Milley, the retired Army general and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who on several occasions subverted orders from his Commander-in-Chief, had his portrait removed from the Pentagon within two hours of President Donald Trump's inauguration.

The portrait's removal has been confirmed by CNN and Reuters. It had been revealed just 10 days ago. //

Of those pardoned by Biden, Milley stands out as having taken actions that could reasonably be described as treason. It is far from hyperbole in the case of the former Joint Chiefs Chair.

Milley, according to a book titled "Peril," assured his counterpart, General Li Zuocheng of the People’s Liberation Army of China, in the final days of Trump's first term that the United States military would not strike the communist country. Even if Trump ordered such actions based on his assessment they were in the best interest of the defense of America.

Perhaps most astonishing was the quote from that book, which shows Milley was willing to warn China — a hostile foreign nation — if an attack was in the works. //

Trump's nominee for FBI Director, Kash Patel, in an exclusive interview with RedState, suggested Milley contravened authorization from then-President Trump regarding the deployment of the National Guard on January 6th.

Milley had claimed the National Guard was deployed to the Capitol at “sprint speed.”

However, congressional testimony from Brig. Gen. Aaron R. Dean II, then the Guard’s adjutant general, suggested the deployment was stalled for the sake of optics, as evidenced by several calls to Ryan D. McCarthy, the Secretary of the Army at the time, to commence deployment going "directly to voice mail.". //

MyDogsMum TXavatar
7 hours ago
Does the pardon exempt him from a dishonorable discharge?

Mike Ford MyDogsMum
6 hours ago edited
Yes. A dishonorable requires conviction by a General Court Martial. A GCM is part of the same federal “sovereign.”

The Biden pardon precludes that
Streiff and I had that phone conversation earlier today.

Having said that, the pardon removes his self incrimination protection and do he can be compelled to testify regarding anything he has done prior to the Biden pardon.

Carey J Dolfin9999
6 hours ago
The Fifth Amendment only protects you from self-incrimination, which requires legal jeopardy. The pardon removed the legal jeopardy, making it impossible for him to incriminate himself. Therefore, he can be required to testify about ANYTHING he has knowledge of, or face Contempt of Court/Congress charges. If he lies under oath, he is subject to perjury charges.

But there may be one thing Joe Biden (or whoever is pulling his strings) overlooked — the Fifth Amendment. Namely, for the time frame covered in the pardon, Hunter Biden can no longer assert his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Hunter Biden would have to answer questions about his business interests if called before Congress, a criminal defense lawyer has said. //

From the wording here, it appears that even if evidence surfaced that Hunter was a serial killer in the specified time period, he could not be prosecuted because of the blanket pardon — which is within the power of the president. But the twist? He cannot assert his Fifth Amendment rights because he cannot self-incriminate. //

Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan strongly suggested on X, formerly Twitter, that Hunter may be called to give evidence as Republicans consider whether to impeach President Biden for his business interests with his son. "Democrats said there was nothing to our impeachment inquiry. If that's the case, why did Joe Biden just issue Hunter Biden a pardon for the very things we were inquiring about?" Jordan wrote on Sunday. //

With that said, I'll offer another prediction: This won't be the last family member Joe Biden pardons. //

Twist Gamma you cant make this stuff up
14 hours ago
Chasing Biden instead of the deep state would be a waste of time and political capital. Find out who instigated and coordinated the Trump lawfare. Get them out of government, and charge them if there's any charge to be found.

And let the DOGE run wild.

That will be hard enough. Prosecuting the case against Biden would just be a distraction from the far more important goals.

I ran into a friend, actor, and politician, Siaka Massaquoi, who looked fresh as a daisy. “Jeez,” I said to him. “This is brutal.”

“Yeah,” he replied with a smile. “I’ve been here since 3:30 am.”

What in the world? That was two hours before we arrived.

Turns out Siaka is on a “list.” He entered the Capitol on January 6, 2021, but has not been charged with anything. His apartment was raided by over 20 armed FBI agents on June 10, 2021, and he’s been under investigation ever since for “associating with members of a social media group.” //

As I keep repeating, he has not been charged or convicted of anything – isn’t this exactly what the Fifth Amendment was designed to prevent? Namely that you can’t be punished without due process? Where’s the due process here?

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
·
Follow
Americans charged—not convicted, charged—with petty offenses related to Jan 6 are on terrorist watch list at TSA and must undergo invasive, extensive searches numerous times. Any Republican who thinks this regime won’t do the same under “red flag” laws is an idiot. Or John Cornyn
2:25 PM · Jun 12, 2022

In an exclusive breaking story, several Federal Air Marshal whistleblowers have come forward with information showing that former U.S. Representative and Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard is currently enrolled in the Quiet Skies program. Quiet Skies is a TSA surveillance program with its own compartmentalized suspected terrorist watchlist. It is the same program being weaponized against J6 defendants and their families. Quiet Skies is allegedly used to protect traveling Americans from suspected domestic terrorists. //

Air Marshals were first assigned to Gabbard on Jul. 23, a day after she criticized Kamala Harris, Biden, and the National Security State in an interview with Laura Ingraham. FAMs were mobilized on Jul. 24 and assigned to their first flight with her on Jul. 25.

Ruling: Thumbprint scan is like a "blood draw or fingerprint taken at booking." //

The US Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination does not prohibit police officers from forcing a suspect to unlock a phone with a thumbprint scan, a federal appeals court ruled yesterday. The ruling does not apply to all cases in which biometrics are used to unlock an electronic device but is a significant decision in an unsettled area of the law.

The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit had to grapple with the question of "whether the compelled use of Payne's thumb to unlock his phone was testimonial," the ruling in United States v. Jeremy Travis Payne said. "To date, neither the Supreme Court nor any of our sister circuits have addressed whether the compelled use of a biometric to unlock an electronic device is testimonial."