OK, some of you have accused Gen. Milley of 'treason'.

Had you listened to the video, you'd know your premise is false.

THat isn't what he did, which is why you need to Listen to the video, and he refers to the protocols/directives signed by the Secretary of Defense. IIRC.

 

Milley is a veteran but he is not above the laws... the content of his conversation was a treasonous act..

 

No he did not... there is no DOD protocol to promise to tip off your enemy before an attack... maybe you can show us this DOD protocol and we can determine whether calling your enemy and alerting him to an attack is in there...

 

I listened to the video... there is no DOD protocol to forewarn your enemy of a pending attack.... prove me otherwise... My premise is dead on, yours is false.

 

Except doing what he did is illegal

 

There's nothing for me to "get over", Patricio.

If Gen. Milley is innocent of doing anything wrong, then that's great. If he's guilty of doing anything wrong, I hope they punish him to the full extent of military and/or civil law. I'm being FAIR-minded... fair enough... are you?

Somehow I sense that you are probably a little too convinced already at this point that he "committed no offense". YOU don't KNOW that, Patricio... so I suggest that YOU "get over it"....

. "Who said that ANYBODY did anything wrong if they were only 'following orders'...?"

 

Please link to the DOD protocol that allows members of the military to promise to give potential adversaries advance notice of our military operations against them.

 

We’ll see....

 

He never extorted the President of another country.... ever.
"peacefully and patriotically march to the capital" is not inciting a riot and insurrection.

 

Quit being untruthful.

 

My point was to listen to his video, that's the least you can do.

 

Listen the video, he predicates his authority in the video, whatever it is, it is there.

No, he 'didn't tip off an enemy before an attack' nor did he suggest he'd ever do that. You are listening/reading right wing hysterics and not listening to the truth.

Watch the video, please.

 

But he didn't do that. That fact is clear in the video, and the source of his authority is referenced in the video.

 

I'll file that in the wishful thinking file.

Congratulations.

 

But his being lawful is not in question.

It is only in question with YOU.

Given the fact that the lawfulness of his act is not in question by the military, it is safe for me not to know it, but to PRESUME it.

 

Since he didn't do that, your premise is moot

He does mention the precise source of his authority, signed by the Secretary of Defense.

Listen to the video.

 

yes he did exactly that…. He said exactly that…
Making promises to our enemy to forewarn them of an attack is treasonous….there are no DOD protocols to aiding and abetting our enemy.

 

please provide us with a link, documentation, video, or anything…. That Trump was planning to attack China ….

 

It's fascinating to see how ardently and energetically you on the Left went after Trump with two impeachment processes -- NEITHER of which even bothered to list an actual crime... and yet, in spite of the fact that Gen. Milley has been 'outed' for deliberately and overtly sharing confidential, and, by its very nature, highly-classified information with the Chinese military's high command, you want no (NO) inquiry into his conduct whatsoever. You see nothing, uh, unbalanced about that....?

 

kinda brings back memories of Comey “sharing” a conversation with Trump and himself… nothing was done…

 

I'll file that in the wishful thinking file.

 

Please limit your requests to pertain to things I actually wrote.

 

Uhh, I believe you are factually incorrect; of the three articles of impeachment spanning two impeachments, two of them, as I understand them, were crimes, noted in italics, below.

First impeachment Articles of Impeachment were: (1) abuse of power, and (2) obstruction of Congress.

The Second Impeachment the Article Of Impeachment was (1) Incitement Of Insurrection.

You'll need to provide evidence of your allegation in order for me to comment on it.

 

I watched your video. He never made any mention of having promised his Chinese counterpart advance warning of an attack, even though that fact was the very reason he was brought before Congress to speak.

Please provide support for your assertion that the phone calls did not in fact include promises made to warn our adversaries ahead of military actions against them.

For instance, a direct denial from the general himself, a transcript of the phone calls, a retraction of that allegation by the book authors, etc.

 

Well I watched the video and he didn't address the quote, attributed to him, in Woodward's book, “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.”

That's treason, and you've yet to provide a reasonable explanation for it.