ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 1 of 18
1 234511 > Last »
Patteeu Memorial Political Forum>Treason? Mark Milley
BleedingRed 01:04 PM 09-14-2021



[Reply]
Ninerfan11 01:05 PM 09-14-2021
Doesn't matter. None of these dudes will ever be punished, the system allows it.
[Reply]
BleedingRed 01:07 PM 09-14-2021

[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 01:07 PM 09-14-2021
Bastards undercut Trump on the thing he did best, call China out on the carpet.
[Reply]
Bowser 01:09 PM 09-14-2021
If true, that is absolutely treason
[Reply]
Donger 01:09 PM 09-14-2021
Milley's fear was based on his own observations of Trump's erratic behavior. His concern was magnified by the events of January 6 and the 'extraordinary risk' the situation posed to US national security, the authors write. Milley had already had two back-channel phone calls with China's top general, who was on high alert over the chaos in the US.

Woodward and Costa also write that 'some might contend that Milley had overstepped his authority and taken extraordinary power for himself,' but he believed his actions were 'a good faith precaution to ensure there was no historic rupture in the international order, no accidental war with China or others, and no use of nuclear weapons.'
[Reply]
BleedingRed 01:11 PM 09-14-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Milley's fear was based on his own observations of Trump's erratic behavior. His concern was magnified by the events of January 6 and the 'extraordinary risk' the situation posed to US national security, the authors write. Milley had already had two back-channel phone calls with China's top general, who was on high alert over the chaos in the US.

Woodward and Costa also write that 'some might contend that Milley had overstepped his authority and taken extraordinary power for himself,' but he believed his actions were 'a good faith precaution to ensure there was no historic rupture in the international order, no accidental war with China or others, and no use of nuclear weapons.'
There is no way to sugar coat clear treason........
[Reply]
Just Passin' By 01:12 PM 09-14-2021
It's ok, though, because



ORANGE MAN BAD!
[Reply]
BleedingRed 01:12 PM 09-14-2021
Donger,

Admit his actions were treason......Just admit it
[Reply]
Donger 01:13 PM 09-14-2021
Twice in the final months of the Trump administration, the country’s top military officer was so fearful that the president’s actions might spark a war with China that he moved urgently to avert armed conflict.

In a pair of secret phone calls, Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, assured his Chinese counterpart, Gen. Li Zuocheng of the People’s Liberation Army, that the United States would not strike, according to a new book by Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward and national political reporter Robert Costa.

One call took place on Oct. 30, 2020, four days before the election that unseated President Trump, and the other on Jan. 8, 2021, two days after the Capitol siege carried out by his supporters in a quest to cancel the vote.

The first call was prompted by Milley’s review of intelligence suggesting the Chinese believed the United States was preparing to attack. That belief, the authors write, was based on tensions over military exercises in the South China Sea, and deepened by Trump’s belligerent rhetoric toward China.

“General Li, I want to assure you that the American government is stable and everything is going to be okay,” Milley told him. “We are not going to attack or conduct any kinetic operations against you.”

In the book’s account, Milley went so far as to pledge he would alert his counterpart in the event of a U.S. attack, stressing the rapport they’d established through a backchannel. “General Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise.”

Li took the chairman at his word, the authors write in the book, “Peril,” which is set to be released next week.

In the second call, placed to address Chinese fears about the events of Jan. 6, Li wasn’t as easily assuaged, even after Milley promised him, “We are 100 percent steady. Everything’s fine. But democracy can be sloppy sometimes.”

Li remained rattled, and Milley, who did not relay the conversation to Trump, according to the book, understood why. The chairman, 62 at the time and chosen by Trump in 2018, believed the president had suffered a mental decline after the election, the authors write, a view he communicated to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in a phone call on Jan. 8. He agreed with her evaluation that Trump was unstable, according to a call transcript obtained by the authors.
[Reply]
Bowser 01:14 PM 09-14-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Milley's fear was based on his own observations of Trump's erratic behavior. His concern was magnified by the events of January 6 and the 'extraordinary risk' the situation posed to US national security, the authors write. Milley had already had two back-channel phone calls with China's top general, who was on high alert over the chaos in the US.

Woodward and Costa also write that 'some might contend that Milley had overstepped his authority and taken extraordinary power for himself,' but he believed his actions were 'a good faith precaution to ensure there was no historic rupture in the international order, no accidental war with China or others, and no use of nuclear weapons.'

[Reply]
Donger 01:14 PM 09-14-2021
Originally Posted by BleedingRed:
Donger,

Admit his actions were treason......Just admit it
We aren't at war with China, so no, it's not treason.
[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 01:14 PM 09-14-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Milley's fear was based on his own observations of Trump's erratic behavior. His concern was magnified by the events of January 6 and the 'extraordinary risk' the situation posed to US national security, the authors write. Milley had already had two back-channel phone calls with China's top general, who was on high alert over the chaos in the US.

Woodward and Costa also write that 'some might contend that Milley had overstepped his authority and taken extraordinary power for himself,' but he believed his actions were 'a good faith precaution to ensure there was no historic rupture in the international order, no accidental war with China or others, and no use of nuclear weapons.'
That's all a load of Orange Man Bad horse crap.

Trump was a total Dove on the war front. Despite the Democrats and others constantly trying to paint him as a danger to start a war, or launch a nuke.

Christ, you'd think we were talking about Hillary.
[Reply]
Nixhex 01:15 PM 09-14-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Milley's fear was based on his own observations of Trump's erratic behavior. His concern was magnified by the events of January 6 and the 'extraordinary risk' the situation posed to US national security, the authors write. Milley had already had two back-channel phone calls with China's top general, who was on high alert over the chaos in the US.

Woodward and Costa also write that 'some might contend that Milley had overstepped his authority and taken extraordinary power for himself,' but he believed his actions were 'a good faith precaution to ensure there was no historic rupture in the international order, no accidental war with China or others, and no use of nuclear weapons.'
If he is allowed to get away with this then what is to stop anyone in Milley's position from going rouge like this and saying it was "good faith precaution"? A very dangerous precedent if you ask me. He should absolutely be released of duty immediately and possibly be charged with treason.
[Reply]
BleedingRed 01:16 PM 09-14-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
We aren't at war with China, so no, it's not treason.
Fine Seditious Conspiracy

2384. Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
[Reply]
Page 1 of 18
1 234511 > Last »
Up