- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: DJT on Slotkin/Mark Kelly video - Seditious behavior from traitors. Lock them up???
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:46 am to Vacherie Saint
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:46 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
its a stupid argument.
He accused the of sedition.
Where is the sedition.
1
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:46 am to Bunk Moreland
If H1B Trump doesn't lock them up, he is a lame duck.
No more talking. Actions or STFU
No more talking. Actions or STFU
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No. I'm just preemptively avoiding irrelevant digressions that aren't necessary for the discussion at hand.
They said that the administration is pitting military members and the intelligence community against American citizens. What orders has the CiC given that do this? Be specific.
quote:
If those orders of the CIC are illegal, then is it sedition? Yes or no
What orders are you talking about? Be specific.
This post was edited on 11/20/25 at 10:47 am
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:46 am to BBONDS25
quote:
If you cannot cite an illegal order..what is the point of the message? Think real hard. It’s not even thinly veiled.
Right. The whole video feels like there's a "wink and a nod" pretty much telling military members "you get to decide what an illegal order is" at best.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:47 am to RollTide4547
quote:
No, you don't.
Where is the sedition?
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:47 am to RollTide4547
quote:
At least you didn't deny it.
The laughter should have told you that
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:47 am to SlowFlowPro
Bleeding pussy.
When you're in the cuck chair do you enjoy watching the wife get railed?
When you're in the cuck chair do you enjoy watching the wife get railed?
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:48 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Who gets to define an unlawful order?
The courts, ultimately.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:48 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Who gets to define an unlawful order?
There are conceivably gray areas. You may run the risk of court martial if you disobey a morally ambiguous order that is later deemed lawful. Not everything is as cut and dried as Calley/My Lai.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:49 am to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
They said that the administration is pitting military members and the intelligence community against American citizens.
And that's also irrelevant to the discussion of sedition.
quote:
What orders has the CiC given that do this?
You already quoted the response
quote:
. I'm just preemptively avoiding irrelevant digressions that aren't necessary for the discussion at hand.
Specific examples are not necessary when discussing a concept, generally. It's a diversion to create irrelevant digression.
quote:
What orders are you talking about?
Illegal ones.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:49 am to Houag80
quote:
Bleeding pussy.
where is the sedition?
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:51 am to RogerTheShrubber
If someone accuses the president of being unlawful, then in the next breath asks the military to disobey that president, I think the argument for seditious behavior could certainly be made.
But be consistent in your role as sfp's ventriloquists dummy. If Kelly and Slotkin are protected by the first amendment in accusing the president of criminal behavior, then the president is equally protected in accusing them of seditios language.
But be consistent in your role as sfp's ventriloquists dummy. If Kelly and Slotkin are protected by the first amendment in accusing the president of criminal behavior, then the president is equally protected in accusing them of seditios language.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:51 am to RogerTheShrubber
They are in "the act of fomenting sedition".
They are telling them to disobey orders from their CIC.
Can't make it simpler
They are telling them to disobey orders from their CIC.
Can't make it simpler
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:52 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
dont think that bothers you in the least though
It obviously bothers you a LOT
Handle the situation DJT
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:52 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
If someone accuses the president of being unlawful
They didnt.
Where is the sedition?
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:53 am to Houag80
quote:
They are telling them to disobey orders from their CIC.
Only illegal orders.
What's unlawful about that?
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:53 am to IAmNERD
Remember kids, The same people who told you that saying "go to the capital" was an insurrection are telling you that asking the military to disobey the president isnt sedition.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:53 am to Houag80
quote:
They are telling them to disobey orders from their CIC.
Legally disobey orders that are unconstitutional.
If biden were POTUS, you would love these people.
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:53 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'll ask the same thing I did in the other thread: How can following the law ever be sedition?
The military kills people. In a lot of cases, whether or not it is legal depends on who gave the order.
If a family gets droned in Afghanistan, that is just a mistake, but not illegal because it was ordered by commanding officers.
The military flies into another country without that country's knowledge, storms into a home, and guns down unarmed people. That order is legal because it came from the president.
Should a soldier decide for themselves that those orders are illegal because they are killing unarmed people?
Posted on 11/20/25 at 10:53 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:You don't get to pick and choose which orders to follow. Thats the reason for " that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me". Turned out that the order to take the covid jab was unconstitutional, yet no one could prove that at the time. If they refused to follow the order, they were punished and kicked out (Trump later allowed them to come back if they wanted to). If they followed the unconstitutional order, they now can't untake the jab....
Where is the sedition?
You and your libtard buddies are trying to use this to attack Trump as a dictator.
Page 9 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News