Sen. Kelly sues the Pentagon over attempts to punish him for his warnings about illegal orders

Nordberg said:
Kelly cannot lose this frivolous Trumpian lawsuit. He said in English, a language Trump is very bad at, to ignore ILLEGAL otders. Trump and his army know that. They are doing the case because Trump told them to. He has always used the legal system to punish people who pisses him off or who he can cheat out of money. When Kelly wins, Trump can take satisfaction that Kelly spent time and money defending himself in court. Now, anyone who is unfamiliar with Trump's abuse of the legal system is not. He will drag you to court, even with a bad case, just to harass and punish you. The court is another tool of bullying that Trump loves to use.
Click to expand...
Especially, when he doesn’t have to pay for it!
 
Uncensored2008 said:
It's the UMJC. Your hero, Airman 3rd Class Kelly, incited troops to mutany.

Remember - you stomped your feet and held your breath that nothing would happen.

LOL
Click to expand...
ROFLMAO. Except Hegseth didn't charge Kelly under the UMJC. He didn't dare do that because it would never would have survived the JAG investigation.

Hegseth wrote a letter of censure. Kelly has sued Hegseth and points out there is no legal basis for reducing his rank.

Perhaps you should catch up with reality. Or do you think your cult fantasies are reality?
 
Yakuda said:
The entire purpose of that endeavor was to sow doubt and mistrust in the command structure of the military. It's despicable for anyone to do it but for a retired service member to do it is particularly disgusting. Actions have consequences. I'm sick and tired of people doing whatever they fuck they please and then whine about the consequences. He should have thought before he acted just like that dyke interfering with ICE
Click to expand...
wait are you speaking to what Pete Hegseth and Pam Bondi both said prior to Magats condemning Kelly for the same type statements that are taught in Military schools, and Police academies?
-
As a lawyer for the conservative America First Policy Institute in a Supreme Court brief, Bondi wrote that “military officers are required not to carry out unlawful orders” and added that the military would not carry out an order to kill non-military targets because such an order would be illegal.
Click to expand...


Hegseth said that the military would not follow unlawful orders from their commander in chief and that there is a standard, ethos, and belief in the U.S. military that prevents them from obeying unlawful directives.
Click to expand...

Are those the despicable two you are referring to sowing doubt in the military?
 
Hawkeye10 said:
He is making the claim to have constitutional free speech rights.....military members have much limited free speech rights, and because the UCMJ has been generally ruled to carry over into retirement he does not have the rights he claims to have.

However this dark age is marked by the collapse of the justice system.....Kelly might well find a judge to say otherwise.

Talk on this here:

Click to expand...
He is making that claim as he DOES have a constitutional free speech.

Use the AI and ask if retired or non active service members have the same restrictions as active service members and you will learn that both Pete Hegseth and Kelly had the right to make the same type comments above, while not in active service as any normal, non military citizen does.

Then use the AI and learn about 'Speech and Debate' protections which are not even needed here but kill this complaint against Kelly so badly that it is an embarrassment and reflection of others stupidity that they cannot see that.
 
QP! said:
He is making that claim as he DOES have a constitutional free speech.

Use the AI and ask if retired or non active service members have the same restrictions as active service members and you will learn that both Pete Hegseth and Kelly had the right to make the same type comments above, while not in active service as any normal, non military citizen does.

Then use the AI and learn about 'Speech and Debate' protections which are not even needed here but kill this complaint against Kelly so badly that it is an embarrassment and reflection of others stupidity that they cannot see that.
Click to expand...
I did not say that active is the same as retired so far as free speech goes...I said that retired is not the same as not military.

Pease try to keep up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top