Who’s kidding whom?
You know that six former members of the military who by chance happened to be Democrats didn’t just wake up one morning and decide to “remind” members of the military that they are not supposed to obey “illegal orders.” They know that: every member of the military is taught the principle, though few have the fortitude to actually defy a superior officer on that basis. (My father did it at least three times during World War II while in the infantry.) This fake public service message or whatever you’d like to call it was a cheap, deceitful, underhanded way of advancing the Democratic Party’s “autocrat”/”threat to democracy”/”end elections” narrative to smear President Trump while exacerbating the brain fever of Trump Derangement Victims. Oh, it’s clever in the same diabolical way the “It’s OK to be white!” signs were, or the whole Black Lives Matter scam, or “Let’s Go Brandon!” Wink-wink. nudge-nudge, you get what we really mean, don’t you?
Does the video literally mean to tell members of the Armed Services that then should defy the Commander in Chief? Not exactly, just like “Lets Go Brandon!” might really mean you want some guy named Brandon to do well. But nobody’s fooled, and anyone who insists that the messages are innocent and harmless is either really dumb or lying.
The six asshole Democrats are trolling the President. How professional of them. Yecchh. So they are stooping to this. Yes, I know Trump likes to troll Democrats, and it’s unprofessional, unpresidential and unethical when he does it. And when he’s doing it, he’s being an asshole. That doesn’t excuse Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, who organized the stunt, and the other five.
Naturally and foolishly, bit predictable, Trump and Co. took the bait and reacted just as the trollers hoped they would. “Democrat lawmakers are now openly calling for insurrection,” Stephen Miller, President Trump’s deputy chief of staff, wrote on social media. Senator Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.)said in a social media post that the Democratic lawmakers were “mad the American people chose Trump” and were “calling on the Military and Intelligence Community to intervene.” The President, of course, went more bat-guano bonkers than anyone. “This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP??? he wrote in one post. “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” he raged in another.
Mission accomplished! Trump stomped on the flaming bag of poo left on his doorstep. Thus Chuck Shumer could react, “Let’s be crystal clear, the president of the United States is calling for the execution of elected officials,” Sen. Schumer said. “This is an outright threat, and it’s deadly serious. Every time Donald Trump posts things like this, he makes political violence more likely. None of us should tolerate this kind of behavior.”
Gee it would be nice to have a President who could react with considered restraint, wit and grace in such situations. Such a President could easily turn such a crude stunt to his advantage. A prudent POTUS would consult with skilled advisers and wordsmiths to respond with a verbal haymaker. But no, THIS President has to rush to social media to barf up his first, emotional reaction, guaranteeing that his tormentors will be celebrating.
I would have loved to know how Presidents Jackson, Lincoln, Roosevelt (either of them), Coolidge, Truman, JFK or Reagan would have responded to a similar thinly-veiled attack. All I can say in that regard is,” A lot better than Trump.”
Ethics Alarms 
impeachment proceedings for all elected officials might be the most effective an appropriate lesson for these insurrectionists.
-Jut
“Clack Lives Matter” – Click on the other hand, no one cared about (or maybe it was a typo)
Typo. Fixed. That’s a strange one—usually it happens with keys that are next to each other.
I will not try to defend Trump’s reaction. I too agree that a more thoughtful and directed response to the members of our armed forces would have been sufficient. He should have summoned all five persons in that video along with ranking members of Congress to the Whitehouse for a come to Jesus moment.
Slotkin said that the video was produced because some military personnel came to her concerned that the attacks on the drug runners in international waters might not be legal. Maybe those personnel should review our history dealing with pirates. Firs with the Barbary pirates and in recent years with Somali pirates
1801-1805: The First Barbary War
When Thomas Jefferson became president, he refused to pay any more tribute to the Barbary pirates. And in May 1801, two months after he was inaugurated, the pasha of Tripoli declared war on the United States. The US Congress never issued an official declaration of war in response, but Jefferson dispatched a naval squadron to the coast of North Africa to deal with the pirates.
The American Navy’s show of force quickly calmed the situation. Some pirate ships were captured, and the Americans established successful blockades.
The drug lords of Columbia, Venezuela, et al are waging a war in our streets killing over 100,000 people per year. That is the equivalent of twice the number killed in Viet Nam over 12 years and significantly more killed in all the recent gulf wars combined.
