A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked War Secretary Pete Hegseth from stripping Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of his rank and military pay.
The ruling from U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, appointed by former President George W. Bush, comes after Hegseth censured Kelly over the video he helped produce with five other Democrats urging military members to disobey &#8220;illegal orders.&#8221; In response, Kelly sued Hegseth, arguing that his First Amendment rights were violated.
In the 29-page <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.288365/gov.uscourts.dcd.288365.37.0_2.pdf">ruling</a>, Judge Leon wrote that Kelly&#8217;s First Amendment defense &#8220;is likely to succeed on merits,&#8221; adding, &#8220;This Court has all it needs to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly&#8217;s First Amendment freedoms and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees.&#8221;
Leon said Hegseth&#8217;s argument &#8220;that military servicemembers enjoy less vigorous First Amendment protections&#8221; due to their obligations to the country has never been applied to &#8220;retired servicemembers&#8221; by a court.
&#8220;This Court will not be the first to do so!&#8221; Leon added.
Leon&#8217;s ruling means that the War Department cannot proceed with its actions against Kelly as the court continues to consider the case. Kelly, a retired Navy officer and astronaut, ripped Hegseth and President Donald Trump after Leon&#8217;s ruling was released.
&#8220;Today a federal court made clear Pete Hegseth violated the Constitution when he tried to punish me for something I said. This is a critical moment to show this administration they can&#8217;t keep undermining Americans&#8217; rights,&#8221; Kelly <a href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUqtAMFj5Ul/">said</a>. &#8220;I also know this might not be over yet, because Trump and Hegseth can&#8217;t admit when they are wrong.&#8221;
Hegseth <a href="https://x.com/PeteHegseth/status/2022035474337214836">vowed</a> to appeal the judge&#8217;s ruling &#8220;immediately,&#8221; writing, &#8220;Sedition is sedition, &#8216;Captain.'&#8221;
In the video, the Democrats said the Trump administration &#8220;is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.&#8221;
&#8220;Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution,” the Democratic lawmakers told U.S. service members. “Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home.&#8221;
The Trump administration labeled the video as &#8220;seditious,&#8221; with President Trump suggesting the Democrats&#8217; behavior was &#8220;punishable by DEATH.&#8221; Trump later clarified that he was not calling for the Democrats to be executed, but added, &#8220;I think they’re in serious trouble.&#8221;
When the War Department launched its <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/war-department-reviewing-serious-allegations-against-sen-mark-kelly-after-dem-military-message?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=War+Department+Reviewing+%E2%80%98Serious+Allegations%E2%80%99+Against+Sen.+Mark+Kelly+After+Dem+Military+Message">review</a> of Kelly&#8217;s participation in the video last November, it cited a military code that makes it a crime “to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States” and “to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States.”
The Justice Department also sought to bring charges against all six Democrats involved, but earlier this week, a federal grand jury <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/grand-jury-refuses-to-indict-dem-lawmakers-over-video-urging-military-to-disobey-illegal-orders">declined</a> to sign off on an indictment. The other Democrats involved in the controversial video include Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Reps. Chrissy Houlahan and Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania. All of the Democrats who helped make the video are military veterans or former members of the intelligence community.
The video was released as Democrats — and some Republicans — condemned President Trump&#8217;s authorization of strikes against suspected drug runners in the Caribbean Sea.
This article has been updated with additional information.

Mark Kelly/Pete Hegseth

Federal Judge Deals Another Blow To Trump Admin’s Effort To Punish Dems Over ‘Illegal Orders’ Video

Federal Judge Deals Another Blow To Trump Admin's Effort To Punish Dems Over 'Illegal Orders' Video

