That would take too much paper work, and probably be difficult to get a conviction. In the military, your rank and retirement are a privilege which is ultimately granted by the POTUS. You don't have to have a court-martial to have those privileges removed.
I don’t like this because it will set precedent. I am very vocal on social media about a lot of things, mainly the left. So who’s to say that future administrations don’t do something similar to us retirees that have a vocal and negative opinion about them. Are we going to go after every influencer that is retired now or in the future that speaks out against the narrative?
I think their video was stupid, but this is setting a dangerous precedent.
He basically addressed the military and told them not to follow orders, as a Captain. He was wearing his uniform- it takes big balls to do that. He should at least stand trial - it’s seditious.
As a retiree, I’ve given this same guidance to Marines: follow lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones. That’s not political it’s basic UCMJ and LOAC training.
What Kelly said is not different in substance. He did not tell troops to disobey orders, and he was not in uniform that claim is false.
Targeting a retired service member for political speech sets a dangerous precedent. Plenty of us retirees are outspoken online. If this is acceptable, anyone could be next.
You can dislike the video as much as I do, but calling it sedition requires ignoring both the facts and the law.
You’re assuming intent that isn’t supported by either the words used or the legal standard.
Saying “follow lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones” is not sedition… it is literally what every service member is taught from day one under UCMJ, LOAC, and ROE. That guidance exists precisely because unlawful orders can occur, regardless of who the POTUS is, and recognizing that fact is not an accusation, it’s doctrine.
Sedition requires an overt act or conspiracy to undermine lawful authority, not an inference, a “subtext,” or disagreement with political leadership. Courts don’t prosecute vibes or hypotheticals.
Labeling retirees as “enemy combatants” for political speech is far more dangerous than the video itself. That logic abandons due process, ignores settled military law, and is exactly how precedent gets abused.
You’re free to dislike the message like I do, but calling this sedition requires ignoring both the facts and the law and that should concern anyone who actually values the Constitution we all swore to uphold.
Yeah, congress doesn't need to know everything. The information they receive is completely at the discretion of the POTUS, and they should be grateful he tells them anything at all.
Just a drop of the military justice flood that is coming for these clowns.
He gambled & lost. 😭 "To Infamy & Beyond" 😮😵
DO IT.
LFG
FAFO. His wife's disability should cover his losses.
Yeah… she took one for the team and paid a horrible price for it. How he thought he could use that and launch his career is deplorable…
So, he won't face a court marshall? Not sure I agree with that.
That would take too much paper work, and probably be difficult to get a conviction. In the military, your rank and retirement are a privilege which is ultimately granted by the POTUS. You don't have to have a court-martial to have those privileges removed.
Yes, I would love to see Kelly court marshalled-he certainly deserves more punishment.
Hmmm. I thought it'd be more than just a demotion.
Demote his ass down to Seaman Recruit (E-1) and then prosecute him under the UCMJ.
I don’t like this because it will set precedent. I am very vocal on social media about a lot of things, mainly the left. So who’s to say that future administrations don’t do something similar to us retirees that have a vocal and negative opinion about them. Are we going to go after every influencer that is retired now or in the future that speaks out against the narrative?
I think their video was stupid, but this is setting a dangerous precedent.
He basically addressed the military and told them not to follow orders, as a Captain. He was wearing his uniform- it takes big balls to do that. He should at least stand trial - it’s seditious.
https://ucmj.us/894-article-94-mutiny-or-sedition/
As a retiree, I’ve given this same guidance to Marines: follow lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones. That’s not political it’s basic UCMJ and LOAC training.
What Kelly said is not different in substance. He did not tell troops to disobey orders, and he was not in uniform that claim is false.
Targeting a retired service member for political speech sets a dangerous precedent. Plenty of us retirees are outspoken online. If this is acceptable, anyone could be next.
You can dislike the video as much as I do, but calling it sedition requires ignoring both the facts and the law.
You’re right IF you take his statements at face value.
However, what I saw was ill intent. A seditious subtext implying that POTUS is issuing (or will issue) illegal orders.
This seditious intent was meant to place doubt in the minds of our military at a critical time in an actual time of war.
From my POV (also a vet) this man (and the other 5) are enemy combatants, and should face trial for seditious conspiracy.
You’re assuming intent that isn’t supported by either the words used or the legal standard.
Saying “follow lawful orders and refuse unlawful ones” is not sedition… it is literally what every service member is taught from day one under UCMJ, LOAC, and ROE. That guidance exists precisely because unlawful orders can occur, regardless of who the POTUS is, and recognizing that fact is not an accusation, it’s doctrine.
Sedition requires an overt act or conspiracy to undermine lawful authority, not an inference, a “subtext,” or disagreement with political leadership. Courts don’t prosecute vibes or hypotheticals.
Labeling retirees as “enemy combatants” for political speech is far more dangerous than the video itself. That logic abandons due process, ignores settled military law, and is exactly how precedent gets abused.
You’re free to dislike the message like I do, but calling this sedition requires ignoring both the facts and the law and that should concern anyone who actually values the Constitution we all swore to uphold.
There was an overt act.
A video with the unrest of sowing division by DOMESTIC ENEMIES who happen to be former military.
I’m done with this conversation, you keep saying the same thing, and so do I. We disagree.
Plus jail please
Anyone wanna bet he was part of the reason that...
Yeah, congress doesn't need to know everything. The information they receive is completely at the discretion of the POTUS, and they should be grateful he tells them anything at all.
How many times has a Jr staffer leaked something between butt pirating sessions in Senate hearing rooms?
Butt pirating?
Somethings you will have to find on your own.
I'm really not sure if this is something I want to find on my own...
You have chosen wisely.
So, hangin' isn't back in style yet?
Not enough. Demote, remove pension. Imprisonment