The doomerism I see in this thread is dumb. This was not a move from strength, but from desperation and weakness. There’s no way this goes well for the administration. Power doesn’t panic, and this was a panic move.
Hell, General Article [134] is so broad you can be tried for pretty much anything your CO can think of, forgot to brush your teeth/hair? General Article … forget to say hello to the unit mascot? GA 134 …
All of that is true, nonetheless, for the average person of average resources having the full weight of a Federal administration, even a weak, flailing, and failing one, can easily wipe out said average person and wreck their lives.
It’s not “doomerism” to acknowledge that.
I do think the six on the video speaking “truth to power” was worthwhile. The fascists hate it when anyone point out they don’t control everything. Due to TACO I don’t think we’ll see any of them swinging from trees but I think those folks will have some bother before this is all over.
The Things That Go Boom will be around for quite some time. That’s the only part of the military they actually like, and even Hegseth’s level of incompetence can’t destroy the US’s installed base of competent soldiers that quickly.
Dictatorship is not a stable form of government. So it never will be hopeless.
I sort of agree with this. If civilian courts were doing what Trump wants, he wouldn’t be trying out military justice.
If a poster comes along who really knows the military justice system, and says something like this in detail, I may (depending on what is said) start thinking you are correct there. Right now, I do not see why this was a dumb move from the POV of an administration trying to lock up enemies.
Questions for anyone confident that Kelly is safe.
Where in the military justice process does this end?
Is NCIS going to conclude Kelly did nothing wrong, refusing to refer the case to a commander?
Does the commander refuse to send it on to a convening authority?
Can a JAG prosecutor then refuse to take the case?
On will a military judge dismiss the case?
And what happens when Hegseth replaces whomever in the process seems to be acting with too much integrity?
As for civilian courts, is there any likelihood they would get involved? Wouldn’t Kelly have to already be convicted before they would possibly look at it?
It hasn’t started. It’s just a referral to the Pentagon (ginned up by Hegseth). Kelly said “You can refuse an illegal order” “Don’t sink the ship”. I don’t imagine anything will come of that. Maybe a nasty administrative letter from Hegseth himself!
100%. Assuming they go the military justice route (which Hegseth said they would), to get him from retired to active duty, the DOD needs to follow federal law. Kelly will challenge that federal law is not being followed correctly/misused/etc. And free speech, and lots of other things I can’t think of.
He’ll have to make those challenges in the military justice system, which, as has been pointed out, is “federal law.” I believe the only way to “civilian courts” is to petition the US Supreme Court after all military appeals have been exhausted.
No, there is a civilan Federal appeals court above the UCMJ, before the Supreme Court.
I hear ya. First, this is all wild wild west litigation so anyone’s guess is as good as mine.
Regardless, an Article 3 Court has jurisdiction to review a recall order. They have done so in the past.
Late: You’re right, it’s all ultimately a federal law. The question is who has jurisdiction to review it and I’d say for recall it’s shared jurisdiction between federal court and military court.
Yes. I guess I shouldn’t have called that a military appeal. But it sort of is.
People are jumping the gun even assuming that an actual investigation is taking place. It’s 50/50 this was a one and done - make the tweet, appease Trump publicly, move into something else.
I think that’s true. But the other 50% says it’s going to happen. We’ll know soon enough I guess.
I’m surprised the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause hasn’t entered the conversation yet.
The FBI plans to interview Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona and five other congressional Democrats in connection with their appearance in a video encouraging members of the U.S. military to refuse to follow illegal orders.
This was posted on X:
Is this a legit post by the legit pentagon X account?
Yes. It’s longer. It also cites a federal law that would apply to something the FBI could theoretically investigate (see above - if the FBI was forced and corrupt).
Who cares about social media? That’s not how military orders are given. If the FBI is going to interview them, then that’s a real investigation (or at least the preliminary to a real investigation); but that’s not the military, so the military stuff may have been nonsense, and now the FBI is doing some ass-covering to look like an actual investigation is occurring.
Is it a common thing for the pentagon to announce an investigation on social media when it’s not investigating and why does it do that?
It hasn’t been common in the past. But much of what the DoD has done in the past 10 months has little precedence and often goes against long standing norms.
The activity in question was not “Speech or Debate in either House.”
Also, (from here)
In interpreting this provision, the Supreme Court has held that the phrase treason, felony, and breach of the peace encompasses all criminal offenses.2 Consequently, Members are only privileged from arrests arising from civil suits, which were common in America at the time the Constitution was ratified.3
Here are the two cites mentioned: