I think what they did was despicable. I don't agree with the president. They should be put in jail.But I do believe what they did was despicable. They need to explain themselves. >> He endor too far saying punishable. >> I think they went too far.Well, yeah. I think that's over the top. But the point you're missing here is you had six members of Congress openly encourage members of the military to dispay orders of this president without giving an example of order that is illegal.I think they're despicable. ...

Donald Trump called Democratic lawmakers traitors today for reminding active duty service members that they are obligated to refuse illegal orders, but it's worth remembering that this is not a radical concept. This is literally the law. And also, here's what Maryland Governor Wesmore told me just last month.We take the oath that we are going to follow the Constitution of the United States of America and we will follow the lawful orders of the commander-in-chief. That's the struggle. >> Mhm.>> That I think ...

RT Mark Paoletta (@MarkPaoletta)NEWS ALERT: JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS becomes the 5th longest serving Justice in our nation’s history (12,447 days – 34 years, 28 days) TODAY, and his profound influence on American jurisprudence grows more every day.Justice Thomas’s more than 763 opinions have laid a path back toward the constitution, and many of Court’s recent decisions - admin state (Loper Bright striking down Chevron deference), affirmative action (Harvard), abortion (Dobbs), 2nd Amendment (Bruen), universa ...

First of all, I don't do fear well. Very clearly, Donald Trump is trying to intimidate and make us afraid so we won't stand up and fight for the Constitution and the rule of law. Uh he's wrong. You know, those of us who made those statements have all taken oaths to this country in uniform and as national security professionals. Those are lifetime oaths and I intend to keep mine. And what that oath requires, not only that I stand up for the Constitution myself, but that I ensure that others are doing the sam ...

Political Discourse & National Security - The report highlights a controversy surrounding a video featuring six Democratic lawmakers, all military veterans or former national security officials, who urged military and intelligence personnel to uphold their oath to the Constitution and refuse illegal orders [1] - Former President Trump responded to the video by calling it seditious behavior punishable by death, escalating the political tensions [1] - House Speaker Mike Johnson acknowledged the inappropriateness of encouraging troops to disobey orders, raising concerns about national security [10] - The White House is allegedly considering using the military against drug cartels in a manner that some legal experts believe could amount to extrajudicial killings [17] - Concerns are raised about the legality of potential military actions against alleged drug smuggling boats near Venezuela, with a senior military lawyer disagreeing with the administration's position [17] Legal & Ethical Considerations - The Uniform Code of Military Justice mandates that military personnel have a legal and ethical obligation to refuse unlawful orders, a principle rooted in the Nuremberg trials [4][5] - The legality of potential military actions against drug cartels is questioned, particularly concerning the potential for extrajudicial killings and the need for congressional approval [17][23] - The White House's legal justification for military actions against cartels is based on the argument that they are similar to ISIS or al-Qaeda, posing an existential threat to the United States [21] Congressional & Executive Branch Dynamics - The report underscores a deep divide between Democrats and Republicans regarding the role of Congress in checking the power of the executive branch [6][14] - Republican leadership is accused of prioritizing allegiance to former President Trump over their constitutional duty to provide checks and balances against the executive branch [15] - The report suggests that the executive branch is potentially misusing the military and proposing illegal actions, creating a context for the Democratic lawmakers' statement [19][20]

If you're looking for the strongest and most effective push back on the Trump administration, it's coming from Democratic governors. Folks like Gavin Newsome of California, who has been leading the fight against Republican redistricting efforts ahead of next year's midterm elections. On Friday, the Justice Department announced they will join an existing lawsuit with California Republicans in an effort to block the state's new congressional redistricting plan, which voters overwhelmingly approved just last w ...

So, one week ago today, we saw the total drubbing of Republicans by Democrats around the country. And it was not just the topline races, the gubanatorial races we were looking at. The further down the ballot you went, the more convincing the victory was in some ways.One particular election stands out in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. It's a suburban swing county just outside Philadelphia. The Republican incumbent sheriff there had entered into a voluntary contract to collaborate with ICE.And last week, that MA ...

A federal judge has now blocked the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon. The judge, who was appointed by President Trump, ruled that the administration violated the Constitution when it sent the Guard to Portland last month. She rejected arguments from government lawyers who'd argued that the protest blocked ICE officers from performing their duties.The administration can appeal that decision. ...

I think what's really at stake most of all is whether or not the president has violated the constitution because again we have to go all the way back to the founding of our country. You know, no taxation without representation is on that license plate on everybody in the District of Columbia. And what it really is saying is the Constitution gives to the Congress, not to the president, the power to impose taxes or tariffs. the Constitution gives to the Congress, not to the president, the right to regulate fo ...

Well, as we reported here last night, Donald Trump will not have a third term in the presidency. We're beginning once again tonight with something that is not actually news. Shouldn't shouldn't be treated as news.Today, even Donald Trump himself gave up the game of using talk of a Trump third term as a way of diverting news attention away from the Trump cruelties, especially the denial of food to hungry people around the world and soon here in the United States. That is what the third term talk was supposed ...