admin
A group of six Democratic lawmakers recently released a video urging U.S. service members to refuse what they called “illegal” orders, a reckless stunt that crossed a line from dissent into dangerous disloyalty. The clip—promoted by Sen. Elissa Slotkin and featuring Sen. Mark Kelly and five other figures with security or military backgrounds—explicitly told troops they could refuse orders they deemed unlawful, a message that sows confusion in the ranks and threatens the constitutional chain of command.
The Department of Defense has launched a review of “serious allegations of misconduct” against Sen. Mark Kelly, the only one of the six still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice as a retired officer, after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blasted the video as “despicable, reckless, and false.” The Pentagon reminded servicemembers that orders are presumed lawful and that encouraging disobedience undermines military discipline and could be prosecuted under existing statutes.
Make no mistake: this isn’t high-minded constitutional debate—it’s political theater that endangers our troops. When elected officials publicly urge rank-and-file servicemembers to second-guess the chain of command without citing any specific unlawful orders, they weaponize doubt and risk lives by weakening the discipline that keeps units cohesive in combat and crisis.
The Democrats’ justification rings hollow. Even some who tried to defend the stunt could not point to a single illegal order from the administration, revealing that the video’s real intent was political interference rather than genuine legal counsel to servicemembers. That calculated move—trying to paint the Commander-in-Chief as an imminent threat to lawful military conduct—deserves the contempt of every patriot who respects the rule of law.
Republican leaders and conservative voices have rightly called out the stunt, stressing that this sort of grandstanding invites chaos and should be answered with accountability. Calls for oversight and investigation are not about silencing disagreement; they are about defending the integrity of our armed forces against political actors who would erode the very foundations of military order.
The legal path the Pentagon is pursuing—reviewing whether a retired officer’s words crossed into misconduct—signals that there are consequences for using military credentials to lend false authority to partisan messaging. If Democrats want to challenge policy or the president, they can legislate, litigate, or campaign; they must not draft troops into their political theater. The safety of the nation and the honor of our servicemembers are not props for theatrical virtue-signaling.
Conservatives should stand firm for both free speech and for the institutions that defend our liberty: speak out against political games that risk the lives of our sons and daughters in uniform, and demand that those who abuse military service for partisan gain be held accountable. The American military deserves leaders who protect order, not elected officials who sow disorder for clicks and headlines.
