Sun Nov 23 15:40:00 UTC 2025: News Article:
Trump Accuses Democrats of ‘Sedition’ Over Video Urging Soldiers to Refuse Illegal Orders, Sparking Outrage
Washington D.C. – Former President Donald Trump has ignited a firestorm of criticism after accusing several Democratic lawmakers of “sedition, punishable by death” for releasing a video encouraging U.S. service members to refuse “unlawful” orders. The accusation, made on his social media platform Truth Social, has been condemned by veterans and legal experts as a dangerous politicization of the military and a potential threat to the lawmakers’ safety.
The video, featuring Democratic Representatives Maggie Goodlander, Jason Crow, Chris DeLuzio, Chrissy Houlahan, and Senators Mark Kelly and Elissa Slotkin, all with military or national security backgrounds, urged service members to resist orders they deemed illegal. While the video did not specify which orders they were referencing, the message was seen by many as a response to Trump’s past deployment of the military in domestic situations.
Trump’s response was swift and harsh, labeling the Democrats as “traitors” who should be arrested and put on trial, even reposting a message advocating for their execution.
His comments have drawn sharp condemnation from military legal experts. David Frakt, a retired Air Force officer and attorney, called Trump’s use of “sedition and treason” inappropriate and ironic, pointing to Trump’s actions on January 6th and his pardons of those involved.
Don Christensen, another retired Air Force colonel, also criticized Trump’s comments, condemning Senator Lindsey Graham for not speaking out against Trump’s statements, despite Graham’s own understanding of the obligation to disobey unlawful orders.
While legal experts generally agree on the importance of refusing manifestly unlawful orders, they also cautioned against the dangers of politicizing the issue and placing service members in a difficult position. Rachel VanLandingham, a law professor and retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, criticized the Democrats’ video for oversimplifying the legal complexities and potentially endangering service members who take the burden of refusing an order upon themselves.
The controversy comes at a time of heightened anxiety within the military, with concerns about politicization within the Judge Advocate General (JAG) corps and worries about the departure of experienced military lawyers. Experts warn that the current political discourse could create a dangerous divide within the military ranks, with service members potentially making decisions based on political motivations rather than legal principles.
The issue underscores the importance of maintaining the military’s political neutrality and ensuring that service members have access to impartial legal guidance. Observers urge active-duty senior leadership to publicly reaffirm their oath to the Constitution and their political neutrality, emphasizing that the military should represent all of America, not just one political party.
First Piper 