Mark Levin Implicates Pelosi in Gen. Milley's 'Treason' Scandal
According to Fox News host Mark Levin, the Democrats are going to keep supporting Joint Chiefs of Staff head Gen. Mark Milley because they don’t want any backlash for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
In an appearance on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show Friday night, Levin said Pelosi played “a key role in” undermining civilian control of the military under former President Donald Trump via a call she made to Milley in the days after the Capitol incursion.
While the details of the call were disclosed for the first time in excerpts from Bob Woodward and Robert Costa’s forthcoming book “Peril,” Pelosi had announced the conversation shortly after it happened on Jan. 8, saying in a letter to House Democrats she’d discussed “precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike.”
CNN reported Woodward and Costa obtained a transcript of the call.
“What I’m saying to you is that if they couldn’t even stop him from an assault on the Capitol, who even knows what else he may do?” Pelosi, who is second in line for the presidency behind Vice President Kamala Harris, said during the call, according to the book. “And is there anybody in charge at the White House who was doing anything but kissing his fat butt all over this?
“You know he’s crazy. He’s been crazy for a long time,” she added.
Milley reportedly responded, “Madam Speaker, I agree with you on everything.”
That’s why, Levin said, “the Democrat Party will do everything they can to run interference for Milley” when the Joint Chiefs head appears on Capitol Hill on Sept. 28.
“They’re running interference for Milley because they’re running interference for Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi has a key role in this,” he continued.
“There’s a telephone conversation between Nancy Pelosi and General Milley in which she — who is absolutely nuts — accuses the president of the time. Trump, of being crazy, talks about nuclear weapons, and Milley says he agrees with her completely.
“He goes back to the Pentagon, he calls in his subordinates and they talk about ‘what is our process?’ and ‘let’s go over it’ for using nuclear weapons,” Levin continued.
“President Trump never hinted ever about using nuclear weapons, there’s no basis for this whatsoever.
“I might add, in a footnote, I don’t know who’s more loathsome, Milley, who is loathsome, or Woodward and Costa,” he continued.
“They sat on it for months and months when the American people should have known, when Congress should have known, and, of course, the people in the military should have known that we have a rogue general.”
[firefly_poll]
While the exact order of events on Jan. 8 isn’t made explicit in reporting on the book, “Peril” reportedly makes it clear that Jan. 8 was a busy day for Gen. Milley and that much was precipitated by two conversations he had that day. One was with Pelosi and the other was with Gen. Li Zuocheng of the People’s Liberation Army, Milley’s counterpart in China.
The most damning allegation from “Peril” is from a previous, Oct. 30, 2020 conversation Milley reportedly had with Li in which he promised that if the United States was “going to attack [China], I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise,” according to The Washington Post.
That flirted dangerously with the Constitution’s definition textbook definition of “treason” and has ballooned into an undeniable scandal. And even if there is a snowball’s chance in Hades that Milley would ever be charged with actual treason, it should be enough to precipitate his resignation.
In the Jan. 8 call, Woodward and Costa reportedly wrote that Milley told Li that despite the events of Jan. 6, “We are 100 percent steady. Everything’s fine. But democracy can be sloppy sometimes.”
Li was still concerned, however — and, on the same day, Milley talked with Pelosi. It’s unclear which came first — but Milley took action on the conversations.
“Milley … summoned senior officers to review the procedures for launching nuclear weapons, saying the president alone could give the order — but, crucially, that he, Milley, also had to be involved. Looking each in the eye, Milley asked the officers to affirm that they had understood, the authors write, in what he considered an ‘oath.'”
In other words, Pelosi had talked to Milley about undermining civilian control of the military — a key tenet of any democracy — and Milley had acted to undermine civilian control of the military. While “Peril” isn’t released until Tuesday, you can draw your own conclusions as to the level of influence this had upon the head of the Joint Chiefs.
Whatever the case, the White House is running interference for Milley, too.
According to CNN, President Joe Biden said Wednesday, “I have great confidence in General Milley.” Earlier in the day, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden “has complete confidence in his leadership, his patriotism and his fidelity to our Constitution,” calling him a “man of honor.”
When one imagines their reaction if it came out that Milley had tried to undermine civilian control of the military to prevent elements of the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, however, one doesn’t see the same rhetoric being used.
If it turned out that this happened after a call from congressional leaders, no matter what their party but especially if it were the opposition, the whirlwind of opprobrium he would reap would be even more brutal — and those leaders would be reaping it, too.
And yet, because of their party affiliation, no one seems to acknowledge the dangerous precedent this sets, particularly if Milley’s actions were precipitated by Pelosi’s call.
If this happened as the book laid out and the House speaker played a “key role” in it, she needs to face scrutiny for her actions, as well.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