Democrats

Department of War

Donald Trump

Mark Kelly

Pete Hegseth

U.S. Military

A Washington, D.C., grand jury refused to indict six Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday over a video they produced in November urging military members to disobey &#8220;illegal orders&#8221; given by President Donald Trump.
The video — which featured Sens. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), and four Democratic House members — was labeled by the Trump administration as a &#8220;seditious&#8221; act. Members of the grand jury, however, did not sign off on the charges brought by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro against the lawmakers, the Associated Press <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-military-orders-democrats-video-e1435655587ad9715c4d1cc776edd545">reported</a>. It remains unclear what specific charges prosecutors were seeking to bring against the members of Congress.
The federal government could attempt to bring charges against the Democrats before a grand jury again. The Daily Wire reached out to the Justice Department for comment.
Slotkin, who organized the video message, <a href="https://x.com/SenatorSlotkin/status/2021401432235155834">said</a> on Tuesday night that the grand jury&#8217;s refusal to indict was &#8220;embarrassing&#8221; for the Trump administration. Last week, the Michigan Democrat <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dem-senator-thumbs-her-nose-at-doj-rejects-call-to-answer-for-illegal-orders-video">rejected</a> the Justice Department&#8217;s request to sit down for a voluntary interview and answer questions about the video.
&#8220;Today, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro attempted to persuade a Grand Jury to indict me. This was in response to me organizing a 90-second video that simply quoted the law. Pirro did this at the direction of President Trump, who said repeatedly that I should be investigated, arrested, and hanged for sedition,&#8221; Slotkin posted on X. &#8220;Today, it was a grand jury of anonymous American citizens who upheld the rule of law and determined this case should not proceed. Hopefully, this ends this politicized investigation for good.&#8221;
The other lawmakers featured in the short clip were Reps. Jason Crow of Colorado, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Chrissy Houlahan and Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania.
In the video, the Democrats — who are all military veterans or former members of the intelligence community — told U.S. service members that &#8220;threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home&#8221; and that the Trump administration “is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.&#8221;
&#8220;Our laws are clear, you can refuse illegal orders,&#8221; the Democrats added. &#8220;You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders.&#8221;
The video was released as Democrats — and a few Republicans — criticized the Trump administration&#8217;s military strikes on suspected drug runners in the Caribbean Sea. Just weeks after the Democrats made the video, President Trump authorized a military operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.
President Trump suggested that the video represented &#8220;SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH.&#8221; Trump later clarified that he was not calling for the Democrats to be executed.
&#8220;I would say they’re in serious trouble. I’m not threatening death, but I think they’re in serious trouble,&#8221; Trump said. &#8220;In the old days, it was death. That was seditious behavior.&#8221;
The War Department, led by Secretary Pete Hegseth, moved to strip Senator Kelly, a retired astronaut and naval officer, of his rank and retirement pay over his participation in the video. Last month, Kelly sued Hegseth, along with Navy Secretary John Phelan, the Department of the Navy, and the War Department, arguing that their action against him violates the First Amendment.

Mark Kelly/Elissa Slotkin

Grand Jury Refuses To Indict Dem Lawmakers Over Video Urging Military To Disobey ‘Illegal Orders’

Department of Justice

Elissa Slotkin

Trump Administration

Washington D.C.

Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) is refusing to comply with a Justice Department investigation into a video she helped organize that urged U.S. service members to resist what she described as “illegal orders,” escalating a standoff with federal prosecutors.
Slotkin said this week she will not sit for a voluntary interview with investigators, saying in a <a href="https://x.com/SenatorSlotkin/status/2019474013307715592">statement</a> on X Thursday, “I’m not gonna be sitting for this inquiry. I’m not gonna legitimize their actions,” even as her legal team prepares for what it says could become litigation against the Justice Department.
Slotkin’s attorney informed U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro that the senator would decline a voluntary interview and requested that the office preserve documents for “anticipated litigation,” in letters first obtained by the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/slotkin-illegal-orders-video-justice-department-interview-06b6c041b158b2ed5911c52a16868764">Associated Press</a>. A separate letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi urged her to immediately terminate the inquiry and reject an FBI interview request.
The investigation stems from a video Slotkin released last year alongside five other Democratic lawmakers, all with prior military or intelligence experience, urging active-duty service members to refuse orders they believe to be unlawful. Republicans criticized the video as reckless and potentially encouraging insubordination, while President Donald Trump publicly accused the lawmakers of sedition.
Slotkin has sought to reframe the video as a civics lesson rather than a call to disobedience, insisting it was meant only to remind troops of their duty to reject illegal commands. But she has simultaneously accused federal authorities of attempting to silence her through intimidation.
“They are purposely using physical and legal intimidation to get me to shut up,” Slotkin said. “But more importantly, they’re using that intimidation to deter others from speaking out against their administration.”
Slotkin further warned officials at the Justice Department that while recent Supreme Court rulings have expanded presidential immunity, those protections do not extend to officials enforcing the law on the president’s behalf.
 “The Supreme Court may have given the president near-immunity on most matters,” she said, “but they’ve given no such immunity to those doing his bidding.”
The Justice Department’s requests have so far been voluntary, placing the burden on prosecutors to decide whether to escalate the inquiry by issuing subpoenas to sitting members of Congress. Asked whether she would comply if subpoenaed, Slotkin paused before responding, saying only that she would “take a hard look at it.”
Slotkin has portrayed the investigation as part of a broader campaign of intimidation, citing threats against her family and property following renewed attention to the video. “If they can do this to a sitting senator,” she said, “just imagine what they could do to a community leader, a business leader, or a mom who goes viral on the internet.”
The dispute has also raised questions about accountability for lawmakers who invoke military authority in partisan messaging, even as Slotkin positions herself as a victim of political overreach. The Pentagon has separately investigated Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ), another participant in the video, while Kelly has sued over efforts to discipline him.
Slotkin, a former CIA analyst and three-term House member before winning her Senate seat in 2024, has increasingly leaned into confrontation with the Trump administration. She has publicly urged Democrats to abandon restraint, “I&#8216;m from the Midwest and for us, leaders like our coaches are just — they have got some alpha energy to them,” Slotkin said when asked how she’d fix Democratic messaging in 2025. 
Her push to bring “alpha energy” back to the party has coincided with a divisive start to her Senate tenure. “I did this to go on offense,” Slotkin said of her refusal to cooperate. “To put them in a position where they have to own their choices.”
Whether that strategy forces the Justice Department to retreat now rests with federal prosecutors weighing how far to press an investigation into members of Congress who are openly daring them to act.

Dem Senator Thumbs Her Nose At DOJ, Rejects Call To Answer For ‘Illegal Orders’ Video

Dem Senator Refuses To Comply With DOJ Investigation On 'Illegal Orders' Video

First Amendment

Jeanine Pirro

A watchdog group is urging Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard to restrict classified access for the so-called “Seditious Six” Democrats while they are under federal investigation.
The Center to Advance Security in America sent a letter to Gabbard’s office on Tuesday warning that the continued access of two Democratic senators and four Democratic congressmen to sensitive U.S. documents risks national security. The lawmakers in question teamed up in a controversial video posted online in November, in part claiming that the Trump administration is “pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.”
“Given that these members are now all under federal investigation, their access to classified information should be suspended for the duration of the investigation. We are requesting this restriction to mitigate the risk of unauthorized disclosure or misuse of classified material during the investigation,” CASA Director James Fitzpatrick told Gabbard in the <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/984984087/CASA-Gabbard-Letter">letter</a> obtained by The Daily Wire.
The Democrats in question are Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, along with Reps. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, Jason Crow of Colorado, and Chrissy Houlahan and Chris DeLuzio of Pennsylvania.
The Justice Department has opened an investigation into the “Seditious Six” over their November video. War Secretary Pete Hegseth coined the nickname for the lawmakers, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/doj-fbi-launch-investigation-into-seditious-six-democrats-interviews-set-to-begin">saying</a> the video “undermines trust, creates hesitation in the chain of command, and erodes cohesion.”
The lawmakers said the investigation is an example of the administration “using the FBI as a tool to intimidate and harass Members of Congress.”
The letter notes that each lawmaker likely handles sensitive U.S. national security information through their committee assignments.
“The members of Congress who appeared in the November 2025 viral video insinuating that military orders from the Trump administration are illegal and not to be followed were purposefully attempting to sow confusion and undermine good order and discipline in our armed forces,” Fitzpatrick told The Daily Wire in a statement. “Given the ongoing federal investigation concerning all six subjects, we believe it is appropriate to restrict their access to classified information for the duration of the investigation.”

