Additional Coverage:
- FBI scheduling interviews with 6 lawmakers who encouraged military members to refuse ‘illegal orders’ (foxnews.com)
FBI and DOJ to Interview Lawmakers Over Controversial Military Video
Washington D.C. – The FBI and Department of Justice are set to interview six members of Congress regarding a video they released, urging service members to disregard orders they might deem illegal. This development comes amidst strong reactions to the video, including calls for arrests and a formal review by the Department of War.
Last week, a group of Democratic lawmakers with backgrounds in military service and intelligence – including Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Sen.
Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), Rep.
Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.), Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.), and Rep.
Jason Crow – published a video directed at active service members and intelligence officers. The video asserted, “Our laws are clear.
You can refuse illegal orders.”
Former President Donald Trump swiftly condemned the video, labeling it “seditious behavior, punishable by DEATH!”
In a significant escalation, the Department of War announced Monday that it has initiated a formal review into allegations of misconduct against Sen. Mark Kelly over his involvement in the video.
The Pentagon stated it might recall Kelly, a retired Navy captain, to active duty to face potential court-martial proceedings or other administrative actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). According to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, four of the other Democrats involved are former military personnel but are not retired, and therefore not subject to the UCMJ.
Sen. Slotkin is a former CIA officer.
Secretary Hegseth took to social media on Tuesday, explaining that while the video “may seem harmless to civilians,” it carries “a different weight inside the military.” He characterized the video as a “politically-motivated influence operation,” citing several reasons for his conclusion.
Hegseth pointed out that the lawmakers never specified a particular “illegal order,” which he argued “created ambiguity rather than clarity.” He also noted the use of “carefully scripted, legal-sounding language” and contended that the lawmakers “subtly reframed military obedience around partisan distrust instead of established legal processes.”
“In the military, vague rhetoric and ambiguity undermines trust, creates hesitation in the chain of command, and erodes cohesion,” Hegseth wrote. He emphasized that the military already possesses clear procedures for addressing unlawful orders and does not require “political actors injecting doubt into an already clear chain of command.”
Hegseth concluded by stating, “As veterans of various sorts, the Seditious Six knew exactly what they were doing – sowing doubt through a politically-motivated influence operation. The @DeptofWar won’t fall for it or stand for it.”