Posted on 10/11/2023 4:04:09 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
One of the evils of the Trump era was that illegal, immoral, and at times unconstitutional acts were raised to high standards if they seemed to chip away at Trump somehow. So a fake dossier, which consumed several years and millions of dollars of American life, was brushed off with a fine from the elections commission rather than someone going to jail for lying to the FBI. So it is now up to General Mark Milley, the Left's newest and bestest friend in violating the Constitution, to save the Constitution from Trump.
A slithering little piece of hagiography in the Atlantic about Milley (published while he was still Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a position he goes to great pains to explain should be apolitical while himself being very political) might have just been that—a chance to kick the dog one more time without consequence—except for the fact that Milley clearly has higher aspirations in Washington (or at least higher aspirations to sell books), most of all because Trump stands close to a second term.
The article serves up the usual, proclaiming Trump an existential threat to Mom and apple pie, never mind democracy, all without details or explanation. Readers of the Atlantic just know it is true and the author, Jeffrey Goldberg, sees no reason to expand on the idea. The real danger here is not poor journalism (we’re used to it) but the promotion of the idea that Trump is inherently dangerous and, without men like General Milley willing to warp the Constitution, we will all die in some Trumpian nuclear hissy fit.
It is important to restate at this point that Trump finished his four years as president. He started no new wars. He did not launch nuclear attacks on Iran or North Korea, nor antagonize nuclear power Russia closer to the edge of one. He came as close as any modern president to some sort of rapprochement with North Korea. Trump never used the Insurrection Act to send the military against lawful protesters in the United States. It is worth remembering these things because Milley’s comments create the impression of something very different.
A healthy portion of the Atlantic article details what Milley felt was Trump’s disrespect for the military (Trump’s deferments but not Biden's are mentioned.) The Atlantic's Jeffery Goldberg writes. “Milley’s family venerated the military, and Trump’s attitude toward the uniformed services seemed superficial, callous, and, at the deepest human level, repugnant.” Former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, Goldberg continued, “in addition to other former Trump administration officials, also argued the former president had such contempt for the military that it made it challenging to explain concepts of honor, sacrifice and duty. That sour view of the armed forces, alongside Trump being unfit to serve as president among other points of contention, made Milley’s first 16 months as chairman far more difficult than he anticipated.” Retired three-star general James Dubik, one of the general's mentors, said “For more than 200 years, the assumption in this country was that we would have a stable person as president.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theamericanconservative.com ...
Wow, this take down of Milley is superb.
And yet Peter Van Buren couldn’t find the courage in himself to conclude, as President Trump stated, that what TraitorMilley did was treason.
Yes, I didn’t see that.
Maybe treason in America has gone the way of the Constitution.
So many are committing treason it no longer has any meaning.
ping
Milley is quite frankly a disgrace to the uniform. He was never asked to execute an unlawful order from the president or at least has not given any account of Trump giving an unlawful order.
It is a military person’s responsibility to obey and carry out to the best of one’s ability all lawful orders, and the burden of proof on what is lawful or unlawful is on the subordinate. One may not like the order and even dislike one’s commander, but an honorable, duty bound military member executes their orders and does not seek to subvert the chain of command.
Like it or not, Trump was Milley’s commander. Does anyone think conservative Republican military generals liked every order given by liberal Democrat presidents? You can be sure some (many?) did not, but they carried the orders out regardless. Those that could not had a duty to resign or were fired (General Macarthur).
Truman is quoted as saying, “I fired him (Macarthur) because he wouldn’t respect the authority of the President. I didn’t fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that’s not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail.”
Milley should be tried under the UCMJ for insubordination and be stripped of his rank.
I am particularly surprised by John Kelly. You'd think he might have some resistance to political brainwashing. He was an enlisted Marine before going to college and returning as an officer.
bkmk
MIC money or they want to be in the elite circles?
Milley will be richly rewarded by the left for what he did, and will continue to do. Selling out America is in vogue in official Washington, and seems to be very rewarding financially for those doing it. No consequences for bad behavior always leads to more of it.
Milley warns in his Atlantic interview he and others will likely be sent to jail if Trump is reelected. Be sure to vote accordingly.>>>. Jail is the lightest sentence this traitor should hope for.
A charge of treason can only be brought in cases involving enemies of the U.S. subject to formal declarations of war. The U.S. hasn’t charged anyone with treason in decades because the U.S. hasn’t declared war in any of its stupid military campaigns since World War II. The last person convicted of treason in the U.S. was some Japanese-American dude who went to Japan during World War II and served as a prison guard there, then came back to the U.S. after the war.
This is why the Rosenbergs were never charged with treason for giving classified information about the atomic bomb to the Soviet Union. They were executed for their crimes (espionage), but since the U.S. wasn’t at war with the USSR there was no legal basis for treason charges.
I would make the case that career military service requires a certain degree of “brainwashing” by definition.
He’s already been rewarded. He still has his job from the Trump Administration. I expect that if a Democrat won 2024 he’d carry on again as the leftist he is. If not, he’s headed for one of the big MSM venues as consultant.
In today’s Washington, you can’t see the forest for the treason.
Military men are trained to take orders...which might make them vulnerable to being brainwashed.
Such a sentence by Alberta's Child is simply childish babbling. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that specifies treason can only occur in connection with a formal declaration of war.
Also, there are numerous States that have treason against that State defined in the State Constitution, while the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, only gives the U.S. Congress the authority to officially declare war.
And, there have been individuals tried and convicted of treason (in at least one case of treason against a state) during a time in which Congress had not official declared war.
That there are people who have given aid and comfort to the domestic and foreign enemies of the United States who have not been charged with treason says more about the officials who have the duty and responsibility to bring such charges than the traitors themselves.
Finally, the Rosenbergs were charged, tried, and convicted of espionage rather than treason, because their crimes occurred during WWII when the Soviet Union was technically an ally of the United States. If their crimes had occurred after WWII, especially during the 'Cold War,' the Rosenbergs could have been charged with treason.
There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that specifies treason can only occur in connection with a formal declaration of war.
No, but the U.S. Constitution specifically describes aid/support of an "Enemy." And even in a legal system as fouled up as ours you'd have a hard time making a case that a foreign nation is an "enemy" of the United States while we are maintaining full diplomatic (and usually even trade) relations with that country.
Heck -- this whole conversation was exposed as a farce when we had nitwits in government and the media claiming that Donald Trump was guilty of "treason" for allegedly conspiring with the Russians in the 2016 election ... even while U.S. and Russian military personnel were engaged in joint missions to the International Space Station.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.