“The U.S. Constitution and laws and states establish procedures for conducting elections, and for resolving disputes over election results … I do not see the U.S. military as part of this process,” Mille said in a statement. In response to questions from two members of the House Armed Services Committee on Friday.
“By law, the U.S. court and the U.S. Congress are required to resolve any disputes, not the U.S. military, in the event of a dispute over certain aspects of the election,” Mille added.
“I deeply believe in U.S. military doctrine,” Mille wrote.
Millie’s answers come in response to questions from Democratic Rips. Alyssa Slotkin of Michigan and Mickey Sheryl of New Jersey after the July hearing of the Armed Services Committee.
Biden started thinking
“I promise you, I’m pretty sure they’ll get him out of the White House with a great dispatch,” Biden said, referring to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Other high-profile Democrats, including the party’s 2016 candidate Hillary Clinton, have speculated that Trump is likely to step down voluntarily in the event of a disputed election result.
Trump has at times refused to say publicly that he would accept the election result, telling Fox News in July, “I have to see, I have to see, I have to see, I just won’t say yes, I won’t say no, and I wasn’t the last time either. का .यो. “
Concerned that Trump may not vacate the presidency after losing the election, Milne wrote an open letter to two prominent retired military officers, John Nagel and Paul Yingling, urging them to join the post-war settlement.
Both Nagal and Yingling are well known in military circles for their writings and scholarships on the recent conflict in the United States, while their advocacy for the armed forces to be involved in the disputed electoral settlement drew response from both the Pentagon and other civilian-military experts. Relationships.
Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman told a news conference earlier in the day that “our constitution, and our constitution, which has been sworn in by all members of the military, is not acceptable to the United States as a mediator in political or electoral disputes.” Will not provide any role for the military. Mass.
“The issue seems to have arisen from restless thinking, reflecting the history of our democracy and the fundamental lack of appreciation for the civil-military relations established under our constitution,” he added, citing arguments in an open letter.
The military has never been involved in a controversial election
U.S. Has a history of disputed elections, including the presidential contests of 1876 and 2000, which were settled by civilian officials and the military has never been involved in any kind of electoral reconciliation effort.
“Because the military is the most trusted institution of American life, when people are afraid they trust the military to do the right thing, legally, constitutionally, decently, even though it’s not their job, in this case it will do the American Enterprise Institute’s foreign and “Be an extraordinarily dangerous example of democracy in America,” Corey Shake, director of defense policy, told CNN.
During the fierce partisan atmosphere of the presidential campaign, the U.S. Amid growing concerns about the politicization of the military, the role of the military is also being discussed.
The top leadership of the army was also criticized for being drawn to politically sensitive issues.
Milli was criticized for his boring look in a picture with Trump himself when the president visited Lafayette Square after law enforcement officers forcibly cleared the area of peaceful protesters.
Trump has also been accused of referring to the military leadership as “my general” and using the military to carry out controversial local missions such as border control and politicize the military in response to the civil unrest that resulted in the death of George Floyd.
While the military has never been involved in resolving electoral disputes, concerns about its politicization are not new. General Leonard Wood failed to win a Republican nomination for president in 1920 while in uniform and General Winfield failed to run for president under the banner of Scott Wig Party while still serving as head of the U.S. Army.
.