They each say they will have the backs of those defying commanding officers orders. Given that the President does not issue orders directly to non-flag officers and such orders are passed down the chain what instructions are they giving to lower level officers, non-comms and enlisted personnel who choose to disregard an order that person believes is an illegal one. I would bet they would be quickly be incommunicado.
The other issue is they also mention obeying the Constitution. Well that means none of us can be prosecuted with hate crime enhancements, affirmative action is null and void, and any other law passed by Congress that could be seen as disparate treatment under the law (14th Amendment) need not be followed. All federal firearms legislation would become null and void because the Constitution leaves regulation up to the states.
I neglected to add the source for the 2 paragraphs relating to the Barbary Pirates.
Barbary Pirates Battled By US Navy 200 Years Ago
Strange war indeed. In the wars that I’m familiar with, and in the one in which I fought, non-combatants did not willingly and repeatedly expose themselves to enemy attacks, nor did they pay the enemy to attack them. In a world more sane, drug users would not be seen as victims in this war, but as collaborators.
Coolidge probably wouldn’t have said a thing, it’s not for nothing that they called him Silent Cal. Andrew Jackson probably would have done an Alexandre Dumas and challenged them to a duel. I could see Teddy Roosevelt’s threatening to give them a righteous butt whuppin’ too. Truman threatened to beat up a critic who spoke ill of his daughter’s singing, so I could see him saying something to the effect that these traitors will face a firing squad. Lincoln might banish them to the Confederacy.
Oh, I think Cal would have has a brisk put-down of the video of five words or less. Andy was also the master of the dismissive shrug “…now let him enforce it.” I’d bet on Teddy making a flamboyant speech about “malefactors,” and Truman saying, “My military will accept the orders of its Commander and Chief and like it.”
Well, let’s think about this. Democrat members of Congress made a video telling military personnel (which might include I.C.E?) they are duty bound to disobey illegal and unconstitutional orders from their superiors, and will absolved if “prosecuted” or disciplined. Got it. It is true and right and ethical and legal. Cool.
Trump, in his usual Trumpian way, said that mutiny and treason are capital offenses punishable by death of convicted. Well, isn’t that also true? Members of Congress are not immune from consequence if they sell national secrets to our national “enemies” and damage national security. If, say Rep. Swallwell (sp ?) shared highly classified information to his Chinese paramour with the requisite mense rea, and that caused damage to the U.S., couldn’t he be charged with treason?
So, we are upset with Trump. That’s Scandal 6004 and he should be impeached (Maxine? Al? Is this thing on?) But, why won’t the media ask why members of Congress felt it necessary to make such a post and only Democrat congressers participated in the video? If it is an immutable truth then it should be bipartisan, ¿right? Sen. Cruz should be up there locking arms with Rep. Crockett, celebrating the military and its objective, nonpartisan standing defending the nation against foreign and domestic threats. But, it’s not. The stunt was intended to poke the Trump Bear to get a rise out of him. A distraction from the ill-advised shut down intransigence or the fact that the Epstein (not the doctor who gave Zeldin some cash but that dead pedoguy) Files flamed out?
jvb
I’d wager that the video is step one in a longer con than just getting Trump to (predictably) lash out in his way. Something more is afoot.
Step two will be a Democrat hack judge (or, perhaps, several judges) declaring some routine action of the admin “illegal!” to set up some kind of “Constitutional Crisis”.
“He still thinks he’s a King! IMPEACH! (again)”
Just a guess.
James, here is a post on Facebook demonstrating public view of the episode the six Democrats are hoping for. I almost made it a separate post, but the writer in question is a friend, and I don’t want to insult him. What would YOU say in response to this?
“In this video members of Congress urge those serving in the military or an intelligence service not to obey illegal orders. This message is true and important and needs to be understood, not only by those who are being asked to carry out illegal orders, but by all Americans.
The speakers don’t say who is issuing the illegal orders they refer to or what the orders are, but on one level at least the answer to that is obvious—they are certainly responding to Trump’s blatantly illegal orders to the military to kill civilians in international waters who are in no way engaged in hostile military action against the United States.
But there is another, deeper level to the video message—one that affects all of us even more directly. There is a very well-founded fear that if Trump succeeds in persuading members of our military and intelligence services to unlawfully kill foreign civilians, he will feel empowered to order them to kill American civilians who oppose him. This is something that Trump has always yearned for the power to do.
And if you doubt that Trump would order the deaths of American civilians, consider the fact that soon after this video was released, Trump announced furiously on social media that those encouraging military and intelligence officers to disobey Trump’s illegal orders are seditious traitors who must be PUT TO DEATH.
