re: Patel says arrests are coming soon.

So is The Atlantic piece timed to make the FBI arrests look like retaliation?

Love how The Atlantic calls it "reporting"

"Breaking! Kash Patel drinks a bunch! No seriously!"

quote:

---

Is this true when it comes to federal charges?

---

In normal circumstances, no.

This is a circus built on revenge and social media clout, so you can't compare it to a normal prosecution.

A normal prosecution of Brennan, for instance, would be in DC.

There was no crime committed there, so the DOJ not being able to even get an indictment is expected

quote:

---

The UCMJ would be far less forgiving for Sen arse-tronaut

---

For correctly stating the law?

When did telling the truth (regarding publicly available information) become a violation of the UCMJ?

quote:

---

For correctly stating the law?

---

Which law are you referencing?

Kelly was motivating 18 to 20 year-old enlisted personnel to ignore and/or refuse orders which they interpreted as potentially illegal. That is a dangerous call. It certainly would fall within the realm of "influencing discipline of the military."

The UCMJ holds that orders are presumed lawful.
Once more, the UCMJ holds that orders are presumed lawful.

Did Kelly note that the UCMJ holds that orders are presumed lawful?

Did he note that, under the UCMJ, the burden is on the service member to demonstrate otherwise. No, he did not.

Instead Kelly's message inverted that presumption, encouraging troops to presume orders may be unlawful, encouraging reticence to obey first, rather than presuming compliance. That is punishable in the military.

Why is she talking? Why nit arrest, and stop talking. fricking lunatics keep running their mouths and lying. Next, she'll be fired, and no ine arrested. Just watch

Fox ran him off not long ago for being too much of a quack.

quote:

---

Which law are you referencing?

---

The UCMJ

LINK

quote:

---

Do I have the right to refuse illegal orders?

---

quote:

---

Yes! All members of the military have the right, and in some cases have the duty, to refuse illegal orders. Your oath is to the Constitution (which incorporates international treaties ratified by the U.S. on human rights and the law of war), not to the Commander-In-Chief or to any other individual in the chain of command.

Under the UCMJ, a servicemember may be punished by court-martial for failure to obey any lawful general order or regulation. The UCMJ does not define what “lawful” means. The Rules for Courts-Martial say that an order is lawful, “unless it is contrary to the Constitution, the laws of the United States, or lawful superior orders or for some other reason is beyond the authority of the official issuing it.” The Rules go on to say that, “This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime.” Finally, the Rules say, “The lawfulness of an order is a question of law to be determined by the military judge.” That determination normally can be made only after a servicemember refuses or obeys an order, in a court martial or a war crimes tribunal.

---