Senator Mark Kelly Sues Pentagon Over Censure and Potential Demotion

The Defense Department’s Case Against Mark Kelly Is Even Dumber Than It Sounds: Use of derogatory language to discredit the opposing side.

At the same time, it’s still having its intended effect.: Implies a negative consequence without providing evidence.

Hegseth characteristically chimed in with his own denunciations: Suggests a pattern of behavior to discredit the individual.

Kelly’s case seems to be a slam dunk.: Presents an opinion as if it were a fact.

Even Hegseth must realize that the more hard-line military court would likely dismiss a case based on a video in which Kelly recites a fundamental plank of military law.: Assumes the thoughts and realizations of an individual without evidence.

The consequences could be deeply demoralizing, within the Pentagon and at U.S. military bases (not that this possibility has deterred Hegseth from his antics so far).: Uses loaded language to criticize an individual's actions.

Actually, this does seem to be the way things work in the United States of America now.: Implies a negative trend without supporting evidence.

I know of a few officers who are hesitant to speak out against Trump or his policies precisely because they fear retribution—and lack the access to resources, high profile, and legal protections that Kelly enjoys as a member of Congress.: Uses anecdotal evidence to suggest a widespread issue.

There is also a disposition among many officers, bred in them from their days as cadets, to steer clear of political activity, even if it’s meant to protest the politicization of the military.: Implies a systemic issue without concrete evidence.

Still, there are rumblings of change.: Suggests a shift in sentiment without providing specific examples.

Kelly’s suit is one.: Implies a trend based on a single example.

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s video pushback against the Trump Justice Department’s criminal investigation is another.: Draws a parallel between unrelated events to suggest a pattern.

The votes of a few (remarkably few, but still a few) Republican lawmakers—voicing new dissent against Trump’s war-making powers in Venezuela, his imperial threats against Greenland, and even his desire to kill Obamacare—may be more wavelets in a turning tide.: Uses loaded language to describe actions and policies.

Meanwhile, the crusade against Captain Kelly seems doomed to a proper flameout.: Predicts failure without evidence, using dismissive language.