Watchdog Group Warns ‘Seditious Six’ Democrats Pose National Security Risk With Classified Access

Watchdog Group Says ‘Seditious Six’ Dems’ Access To Classified Info Puts US At Risk

Tulsi Gabbard

War Secretary Pete Hegseth fired back — rhetorically speaking — at Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) over a lawsuit filed Monday, saying that the Arizona Democrat was only &#8220;worried and cranky&#8221; because he was facing consequences for his own actions.
&#8220;&#8216;Captain&#8217; Kelly knows exactly what he did, and that he will be held to account. Thats why he’s so worried and cranky,&#8221; Hegseth posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“Captain” Kelly knows exactly what he did, and that he will be held to account.
Thats why he’s so worried and cranky. <a href="https://t.co/SSU9jccrx6">https://t.co/SSU9jccrx6</a>
— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) <a href="https://twitter.com/PeteHegseth/status/2011151451381498107?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 13, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Hegseth’s comment comes one day after Kelly announced his lawsuit — in which he also named Navy Secretary John Phelan, the Department of the Navy, and the Department of War as co-defendants — claiming that Hegseth had stepped outside his Constitutional authority in censuring him and launching a review of his behavior.
“Pete Hegseth is coming after what I earned through my twenty-five years of military service, in violation of my rights as an American, as a retired veteran, and as a United States Senator whose job is to hold him—and this or any administration—accountable,” Kelly claimed. “His unconstitutional crusade against me sends a chilling message to every retired member of the military: if you speak out and say something that the President or Secretary of Defense doesn’t like, you will be censured, threatened with demotion, or even prosecuted.”
Hegseth, one week earlier, announced the censure and a full review of Kelly’s conduct over the Arizona senator’s role in creating a video that encouraged active duty service members to question the legality of their orders in real time.
Referring to Kelly and the other Democratic lawmakers involved as “The Seditious Six,” Hegseth noted that the retired Navy captain was the only one who was still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and announced a review of his conduct that could ultimately result in a reduction in rank and pay, or even see Kelly recalled to active duty to face a Court Martial.

President Trump Holds Cabinet Meeting At The White House

Pete Hegseth Hits Back At ‘Captain’ Mark Kelly: He ‘Knows Exactly What He Did’

Pete Hegseth Hits Back At 'Captain' Mark Kelly: He 'Knows Exactly What He Did'

Military

U.S.

Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) announced on Monday that he&#8217;d filed a lawsuit jointly naming War Secretary Pete Hegseth, Navy Secretary John Phelan, the Department of the Navy, and the War Department as defendants.
In the lawsuit, filed Monday in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., Kelly claimed that Hegseth had overstepped his constitutional boundaries by ordering a Uniform Code of Military Justice review following his participation in the &#8220;Seditious Six&#8221; video.
&#8220;Pete Hegseth is coming after what I earned through my twenty-five years of military service, in violation of my rights as an American, as a retired veteran, and as a United States Senator whose job is to hold him—and this or any administration—accountable,&#8221; Kelly claimed. &#8220;His unconstitutional crusade against me sends a chilling message to every retired member of the military: if you speak out and say something that the President or Secretary of Defense doesn’t like, you will be censured, threatened with demotion, or even prosecuted.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Pete Hegseth is coming after what I earned through my twenty-five years of military service, in violation of my rights as an American, as a retired veteran, and as a United States Senator whose job is to hold him—and this or any administration—accountable. His unconstitutional…
— Senator Mark Kelly (@SenMarkKelly) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenMarkKelly/status/2010787235549876286?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 12, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Kelly spent the rest of the lengthy post reminding his audience that &#8220;military rank is earned, not given&#8221; and listing his personal accomplishments — particularly those that showcased his willingness to risk his life for those he served.
&#8220;I gave everything I had to this country and I earned my rank of Captain, United States Navy,&#8221; Kelly said, adding, &#8220;Now, Pete Hegseth wants our longest-serving military veterans to live with the constant threat that they could be deprived of their rank and pay years or even decades after they leave the military just because he or another Secretary of Defense doesn’t like what they’ve said. That’s not the way things work in the United States of America, and I won’t stand for it.&#8221;
Kelly went on to recall his oath to defend the Constitution and claimed that his lawsuit was simply the next phase of that mission: &#8220;Our freedom of speech, the separation of powers, and due process are not just words on a page.&#8221;
&#8220;So today, I filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of Defense because there are few things as important as standing up for the rights of the very Americans who fought to defend our freedoms,&#8221; he said.
Hegseth moved to officially censure Kelly in early January, launching a review of Kelly based on his role in creating a video that encouraged active duty service members to question the legality of their orders in real time.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Six weeks ago, Senator Mark Kelly — and five other members of Congress — released a reckless and seditious video that was clearly intended to undermine good order and military discipline. As a retired Navy Captain who is still receiving a military pension, Captain Kelly knows he…
— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) <a href="https://twitter.com/SecWar/status/2008189258528665898?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 5, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Captain Kelly’s status as a sitting United States Senator does not exempt him from accountability, and further violations could result in further action,&#8221; Hegseth said at the time. &#8220;These actions are based on Captain Kelly&#8217;s public statements from June through December 2025 in which he characterized lawful military operations as illegal and counseled members of the Armed Forces to refuse lawful orders. This conduct was seditious in nature and violated Articles 133 and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, to which Captain Kelly remains subject as a retired officer receiving pay.&#8221;

