- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- 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
re: Trump: “The traitors that told the military to disobey my orders should be in jail”
Posted on 11/23/25 at 9:17 am to Azkiger
Posted on 11/23/25 at 9:17 am to Azkiger
quote:
I dunno... We spent years hearing academics and experts telling us that words, even silence, could be violence.
Oooh, ooh!! Stochastic Terrorism!!
I 'member!
0
Posted on 11/23/25 at 9:23 am to RohanGonzales
quote:
I don't know
Of course not, you need daddy Trump to tell you how to think.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 9:25 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Perhaps next they'll senselessly broadcast to the military some other well known truth .... "the sky is blue," or "water is wet"?
When the President of the United States is often arguing water is dry, saying water is wet is seditious.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 9:26 am to hawgfaninc
Well then put up or shut up Donnie
Americans are tired of the bluster and no action
Americans are tired of the bluster and no action
Posted on 11/23/25 at 9:34 am to HighStatus
quote:
You are a frickin idiot dawg.
Where did you go HS?
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:19 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:The PSA was clearly aimed at Trump. But there are three different categories here and everyone is conflating them:
It wasn't even that. They clearly tell people to be on the legal side of the law and Constitution.
-What you think they meant
-What you can actually prove they meant
-What they actually said
Those are not the same things legally, and what they actually said was, “Refuse illegal orders.” Not “refuse Trump’s orders.” Not “refuse lawful orders. ”Not “ignore the chain of command.” Which is already the UCMJ requirement.
If Trump’s orders are lawful, then the PSA doesn’t tell anyone to disobey him. If Trump’s orders are illegal, then troops are already required under UCMJ to refuse them, and that still isn’t sedition. And unless you can point to where they told soldiers to disobey lawful orders, sedition never even enters the conversation.
You can hate the PSA, hate the timing, hate the motive, hate the congressmen, hate the Dems, hate the liberals, hate the fricking sky for being blue. None of that changes the only thing that matters: their actual words.
And honestly, if any service member is dumb enough to refuse a lawful order because of that video, they’ve identified themselves as someone who shouldn’t be in uniform to begin with. UCMJ already handles that. Boot them out and move on.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:29 am to northshorebamaman
quote:Again, as has been pointed out repeatedly, that simply is not true.
None of that changes the only thing that matters: their actual words.
E.g., The “Blind Sheikh” did not give literal, explicit orders like “Go bomb this.” He used coded religious rhetoric and metaphors which his followers understood as instructions for violent attacks. He was convicted of .... wait4it .... seditious conspiracy.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:34 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
E.g., The “Blind Sheikh” did not give literal, explicit orders like “Go bomb this.” He used coded religious rhetoric and metaphors which his followers understood as instructions for violent attacks. He was convicted of .... wait4it .... seditious conspiracy.
And they put a bomb in the parking area at the foundation of the World Trade Center and detonated it. That makes the situation a little different, wouldn't you agree?
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:37 am to RelentlessAnalysis
They said more than that. You haven't watched the video.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:38 am to SallysHuman
quote:
go find the full text of their PSA and we can nitpick it together.
Full transcription.
quote:
Opening narration/visuals: The lawmakers appear on screen in a split-screen format, speaking directly to camera against a neutral background with American flags. Soft, somber music plays.]
[Cut to group statement, with all six speaking in unison or rotating close-ups:]
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (MI, former CIA analyst): “We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now. Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk.”
This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.
Like us you sworn an oath. To defend and protect this constitution. Right now these threats to our constitution are not just coming from abroad. But right here at home.
Right now, our laws are clears. You can refuse to follow illegal orders. You must refuse to follow illegal orders.
No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our constitution.
We know this is hard. And it’s a difficult time to be a public servant. But whether you’re serving in the CIA, the army, the Navy, the Air Force, your vigilance is critical. And know that we have your back.
Because now, more than ever, the American people need you. We need you to stand up for our laws. Our constitution. And who we are as Americans.
Don’t give up. Don’t give up. Don’t give up the ship.
[Closing narration/visuals: Fade to text overlay .”
This post was edited on 11/23/25 at 11:59 am
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:40 am to TBoy
quote:Only in progression to a life impacting end point. Not in intent.
And they put a bomb in the parking area at the foundation of the World Trade Center and detonated it. That makes the situation a little different, wouldn't you agree?
The “Blind Sheikh” neither placed the bomb, nor detonated it.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:46 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
LSUTANGERINE
That version looks a little different than what RA posted... it's missing some parts. Where'd you hunt that one down?
The one I saw specifically accused "this administration" of pitting the military and intelligence against citizens.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:47 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:This is a false declarative assertion and foundational to the rest of the messaging. What is the basis?
Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk
quote:What orders? The implication is clear there are unlawful orders being issued.
By refusing unlawful orders
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:47 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Only in progression to a life impacting end point. Not in intent.
The “Blind Sheikh” neither placed the bomb, nor detonated it.
I understand now. To you, anyone who says something that you take as insulting to Trump is like a mass murderer plotting a terrorist bombing.
You do understand that federal law does not require military personnel to follow illegal orders, don't you? Is following federal law like bombing the World Trade Center? That's pretty much where you are in this.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:48 am to SallysHuman
quote:The version that I found said that there were some introductions before the substantive text, but did not quote them.
That version looks a little different than what RA posted... it's missing some parts. Where'd you hunt that one down?
It appears that the introductions were somewhat more detailed than that article implied.
The transcript from Tangerine does seem to be more complete.
This post was edited on 11/23/25 at 10:51 am
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:49 am to NC_Tigah
quote:Not analogous to this at all. And I know you're smart enough to understand that.
Again, as has been pointed out repeatedly, that simply is not true.
E.g., The “Blind Sheikh” did not give literal, explicit orders like “Go bomb this.” He used coded religious rhetoric and metaphors which his followers understood as instructions for violent attacks. He was convicted of .... wait4it .... seditious conspiracy.
What made his language legally count as instructions was that he was speaking in deliberate coded directives to a group that was literally trained to understand those codes, already organized, and prepared to act. His words were coded into specific operational plans his followers had been taught to interpret, and those followers actually executed those violent acts based on those coded instructions.
It was a specific and documented command language within a structured group trained to understand it. This is nothing like that. There’s no insider lexicon, no operational plan, and no audience trained to interpret hidden instructions.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:51 am to NC_Tigah
Democrats troll Trump looking for overreactions and it works like a charm.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:51 am to TBoy
quote:
You do understand that federal law does not require military personnel to follow illegal orders, don't you? Is following federal law like bombing the World Trade Center? That's pretty much where you are in this.
You idiot. This is something nobody is arguing against. If you served you would know that that fact is drilled into every service member’s head. There was no need for the announcement. However making that announcement while simultaneously saying the president sending national guard to help cities is illegal makes their intent clear. You can play dumb if you want. It’s disgusting you would do so because you hate Trump. But that’s where you are.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:51 am to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
The version that I found said that there were some introductions before the substantive text, but did not quote them. It appears that the introductions were somewhat more detailed than that article implied.
Okay... so both your text and Tange's are correct- they just need to be spliced together?
I just remember when I watched it and typed out a line of it for here, it was a line that was in your version but not Tange's.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 10:52 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Democrats troll Trump looking for overreactions and it works like a charm.
Trumps reaction was “sedition is punishable by death.”
That is a factually correct statement. How is a factually correct statement an overreaction? Or are you saying it is appropriate to consider the circumstances and obvious implications?
Page 6 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News