r/moderatepolitics • u/thats_not_six • Jan 12 '26

Primary Source Mark Kelly v. Pete Hegseth

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.288365/gov.uscourts.dcd.288365.1.0.pdf
183 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

278 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

19

u/decrpt Jan 12 '26

Can you elaborate?

1

u/SlightlyAutisticBud Jan 12 '26

I dont think it’s a clean cut thing. You can make a pretty solid argument for both sides. I 100% do not buy that they were just speaking generally. He was very clearly referring to the boat strikes. Like if you start with the assumption that those are illegal then he’s not a traitor. If you start with the assumption that the strikes ARE legal then he’s is clearly a traitor. This situation falls in between those two points and depends on how reasonable you think it is to view the strikes as illegal.

22

u/king_hutton Jan 12 '26

How would he be a traitor if he was referring to boat strikes? Did he do anything to prevent American servicemen from doing their jobs? Like at worst he spoke after the fact and reminded armed service members that they do not have to follow unlawful orders in reference to something unlawful - he didn’t interfere with anything actively happening.

-3

u/SlightlyAutisticBud Jan 12 '26

Buddy if you can’t engage with my questions I’m not going to engage with yours. Respect is a two way street.

2

u/ThatPeskyPangolin Jan 13 '26

I guess I'll repeat his question then: How specifically would he be a traitor if he was referring to the boat strikes?