Mark Kelly Files Lawsuit Against War Secretary Over Code Of Conduct Review

Mark Kelly Files Lawsuit Against War Secretary Over UCMJ Review

Justice

narcoterrorists

U.S. Navy

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is making it crystal clear: wearing a suit in the halls of Congress doesn’t give you a free pass to spark a mutiny.
Hegseth announced a major escalation in the Department of War’s investigation into Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), directing a <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hegseth-moves-censure-sen-mark-kelly-review-his-retirement-rank-pay-over-seditious-video">formal censure letter</a> to be placed in the retired Navy captain’s permanent file. More importantly for Kelly’s pocketbook, Hegseth has ordered a 45-day review of the senator’s retirement rank and pay. The move follows &#8220;reckless and seditious&#8221; statements by Kelly that the administration says were intended to undermine military discipline.
&#8220;Six weeks ago, Senator Mark Kelly — and five other members of Congress — released a reckless and seditious video that was clearly intended to undermine good order and military discipline,&#8221; Hegseth stated. He reminded the Arizona Democrat that, as a retired officer still drawing a pension, he remains firmly under the thumb of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
The controversy stems from a video released in November titled &#8220;Don’t Give Up the Ship,&#8221; in which Kelly and a cohort of left-wing Democrats who are veterans urged service members to &#8220;refuse unlawful orders.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
We want to speak directly to members of the Military and the Intelligence Community.
The American people need you to stand up for our laws and our Constitution.
Don’t give up the ship. <a href="https://t.co/N8lW0EpQ7r">pic.twitter.com/N8lW0EpQ7r</a>
&mdash; Sen. Elissa Slotkin (@SenatorSlotkin) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenatorSlotkin/status/1990774492356902948?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 18, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Department of War points out that Kelly failed to cite a single actual &#8220;illegal&#8221; order, adding that Kelly used his military credentials to baselessly sow seeds of insubordination against the Trump administration’s efforts to secure the border and target suspected narco-terrorists.
Kelly, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/sen-mark-kelly-attacks-trump-and-hegseth-in-heated-rant-says-he-wont-back-down">appearing</a> at a town hall in Tucson in early December, remained defiant — and personal. He mocked President Donald Trump as &#8220;asleep at the wheel&#8221; and dismissed Hegseth as a &#8220;joke,&#8221; boasting that he won’t &#8220;back down.&#8221; Kelly’s wife, former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ), reportedly &#8220;laughed and laughed&#8221; at the prospect of a UCMJ prosecution.
But Hegseth isn&#8217;t laughing. Federal law prohibits any action intended to interfere with the loyalty or morale of the armed forces, carrying a potential ten-year prison sentence. While Kelly claims he is &#8220;standing up for the Constitution,&#8221; the administration argues he is hiding behind a shield of &#8220;legal gymnastics&#8221; to encourage mutiny. Kelly has 30 days to respond before the Navy decides just how much his &#8220;seditious&#8221; rhetoric will cost him.

MixCollage-05-Jan-2026-01-23-PM-3852

Hegseth Moves To Strip Mark Kelly Of Rank And Pay Over ‘Seditious’ Military Video

