- 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: Patel says arrests are coming soon.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 9:58 am to WWII Collector
Posted on 4/21/26 at 9:58 am to WWII Collector
quote:
So.. what do we do now?
I mean.. if the 2020 WAS stolen, what do we do?
If the election is proven to be stolen, we get voter ID…. Maybe.
I say maybe because many leftists would not care. It’s “by any means necessary “ for these nutbags.
0
Posted on 4/21/26 at 9:59 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The UCMJ
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.
Can the UCMJ be court-martialed? Asking for Whiskey Pete.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:01 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
Man, if firing the competent career prosecutor to install that old geezer solely because he’ll indict who you want indicted doesn’t inspire confidence, I don’t know what will!
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:02 am to SlowFlowPro
What if the orders aren’t illegal and the congressman just didn’t like them and incorrectly called them illegal and encouraged service members to ignore them?
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:11 am to BBONDS25
First Amendment still controls.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:16 am to Decatur
Wrong. He is still subject to discipline under the UCMJ. Articles 90-92.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:21 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This is a circus built on revenge and social media clout, so you can't compare it to a normal prosecution.
Sure you can. Just compare it to the very normal prosecutions of the Biden era. You defended those as SOP for years.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:21 am to Geekboy
It appears that this train no longer has any significant number of passengers.
Right wingers can only recycle the same BS for so long before even their target audience ignores them. It is starting to happen.
Right wingers can only recycle the same BS for so long before even their target audience ignores them. It is starting to happen.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:25 am to BBONDS25
Not for protected First Amendment speech as a retiree and sitting member of Congress.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:25 am to BBONDS25
I believe you're correct. I saw something about discipline from SecWar. Possibly a Naval court martial.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Not at issue.
Do I have the right to refuse illegal orders?
Sorry.
As I told you the issue is interference with order and discipline, which in this instance is clear.
10 USC 934: Art. 134. General article/ LINK
quote:
The purposes of military law are to
promote justice, to deter misconduct, to facilitate
appropriate accountability, to assist in maintaining
good order and discipline in the armed forces, to
promote efficiency and effectiveness in the military
establishment, and thereby to strengthen the national
security of the United States.
This post was edited on 4/21/26 at 10:40 am
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:56 am to NC_Tigah
The issue here is the First Amendment. Restrictions on protected speech that have been applied to active service members by SCOTUS have never been applied to inactive service members. That’s why Judge Leon granted Kelly’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 10:59 am to Decatur
quote:Patently incorrect!
He is not in active service. He can speak his mind.
He remains subject to military jurisdiction.
Kelly is a retired Captain drawing retired pay. That keeps him within the UCMJ's reach. He never fully left military jurisdiction.
quote:Under the UCMJ, he not only lacks the right to use speech to interfere with military order and discipline, it is against the law.
He has protected First Amendment rights.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 11:01 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
As I told you the issue is interference with order and discipline, which in this instance is clear.
Telling soldiers they don't have to follow illegal orders does not interfere with any lawful order, and has no applicability to the rest of what you said.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 11:03 am to SlowFlowPro
Lol they were hoping young troops would refuse orders.
The only reason they made the horseshite video.
The only reason they made the horseshite video.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 11:05 am to Decatur
quote:No sir.
The issue here is the First Amendment.
The first amendment is not an unlimited right (yelling "fire!" In a crowded theater). Kelly's 1st A right, under the UCMJ, is specifically abrogated if his actions interfere with military order.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 11:06 am to Decatur
quote:
Not for protected First Amendment speech as a retiree and sitting member of Congress.
Wrong. He is still subject to the UCMJ.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 11:07 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
He remains subject to military jurisdiction.
Kelly is a retired Captain drawing retired pay. That keeps him within the UCMJ's reach. He never fully left military jurisdiction.
I don’t dispute this.
quote:
Under the UCMJ, he not only lacks the right to use speech to interfere with military order and discipline, it is against the law.
Citation requested. SCOTUS has never applied the speech restrictions for *active duty* military members to retired military members. You may want to read Judge Leon’s opinion.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 11:09 am to Jbird
quote:
Lol they were hoping young troops would refuse orders.
The only reason they made the horseshite video.
Other than the real reason, which was to have the admin fall into the trap and act like retarded donkeys in response, taking a bunch of public, humiliating Ls in the process.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 11:09 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Kelly's 1st A right, under the UCMJ, is specifically abrogated if his actions interfere with military order.
*a lawful military order
Fixed it for you.
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News