As we all know, some Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Mark Kelly, with previous armed forces or national security experience made a video urging service members not to obey illegal orders. This is crazy. We all know that “I was just following orders” has always been accepted as a valid excuse for things like war crimes.
With the news yesterday that the Pentagon is considering calling Mark Kelly back to active duty so it can court martial him and the news today that the FBI is seeking interviews with the lawmakers who participated in the video, it’s fairly clear that we need to clarify a few things. So here goes.
- Service members take an oath to support and defend Donald Trump. This means that the law (including the Constitution and the Uniform Code of Military Justice) does not take priority over the orders, wishes, and whims of Trump and his minions, including Pete Hegseth.
- In fact, if Hegseth is drunk at the time he gives an order, our troops are to execute those orders with even greater speed and efficiency.
- To suggest that the troops may owe greater loyalty to the law than they owe to Trump and his lackeys is seditious.
- In fact, the word “seditious” is defined as conduct that frustrates, impedes, questions, or irritates Donald Trump.
- That the Democratic lawmakers may not have realized that fact is no excuse. If ignorance of the law is no excuse for criminal conduct, surely it is even more true that ignorance of Trump’s whims and desires is inexcusable.
- Inexcusable to the point of treason punishable by death.
- That the Democratic lawmakers may not have realized that fact is no excuse. If ignorance of the law is no excuse for criminal conduct, surely it is even more true that ignorance of Trump’s whims and desires is inexcusable.
- The FBI’s involvement in this matter is surprising because I thought the Bureau was spending all its time providing security for Kash Patel’s girlfriend.
- The Bureau’s apparent ability to multitask is really admirable and is a tribute to Kash Patel’s unique brand of leadership.
One hopes that these clarifications (as well as the investigations themselves) will persuade others to temper their rhetoric and recognize who is in charge here.