Congress

Politics

The Department of War has escalated a review of Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly to an “official Command Investigation.”
“The Office of the Secretary of War, in conjunction with the Department of War&#8217;s Office of the General Counsel, is escalating the preliminary review of Captain Mark Kelly, USN (Ret.), to an official Command Investigation. Retired Captain Kelly is currently under investigation for serious allegations of misconduct. Further official comments will be limited to preserve the integrity of the proceedings,” a department official told The Daily Wire.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
NEW: <a href="https://twitter.com/DeptofWar?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DeptofWar</a> official tells <a href="https://twitter.com/realDailyWire?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDailyWire</a> that DOW is escalating its preliminary review of Senator Mark Kelly to an “official Command Investigation.”
“Retired Captain Kelly is currently under investigation for serious allegations of misconduct,” official says. “Further…
— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) <a href="https://twitter.com/MaryMargOlohan/status/2000709725726347348?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 15, 2025</a></blockquote>
Last week, the U.S. Navy sent a report to War Secretary Pete Hegseth on a review of Kelly’s actions warning military members against following “illegal orders.” The Office of General Counsel for the War Department is providing advice and legal review of the investigation into Kelly.
The department <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/war-department-reviewing-serious-allegations-against-sen-mark-kelly-after-dem-military-message">initiated</a> a review of Kelly, a U.S. Navy combat veteran and retired astronaut, in November after the senator joined five other Democratic lawmakers in a video urging military members to disobey “illegal orders.” The Arizona Democrat is under consideration to be recalled to active duty to undergo “court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.”
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible c-link--underline" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Christmas Sale – Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
“The Department of War reminds all individuals that military retirees remain subject to the [Uniform Code of Military Justice] for applicable offenses, and federal laws such as 18 U.S.C. § 2387 prohibit actions intended to interfere with the loyalty, morale, or good order and discipline of the armed forces. Any violations will be addressed through appropriate legal channels,” the department said in a statement at the time.
At the time of the video, Hegseth denounced it in a <a href="https://x.com/PeteHegseth/status/1993008532187148582">post</a> on X, saying that message put out by the “seditious six” lawmakers is “despicable, reckless, and false.”
“Encouraging our warriors to ignore the orders of their Commanders undermines every aspect of ‘good order and discipline.’ Their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion — which only puts our warriors in danger,” said Hegseth.

Hegseth’s War Department Escalates Review Of Mark Kelly Over ‘Seditious Six’ Video

Department of Defense

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBsTw9By0X4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Speaking</a> at a town hall in Tucson, Arizona, Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly mocked President Donald Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, saying Trump was “asleep at the wheel” while calling Hegseth a “joke.”
“It feels to me that at every turn, this president is working against the American people,” Kelly told the crowd. “What I have seen from the Secretary of Defense and the president is not normal.”
“He sticks a full force of the DOD, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, on me for saying something that&#8217;s in the Uniform Code of Military Justice,” Kelly protested, referring to the video he and five other Democrats released urging troops to disobey orders they deemed to be unlawful. “You cannot make this stuff up. This is how ridiculous these people are, how unprofessional, how unqualified.”
“If he thinks I&#8217;m going to back down, he&#8217;s lost his mind,” Kelly boasted, adding, “He&#8217;s got a couple options. One of them is just go take a hike. That&#8217;s what I ultimately expect him to do. Or he could try to prosecute me, but I&#8217;m not going away because I&#8217;m standing up for everybody, not only myself.”
“They&#8217;re doing a lot of bad stuff,” he declared. “I mean, I&#8217;d put this on a list. It&#8217;ll be somewhere on a list of maybe 50 things. I&#8217;m not going to go through them. But let me tell you what he&#8217;s not doing. That&#8217;s even more important. What the president is not doing. This guy is literally asleep at the wheel &#8230; He has turned the United States government into a crappy reality TV show with bad ratings. And it&#8217;s time to turn it off,” Kelly stated.
Turning to Hegseth, he stated, “You&#8217;ll appreciate this. When Pete Hegseth tweeted that he was going to prosecute me under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I see this tweet. I take out my phone and I read it verbatim to Gabby. And by the second sentence, she starts laughing. She laughed and laughed. She laughed through the whole thing. Because she realizes two things. One: That guy&#8217;s a joke. And number two. I&#8217;m not backing down.”
“When we win back the House and maybe even the Senate, we get the subpoena power. We can have hearings to hold this administration accountable for the awful stuff that they&#8217;re doing,” he threatened.
“The president doesn&#8217;t care about the law,” he declared. “When you give this guy this kind of power, and we knew what he was going to do with it. I mean, he was going to abuse every lever of power that he has. He&#8217;s trying to do it against me personally right now.”

