Worried Trump could 'go rogue,' Milley took top-secret action to protect nuclear weapons

] I'm a democrat as well as hundreds on this forum. You called me F'd up and yet the board does not see fit to remove your insult. The fact is it’s absolutely to your liking that Trump claims he is still the legitimate president to the U.S. to millions of his followers. Not once have you denounced him and you agree entirely with him that Biden is not legitimate I've asked you many times about this and you say nothing. . The fact that this Forum has not removed your insult which is far more drastic than anything I have been accused of labeling us as F'd up democrats after removing numerous comments of mine says more about this forum than it does me. As I've said this forum has removed numerous of my statements regarding your investment in Trumps declaration that he is the legitimate president. This bias in your direction is obvious and it's too late to correct. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen rules inconsistently applied to me. This forum applies rules inconsistently arbitrarily and is totally unfair to those who whose views it doesn’t like. It denies freedom of speech. It is and never has been fair and honest.

 

Truman knew how to handle it.

 

What's to disagree with? I quoted the law to you. Milley is due to testify before a Congressional Committee shortly and will answer those questions, either in open or closed session. The book says essentially what you said and what he told the Chinese, Pelosi and the officers of the National Commend Center. The officers who follow the President's orders are compelled to follow ONLY lawful orders. If they doubt the legality of the order, other people become involved. I'm guessing, but I suppose "other people" includes the National Security Council principals (one of whom is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs).

 

It restricts him to sending forces somewhere to 60 days and then must seek Congressional approval.

Cite that part that says a President cannot launch a nuclear attack if in his judgement it is necessary and must seek Congressional approval. I have posted specific cites that it is SOLELY the discretion of the President, there is no other commissions or permission required.

 

I quoted that part in my post...it's either a Congressional declaration of war, statutory law in the form of an Authorization to Use Force, or an emergency retaliatory attack after being attacked first.

 

You're partly correct but there is a chain of command that can put tons of pressure on him and slow him down. If he wakes up in the middle the night and decides to bomb Russia just out of sheer anger without provacation or preperation the chain of command could slow him down and litteraly grind him to a halt.

 

I think the 60 day provision applies to the President's "emergency powers," i.e. his initial response would still have had to be in response to an attack...i.e. although Congress passed an AUF following 9/11, Bush could have responded initially with a defensive attack against Al Qaeda, under "emergency powers," for 60 days without a Congressional declaration of war and/or an AUF.

 

The only violation was in the political minds of Pelosi and company which evidently includes Milley.

 

Trump believes the election was stolen, so did Hillary and she probably still does. Looks pretty on target to what I was saying.

 

Fortunately, there was no violation of the law, which what Milley was assuring Pelosi and the Chinese of...i.e. everything is under control...we're still a nation under law.

 

Pelosi thought that up because it will be a wonderful talking point when Trump runs again. Milley played along. If someone needed to contact the Chinese it should have been someone the President chose. He might even have given the job to Milley. There was no actual problem, it's all politics we can be proud of.

 

You're playing down The Big Lie and the January 6th riot.

 

The rules are the same if it was Biden. The office is what we honor when push comes to shove.

 

The SecDef can give his opinion. An emergency 25th would have to be called to remove the President. Ever read or watch Fail-Safe?

But the bottom line is the JCSC would have NO ROLE in the matter. He is NOT in the chain of command and Milley acted in gross subordinate implying he did have command authority or could intercede in a nuclear launch.

 

I agree. Biden was in Pence's position in the 2017 joint session that placed Trump in the Presidency.

 

He never said he had "command authority," but he was part of the decision-making process that, by law, officially advises the President on military affairs.

 

No, the President could launch a nuclear attack, he alone has the authority and would need no permission and especially from Congress.

