And all were pardoned

You may have heard about the “law and order” Republican outrage when some Democratic politicians reminded service members that they could refuse to obey illegal orders.

Is It Illegal to Urge Troops to Refuse Unlawful Orders?

Chantelle Lee

All six of the lawmakers—Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, Rep. Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Rep. Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania—either served in the military or in national security positions before they were elected to office.

In a video they shared last week, they reminded members of the military and intelligence community that they “can refuse illegal orders” and that “no one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.” 

The Republicans claimed that the warnings amounted to treason.

In contrast, they do not view the events of January 6 as treasonous.

While the Democrats’ comments, which were sound legal advice and did not lead to any injuries, many people were physically harmed during the January 6 riots.

The actions taken that day were so severe that Trump denied having encouraged anyone to attack the Capitol.

Nevertheless, Trump pardoned every one of the rioters, no matter the severity of their actions, while the Democrats who merely quoted the law are being investigated. We should remember that had Hitler’s minions refused his orders to murder innocents in gas chambers, millions of lives might have been spared.

I asked ChatGPT about injuries during the insurrection. Here is the response: Publicly Documented January 6 Injuries (Named Individuals)

• The table above includes all named individuals whose injuries are verifiable in public testimony, court filings, congressional reports, or major news sources.
• The remaining ~135 or so injured officers are not publicly named and appear only as aggregated totals.
• There is no public list of rioters injured (other than deaths), because injuries to rioters were not tracked, and private medical info is not released.

During the Nuremberg Trials, many Germans convicted of war crimes argued that they were “just following orders,” a claim that may have been true in some instances.

However, following illegal orders does not absolve individuals of responsibility for their actions.

According to The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) a soldier is not only allowed to refuse an illegal order — he is legally obligated to refuse it.

U.S. military doctrine (e.g., Army Regulation 190-14, FM 27-10) explicitly state that troops have a duty to disobey unlawful commands.

An order is unlawful if it violates U.S. law, the UCMJ, the Constitution, or the Geneva Conventions, directs a war crime, violates rules of engagement, is not related to a legitimate military purpose, or requires immoral or criminal conduct.

If a soldier follows an illegal order, he may face criminal liability for any resulting offense, even if it was ordered.

If a soldier believes an order is illegal, he may be punished for disobedience (Article 92) unless his belief is reasonable. The soldier should seek clarification when the legality is uncertain.

There is no law against telling a soldier to “disobey illegal orders,” as this statement merely reiterates the soldier’s legal duty. It does not constitute incitement, unlawful influence, or insubordination; it is simply a reflection of what U.S. military law already mandates.

So, if any Democrats are charged with the crime of treason or sedition, it is highly likely that nearly all judges, with the possible exception of Trump’s favorite judge, Aileen Cannon, will dismiss these frivolous cases.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell

Search #monetarysovereignty

Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;

MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell;

https://www.academia.edu/

……………………………………………………………………..

A Government’s Sole Purpose is to Improve and Protect The People’s Lives.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY