Trump and his allies are quietly “plotting” to “deploy the U.S. Military to quell potential unrest on Inauguration Day” if Trump wins in 2024.

[postman]

Lawsuits, not criminal charges.

What Trump was trying to do was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Which BTW is the highest law in the land.

 

[kyzr]

Matthew Whitaker

Look at Garland protecting Hunter and Joe Biden and then look at Matt Whitaker,
Matt Whitaker wins legitimacy by a mile.

 

[Mac-7]

He/she has to answer to their oath. Just like every soldier in the military., Who have far more power than any bureaucrat.

The oath states that service members must obey the orders given to them

 

[postman]

No, people thought they may have might have could have violated federal law, and used their belief as a cover to not enact policies they disagreed with.

If they don't like it, they should have quit. They are cogs in a machine, not policy makers.

They are oath bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States, above fealty to any person or party.

 

[postman]

The oath states that service members must obey the orders given to them

Actually it states they must obey all "LAWFUL" orders given to them.
That's why the excuse "I was only following orders" didn't fly at Nuremburg.

 

[berg80]

The "deep state" is real. But it’s not what Trump thinks it is.



Hopefully the Supreme Court rules to limit or even better overturn Chevron Deference and we can start to wrangle these agencies back under control.

From your linked article........"Author David Rohde explains how the “deep state” evolved into a sprawling conspiracy theory."

 

[Mac-7]

Actually it states they must obey all "LAWFUL" orders given to them.
That's why the excuse "I was only following orders" didn't fly at Nuremburg.

It should have applied at nuremberg

A soldier in combat is not equipped to decide lawful or unlawfull orders

Its a heads we win, tails you lose situation

 

[berg80]

Look at Garland protecting Hunter and Joe Biden

He hasn't. What were you saying about Whitaker's legitimacy?

Trump A.G.’s Toilet-Scamming Days Come Back to Haunt Him

New reports show Matthew Whitaker allegedly tried to stonewall an investigation into his time with World Patent Marketing.

www.vanityfair.com

 

[martybegan]

They said they would quit.

Former DOJ officials detail threatening to resign en masse in meeting with Trump​

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/23/1107217243/former-doj-officials-detail-threatening-resign-en-masse-trump-meeting#:~:text=Former%20DOJ%20officials%20detail%20threatening,in%20meeting%20with%20Trump%20%3A%20NPR&text=Hourly%20News-,Former%20DOJ%20officials%20detail%20threatening%20to%20resign%20en%20masse%20in,3%2C%202021.

"Threatening"

And for every one that did that, there were 5 still putting sand in the gears.

 

[berg80]

A soldier in combat is not equipped to decide lawful or unlawfull orders

You think burning human beings in gas chambers is ambiguous in terms of it being lawful?

 

[martybegan]

Check again. I'm sure they violated federal law. It's just that Trump couldn't be prosecuted while in office, so no charges were brought, or indictments sought to confirm their illegality.

So "sure".

The President as ELECTED executive decides those things, not some grade 5 SJW wonk.

 

[martybegan]

What Trump was trying to do was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Which BTW is the highest law in the land.

In your opinion, and the opinion of the SJW wonks in question.

It's amazing you want unelected idiots to have power over an elected President.

 

[kyzr]

He hasn't. What were you saying about Whitaker's legitimacy?

Got better links than Vanity Fair?

 

[martybegan]

They are oath bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States, above fealty to any person or party.

They don't get to decide that and keep their job. They should quit.

 

[berg80]

"Threatening"

And for every one that did that, there were 5 still putting sand in the gears.

Sand in the gears is an interesting way to put threatening to resign over Trump naming an unqualified sycophant as AG because the acting AG wouldn't participate in an attempted coup.

 

[Care4all]

Trump= Man of Lawlessness.

 

[berg80]

They don't get to decide that and keep their job. They should quit.

You're missing the obvious. They were trying to defend the constitutional order while Trump was trying to destroy it.

 

[Mac-7]

You think burning human beings in gas chambers is ambiguous in terms of it being lawful?

No

But even in that situation what were german officers supposed to do?

Refuse orders and be shot?

 

[berg80]

Got better links than Vanity Fair?

Got any evidence the info is wrong?

 

[berg80]

No

But even in that situation what were german officers supposed to do?

Refuse orders and be shot?

Refuse orders and shoot Hitler.