Sen. Kelly Speaks On President Trump and Defense Secretary Hegseth At US Capitol

Sen. Mark Kelly Attacks Trump And Hegseth In Heated Rant, Says He ‘Won’t Back Down’

Democrats have hit upon a two-pronged strategy for 2028. 
One of the strategies is to make members of the military truly uncomfortable about following their orders. The Democrats apparently believe that this will somehow create unrest and chaos. I don&#8217;t know how else to explain why Democrats are now suddenly coming out of the woodwork to suggest that a bunch of illegal orders are being issued from the Trump administration that members of the military must now consider.
When Democrats such as Senator Mark Kelly or Senator Elissa Slotkin from Michigan say to soldiers, to airmen, to members of the Navy, “If you guys follow an illegal order, you will be punished,” but then don&#8217;t define “illegal order,” what they are doing is creating a Catch-22 situation.
That’s because if people follow orders, they&#8217;re protected in the moment. But down the road, some Democrat may be elected and declare retroactively that those orders were illegal, members of the military should not have obeyed them, and they could end up court-martialed. 
Thus, it’s a Catch-22 for members of the military. That is why it is so negative. 
All of that is prong number one in the Democratic strategy; a chaos strategy with regard to military orders. 
Prong number two is setting up an entire slate of possible Democratic nominees who appear to be moderate.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2325-war-crime-hegseth-s-narcoterror-missile-strike-draws-fire?elementPosition=7&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-974957 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-300x50.webp 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-768x128.webp 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1536x256.webp 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-2048x341.webp 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
One of the big questions in the aftermath of President Trump winning his second term was: Will Democrats shift over to the Zohran Mamdani Left, or are they going to move toward a more moderate middle? Are they going to jettison much of their culture war baggage or start talking about trans, or are they going to stop talking about trans?: Are they going to up the ante on DEI or move away from DEI?
By all indicators, it appears the Democrats are not being morons. It appears that while people like Zohran Mamdani may be winning in places like New York and deep blue areas, what the Democrats are actually attempting to do is play moderate.
It seems that more and more often, they&#8217;re playing dead on the trans issue. It&#8217;s seemingly disappeared from the Democratic lexicon.
You don&#8217;t hear Democrats talking about “equity” in the same way that they were even a year and a half ago, when this was the be-all, end-all of American politics. 
Even on immigration, Democrats have taken a more moderate middle line. They&#8217;re no longer arguing, along with AOC, that ICE ought to be disbanded.
They&#8217;re not arguing anymore that the police ought to be defunded.
Instead, what they seem to be doing is arguing that President Trump is largely right on the southern border. They say he&#8217;s being overzealous in the prosecution of illegal immigrants who they say have not committed crimes. 
Democrats seem to be — at least in image — turning toward the middle.
That’s part of what is going on with the controversy swirling around Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.
To recap, last week, there was a report from The Washington Post. It argued that the White House had, via Hegseth, given a direct order to basically blow away members of narco-trafficking cartels in the water after they were already put out of commission.
Supposedly, Hegseth ordered everyone to be killed, up to and including survivors who were in the water clinging to the wreckage of the burning boat. This raised some fairly significant legal issues because, as it turns out, under the laws of war, under the Geneva Conventions, and under American law, you are not supposed to kill people who are no longer in the fight.
The 1949 Geneva Conventions, ratified by the United States, <a href="https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gci-1949/article-3">state</a>:
<blockquote>Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat (out of combat) by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction based on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above persons: violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment, and torture …</blockquote>
In other words, you can&#8217;t take somebody as a P.O.W. and shoot them. Under the Geneva Conventions, there is no policy of “We take no prisoners.”
There is the possibility that these people would not be considered hors de combat, depending on the condition of the boat; the boat may have been dead in the water, but at the same time, they could call their narco-trafficking friends. That is one possible defense.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt read <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/karoline-leavitt-says-hegseth-didnt-order-second-strike-on-narco-terrorists-boat">this statement</a>:
<blockquote>President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have made it clear that presidentially-designated narco-terrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war. With respect to the strikes in question on September 2nd, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes. Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law, directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated. </blockquote>
The contention here is that there was a general order given to take out the boat, and that possibly Admiral Bradley is the person who actually gave the order to conduct a second strike, if, in fact, a second strike was conducted.
The New York Times published a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/01/us/hegseth-drug-boat-strike-order-venezuela.html">follow-up piece</a> in which they seemed to admit that Hegseth did not give a general kill order, especially for people who were already hors de combat.
All of this seems like a convenient way of simply providing support to the Democrats who released the video that told members of the military not to obey orders.
This feels ginned up.
It feels as though The Washington Post went ahead and reported a story on extraordinarily thin sourcing to create the possibility of an illegal order that, it turns out, may not have been illegal at all, in order to provide support for the Democratic narrative that this administration is lawless, and that only a moderate military veteran who might be running in 2028 can step into the breach.
This feels like the predicate for a move by the Democratic Party to elevate somebody like Senator Mark Kelly, a former astronaut who tends to portray himself as a moderate, even though he voted with Joe Biden in the Senate almost all of the time.
The Democrats are not going to burn themselves down by openly championing the leftist causes they truly believe in.
They’ll wait until they gain power before they turn on that spigot.

