The clear-cut case for court-martialing Gen. Mark Milley: Silence from U.S. officials

by WorldTribune Staff, September 11, 2022

In October 2020 and January 2021 Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called his communist Chinese military counterpart and provided him with advance warnings of U.S. military intentions and actions.

America learned of Milley’s direct contact with the communists through the book “Peril”, authored by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa.

In the book, Gen. Milley is quoted as saying, “General Li, I want to assure you that the American government is stable and everything is going to be OK. We are not going to attack or conduct any kinetic operations against you.” And then, reportedly, Gen. Milley said this: “General Li, you and I have known each other for 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.”

Milley admitted to making the calls. A spokesman stated that Milley had acted within his authority as the senior military adviser to the president and the secretary of defense.

Yet Milley failed to consult any U.S. civilian authority. That fact was confirmed by Christopher Miller, the former acting secretary of defense, and by former President Donald Trump.

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, a graduate of West Point and an Army officer, as well as a lawyer, congressman and former director of the CIA, said this about Milley’s actions: “If you had a senior military leader, who is simply an adviser, tell the Chinese Communist Party that they would get notice of an attack, this rivals anything we’ve seen in our nation’s history.”

Milley “should be subject to an Article 32 Hearing under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for his conduct and statements,” Chris Farrell, Director of Investigations & Research for Judicial Watch and a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence Officer, wrote in an Aug. 30 op-ed for The Washington Times.

An Article 32 Hearing is the military equivalent of a civilian grand jury. “Should probable cause of the commission of a crime be established, it would lead to Gen. Milley’s court-martial,” Farrell wrote. “The Army has an affirmative duty to maintain good order and discipline, especially with regard to senior leader misconduct.”

Farrell was not the only Washington insider to raise the prospect of a court martial.

Jonathan Turley, the frequently-interviewed law professor at George Washington University, raised alarms about the Woodward account of Milley’s instructions to subordinates emphasizing his place in the command structure for The Hill on Sept. 16, 2021:

“While some pundits praised Milley for allegedly taking control over nuclear weapons and war declarations, the allegations — if true — could subject Milley to a possible court martial for usurping the authority of the commander in chief under Article II of the Constitution.”

He added:

If Milley told subordinates they were to await his concurrence on an attack order, he would have elevated his authority over the express authority delegated to a president. There is a “process” that includes the chain of command. As commander in chief, a president can always deliver a direct order to any subordinate — and Milley would not have the authority to countermand the commander in chief.

Furthermore, if Milley promised to warn the Chinese of an attack, it could be an act not of insubordination but of treason.

In their book, Woodward and Costa “obtained” a copy of a call transcript between Milley and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi concerning Trump and nuclear weapons. The book provides detailed quotes from both Milley and Pelosi. In one exchange, Pelosi at length attacks Trump, saying “they couldn’t even stop him from an assault on the Capitol,” and that “he’s crazy. You know he’s crazy. He’s been crazy for a long time. So don’t say you don’t know what his state of mind is. He’s crazy and what he did yesterday is further evidence of his craziness. But anyway, I appreciate what you said.”

Milley responds: “Madam Speaker, I agree with you on everything.”

Milley “obviously cooperated in some manner” with Woodward, Farrell wrote, adding that “Freedom of Information Act requests for call transcripts were stonewalled by the Pentagon. Gen. Milley is hiding the information from the American people and forcing a current lawsuit in federal court to compel him to release information he selectively leaked to friendly reporters.”

The authors quote Milley saying, “F—- that s—-, I’ll just fight him” [President Trump], and, “If they want to court-martial me, or put me in prison, have at it. But I will fight from the inside.”

Farrell noted: “A general ‘fighting from the inside’ against the president is the very definition of subversion. ”

Milley “must be held to account for his conduct and selectively leaked statements,” Farrell wrote. “His reported actions, if true, are the most egregious examples of treasonous subversion by a commissioned officer of the United States since Maj. Gen. Benedict Arnold.”

Farrell and Turley both work in the private sector. Significantly there has been no reported call by Washington, DC government officials for a court martial of Gen. Mark Milley.

Action . . . . Intelligence . . . . Publish

You must be logged in to post a comment Login