re: DJT on Slotkin/Mark Kelly video - Seditious behavior from traitors. Lock them up???

quote:

---

They didnt say pick sides. They said "FOLLOW THE LAW and CONSTITUTION."

---

Was the killing of Osama Bin Laden following the law? Did he get due process per the Constitution? Would a soldier have been justified in refusing to carry out that mission, or would he have been court-martialled?

quote:

---

How can following the law ever be sedition? How can following the law ever be sedition? How can following the law ever be sedition? How can following the law ever be sedition? How can following the law ever be sedition? How can following the law ever be sedition? How can following the law ever be sedition? How can following the law ever be sedition?

---

This shall be your Legal Formalist mantra. You will appeal that there is ONLY the letter of the law and never the Spirit of the Law. And you will win this legal battle when seditious behavior is carefully couched in Constitutional legalese. But America will lose a far more important battle.

There is something larger in play here, Slow-and I say this in friendship and respect for your intellect. This is a POLITICAL PROVOCATION of the first order. It is a declaration of war, just within the legal boundaries, of resistance within our military and intelligence bureaucracies. And BECAUSE MEN ARE NOT ANGELS, many who oppose the administration, will use it to undermine military order and legitimate national security obligations. In other words-those down the ranks will use this appeal to Constitutional obligation to behave extra-constitutionally. Again, because each man is guided by his conscience and not all will be what you refer to as "following the law". Some will just want to shut down the Bad Orange Man who has the Constitutional authority of the Executive Branch.

So, you have an act of LEFTIST AGITPROP which is formally legal but which is in every practical way a call for the spirit of two-party rule to be ignored or disrupted. This is saying -ONLY DEMOCRATS HAVE THE MORAL AUTHORITY TO GOVERN/THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS UNFIT TO GOVERN. The latter which was decided at the ballot box and to oppose that is in every way in the spirit of seditious/insurrection etc.

Lastly, if this advice is followed it would accomplish the following: ruined lives and ruined careers, a weakened Body Politic, an increase in the likelihood that the culture wars get hot, an increase in the likelihood of foreign espionage, a weakening of our political system etc. There is literally no UPSIDE to America of doing this-other than the political gain by the minority party. It is an EXTREMELY dangerous game of intentional national disunity and not one that you should support.

Join me Slow, in being an American. Join me in supporting American traditions, principles, ideals and Institutions. All of those are more essential, honest and virtuous than partisan borderline Revolutionary Leftist legal formalism. Demonstrate some WISDOM outside of your legal formalist world view or you will wake up in a world where neither wisdom or the Rule of Law is valued.

quote:

---

However, the implication of the message was that ANY order coming from the current president is likely to be an illegal one.

---

I didnt see this, which is why they asked soldiers to use their intuition and understanding.

IF an order is unconstitutional...not 'disobey all orders"

quote:

---

When they said follow the law and constitution, absolutely not.

---

When they said this administration is pitting m/ic against citizens they absolutely were.

The term "pitting against" implies there are sides. They put Trump on one side, citizens on the other... then reminded the m/ic of their oath and that the threat came from within.

Goodness gracious you are willfully obtuse.

quote:

---

When they said this administration is pitting m/ic against citizens they absolutely were.

---

Sure.

But the part that Trump is raging about they didnt. He's wrong, and this is dangerous.

quote:

---

Obama droned American citizens without due process

---

And everyone here complained.

At some point you have to ask after 10 pages, is arguing about this worth the effort? You are not going to change each other's minds.

Like SFP, I am not a legal scholar. Though common sense will show that they are playing a very dangerous game with this PSA.

quote:

---

If its legal.

---

Based on what? Their personal understanding of the law? The authority of the commander? The liberal judge in DC tossing out the injunction?

What should a soldier base this on? If the law is so clear, why all the injunctions?

You think these dems needed to take time out of their schedule to simply, and without implication, remind soldiers that they dont have to follow unlawful orders? How fricking stupid are you?

Why are multiple democrats who dislike Trump making videos?