That death threat includes me, so I take it very personally.
I think we are going to see a strong backlash in the next few days against Trump’s intemperate death-threat. Once again, he has taken the bait and caused an issue that until now far too few Americans have paid enough attention to and turned it into a huge issue that I think will energize even conservative Americans to rise up against him. This issue—whether the military will, when push comes to shove, defy an unlawful Trump order to shoot and kill us—has always been in my mind the ultimate question in our opposition to Trump.
I have no doubt that Trump is itching to issue such an order—he is being held back only by one gnawing question in the back of his head— will his kill order be obeyed?
Our country’s future may depend on what the answer to that question turns out to be.“
That person is too far gone for civil debate. I think I’d go with “Lighten up, Francis” and move along.
But he is a distinguished, much admired retired lawyer, whose pronouncements are universally treated as gospel on my Facebook feed. He’s witty, analytical and rational…except where Trump is concerned. He’s even a baseball fan! But he clearly believes the most absurd MSNBC doom narratives. I don’t get it, just as I don’t get Curmie’s meltdown. If it can happen to them….
If I were to engage in a meaningful way, I might concede the first point (“those serving in the military or an intelligence service not to obey illegal orders”) and counter the following assertions (which he presents as “fact”) with a lot of “citation needed”:
“Trump’s blatantly illegal orders to the military to kill civilians in international waters“.
Of all the assertions, this is fairly up for debate. Whether or not foreign drug boats are fall under his executive power strikes me as open to interpretation. I honestly don’t know enough about the relevant law to take a hard stance. The rest is nothing more than wild-eyed fever dreams.
“There is a very well-founded fear that if Trump succeeds in persuading members of our military and intelligence services to unlawfully kill foreign civilians, he will feel empowered to order them to kill American civilians who oppose him.” Why is it “well-founded”? He was already President for a full term. How many American civilians did he dispatch with his death squads? Perhaps contrast this with the documented American citizens killed by Obama’s drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan (I don’t know enough about the specifics to take a position on them, but there were American casualties).
“This is something that Trump has always yearned for the power to do.” Again, citation needed. What, if anything, are you basing this wild assertion on ? What has he done which is indicative of such a yearning? While often bellicose, in practice Trump is more of a pacifist than his predecessors. He just updated Teddy Roosevelt’s motto to: “speak LOUDLY and carry a big stick.”
“I have no doubt that Trump is itching to issue such an order—he is being held back only by one gnawing question in the back of his head— will his kill order be obeyed?“
On what, other than your peerless “instinct” are you basing such a wild claim?
I doubt you’d get far with any of this. In my experience, people on Facebook don’t allow their bubbles to be pierced and there’s always an Amen chorus to back them up. It’s why I deactivated my account in 2017 or so (I would have been banned during the “Covid Years” anyway – I don’t miss it). I think this quote from the brilliant “Iowahawk” is what closed the deal for me: https://x.com/iowahawkblog/status/826812467888136198
Were I to rebut this screed, I would focus on the main thrust of my own post, since I believe one has to be deliberately dense to deny it: the video isn’t intended to “remind” military personnel of the Nuremberg rule (which actually pre-dated Nuremberg, hence my Dad’s confidence in telling one of the officers whose illegal order he refused to follow in WWII) but was, and I say obviously, intended to insult Trump, encourage the absurd theory that he is a Nazi in waiting, and to enhance their standing with the Trump-Deranged, like my freind. Since I don’t think he’s deliberately misreading what is right in front of his face, I would ask him directly: What has happened to you? You understand Occam’s Razor: we’ve discussed it. Why are you embracing a crazy conspiracy theory rather than the far more justifiable interpretation?
Godspeed. Let us know how it goes.
No, I’m not going to do it. Our friendship is based on mutual respect and narrow intersections of interest. Its not worth the loss to rush into his irrational side.
Wait. Is this Facebooker one of the 6 Democrat Congressers or just some dude or dudette who vehemently opposes Orange Man Evilest Bad? If the latter, well, methinks the poster overestimates said poster’s influence on U.S. policy, culture, and society. If the former, well, bully for him/her. He/She trolled the Troller in Chief. Nice. We are toast as a country.
jvb
Then there is this from Richard Ojeda, candidate candidate for Congress in North Carolina:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DRU8h2Nk_l3/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
jvb