one day you'll wake up and realize why you receive the amount of scorn you get on here. Or maybe you just do this for fun.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:25 am to SallysHuman
I do know Speaker Johnson specifically stated the DOJ and Pentagon were looking into the matter. That particular statute noted above is spot on and must be used to stop this going forward.
Arrest them all now and give each of them the maximum sentence. Only then will such dialogue end.
Arrest them all now and give each of them the maximum sentence. Only then will such dialogue end.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
follow the law
By using the word, "illegal," without providing any concrete example, they have established confusion, uncertainty and an overall negative reaction.
Their intent is to negatively impact both morale and loyalty. (This establishes probable cause based on the wording of the statute)
Any honest judge would find, "standing" according to the wording of the statute.
You, of course, are just pretending that this is a legitimate concern for the men and women in uniform.
Most see through this as being a purely political gimmick.
You know darn well know that these Democrat politicians don't give a rat's arse about the military honor code over their own political agendas.
This post was edited on 11/21/25 at 8:52 am
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
By being reminded to follow the law and Constitution?
Unpack that for me
You are not that fricking stupid.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:35 am to SallysHuman
quote:
Slotkin's response to Trump's post was actually craftily measured... I think Kelley and the other dude might have talked themselves into a corner though with their "clap backs".
Slotkin is worrisome. She's the smart one in that bunch. The dudes are retards.
She's career CIA.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:36 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
There are plenty of servicemen who would gladly testify about being negatively influenced...
By being reminded to follow the law and Constitution?
Unpack that for me
When she implies that everything the CIC is doing is "illegal," then yeah. It's a fricking problem. You know this but your TDS clouds your judgement. Nerd.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:37 am to RohanGonzales
quote:
quote:
By being reminded to follow the law and Constitution?
Unpack that for me
You are not that fricking stupid.
Yes. He is. TDS broke him.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:44 am to SallysHuman
Kelly and the other guy are both retired military, which means they are still subjected to the UCMJ. Both can get court martials for statements they have made just in that video. The fact they put Army and U.S. Navy in their titles while making those statements are a huge no-no.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:52 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
By being reminded to follow the law and Constitution?
They aren’t now?
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:56 am to Chip82
POTUS Trump should respond with:
We need to alert the aides and employees of Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) - Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
- Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) - Rep. Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.) - Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) - Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.):
Congressional aids shall NOT follow the orders of any elected Congress person if they feel those orders are unethical, illegal or differ with their 'understanding' of the Constitution.
That's especially true of the orders of Sen Elissa Slotkin as she's considered usually unstable even by democrat standards.
Remember congressional aides - YOU make the call on what 'orders' these congress people give you. IF it doesn't 'feel' right or differs with YOUR interpretation of the Constitution - don't do what they ask.

We need to alert the aides and employees of Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) - Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
- Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) - Rep. Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.) - Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) - Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.):
Congressional aids shall NOT follow the orders of any elected Congress person if they feel those orders are unethical, illegal or differ with their 'understanding' of the Constitution.
That's especially true of the orders of Sen Elissa Slotkin as she's considered usually unstable even by democrat standards.
Remember congressional aides - YOU make the call on what 'orders' these congress people give you. IF it doesn't 'feel' right or differs with YOUR interpretation of the Constitution - don't do what they ask.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:57 am to SlowFlowPro
By being reminded to follow the law and Constitution?


Popular
Back to top
5