"The advisers may or may not join the conference in a timely way. If a brewing crisis suddenly escalates and catches them off guard, key advisers may fail to get on the call before a president decides the time to strike has arrived. During nuclear release exercises and real-world incidents involving North Korea and other nations over the past decade, missile launch preparations or actual firings posing a potential threat triggered emergency conferences, but notification often failed to reach key advisers in time. Sometimes none of the advisers checked in, leaving the president and the head of Strategic Command (StratCom), whose role is to brief the president on nuclear options and their consequences, alone in the hot seats.5

After this briefing, the president may seek advice from any, all, or none of the advisers in the room or on the telephone before rendering a decision, which likely but not necessarily involves choosing a preprogrammed option.6 Formally, he does not need any approval or consent, although StratCom or others on the call could attempt to dissuade the president if his thinking or final decision veer into the realm of the obviously misguided or illegal.7 Even the defense secretary has no particular role other than offering advice if asked. Contrary to widespread belief, he does not confirm the order or otherwise bless it in any way. But this is their last chance to change the president’s mind before a formal launch order is prepared by the Pentagon, disseminated, and inexorably implemented."
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/201...-checks-presidential-nuclear-launch-authority

 

He was injecting himself into the chain of command that is claiming and attempting to exert a command authority of which he has NONE. He has no role in any command decision other than to give the President his advice IF the President elects to seeks it.

 

Trump would unleash a nuclear attack for no reason at all, you would come to this forum to defend him before you get nuked.

Of course, the fact that the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army is concerned about Trump's mental state doesn't trigger any questioning from you.

Better to call Milley a traitor than to question your own blind devotion.

 

Your hasty conclusion about Milley without a legal trial shows reckless rush to Judgement and lack of concern for the legal process to make that decision.

Totally wrong. The chain of command would never allow use of nuclear weapons without provocation or preparation. No Generals would simply allow world war III to occur unprovoked and for no reason what-so -ever. This is a grey area but the fact that you put your trust in pure insanity/suicide by a supposedly helpless chain of command shows that your judgment and reasoning are off the wall and other worldly. On post 1514 you labeled me as F'd up. I am a Democrat and you felt free to say: “And we didn't have a sick crazy f'd up president there was NEVER a thought given to some nuclear launch that was all made up nonsense by a sick crazy F'd up MSM/Democrats/Lefist.” F'd up Dems could include all Democrats even me since you didn't specify on post 1514. That post should have been blocked out by the Forum.


In turn I believe that it is in your interest to have Trump running around telling millions of followers that he is the legitimate president because it sews confusion and under mines Biden. You have never spoken out against this and you have done damage by referring to F'd up Dems who could be any Dems including me.
.
Pelosi asks Joint Chiefs about preventing Trump from launching nukes - POLITICO
“The way the nuclear arsenal is employed, it is not that easy for a crazy president to go and launch nukes,” the official said. “That’s kind of a silly thing to say.”
A senior military official stressed on Friday that troops have been taught to recognize and disobey illegal orders, particularly those at U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees America’s nuclear arsenal. While theoretically Trump could fire any officer who refused to obey an illegal order, he would be hard-pressed to find another who would implement it, the person said."

 

Interesting article...but it is "a proposal" for first use. Nothing therein contradicts my point that the current War Powers Act prohibits first attacks, absent a declaration of war by Congress or an AUF by Congress. "Emergency powers" are limited to defensive actions...consistent with both the War Powers Act and international law.

 

You're claiming that the President has the legal authority to initiate a first strike attack on a potential enemy. He does not. Milley's input comes from his position on the National Security Council's among its "principal members," all of whom, I believe, are Senate confirmed Presidential appointments.

 

Fail-Safe was released in 1964. The War Powers act was legislated in 1973.

 

Really?

 

Here's another "prediction" from the Mein Pillow guy...

My "prediction" is anything produced by or for Mike Lindell will never see the inside of the Supreme Court (unless his supporters riot over there next time)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mypillow-guy-mocked-trump-prediction-025256525.html

Read the response tweets.... some solid efforts in there....