hegsethkelly

The Democratic Party’s Two-Pronged 2028 Strategy: Military Chaos, Moderate Messaging

Ben Shapiro

narco-terrorism

Opinion

Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) claimed on Sunday that he was worried American troops might only learn after the fact that an order they had carried out was unlawful.
Kelly, already under fire for his participation in a video that encouraged members of the military to question the validity of their orders in real time, doubled down during a Sunday morning appearance on NBC&#8217;s &#8220;Meet the Press.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) went on NBC and told active-duty U.S. military members that if they follow orders to strike drug-smuggling boats they might be committing illegal acts and could be prosecuted later.
He said troops “may find out down the road that they did something that… <a href="https://t.co/4gsRmkRbR0">pic.twitter.com/4gsRmkRbR0</a>
— Media Lies (@MediasLies) <a href="https://twitter.com/MediasLies/status/1995504474161365328?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 1, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;I want to put the question to you,&#8221; anchor Kristen Welker began. &#8220;If you were still in uniform, if you received an order to strike suspected drug boats overseas and kill everybody onboard, would you refuse that order in real time?&#8221;
&#8220;Well, let me start by saying I&#8217;ve sunk two boats — two ships,&#8221; Kelly replied, referencing his own actions during the first Gulf War. &#8220;Never once did I question whether those orders were legal or illegal. People can tell the difference — should be able to tell the difference between something that is unlawful and something that is lawful.&#8221;
&#8220;If I was ever given an unlawful order, I would refuse — you know, even if you have time, you can certainly go to the Judge Advocate Generals, the lawyers, and have a discussion about it,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;If you don&#8217;t have time, you just say simply I&#8217;m not going to do that, that&#8217;s against the law.&#8221;
&#8220;It puts a lot of burden on the troops to make a decision in real time,&#8221; Welker observed.
&#8220;It&#8217;s a tremendous amount of burden on officers in the military,&#8221; Kelly agreed. &#8220;But that is their responsibility, and they can figure out — you know, a reasonable person can tell something that is legal and something that is illegal.&#8221;
Welker asked again, directly, whether Kelly would refuse the orders to strike drug boats.
Kelly did not offer a definitive answer, but instead said that he worried about troops who &#8220;may find out down the road that they did something that is illegal&#8221; because they acted on an order that reflected &#8220;the whims of a president&#8221; rather than law.
Thus far, there has been no <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/does-the-president-have-the-authority-to-strike-venezuelan-drug-boats">real consensus</a> regarding the legality of the strikes.

958A875C-CA84-4009-8B0E-B0EE1A949445_1_201_a

Mark Kelly Encourages Active Military To Question Orders In Real Time

Mark Kelly Doubles Down, Encourages Active Military To Question Orders In Real Time

Media

Sports journalist Stephen A. Smith, a Democrat who nonetheless sometimes espouses perspectives at odds with the Democratic Party, <a href="https://grabien.com/story?id=558294&amp;utm_source=cliplist&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=cliplist20251127&amp;utm_content=story558294">slammed</a> Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) for participating in a video calling for military servicemembers to defy unlawful orders from their superiors.
Last week, a group of six Democrats, comprised of two senators and four members of the House, released an incendiary video in which they encouraged members of the military and intelligence community to disobey illegal orders they receive from the Trump administration.
Sens. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Mark Kelly (D-AZ), along with Reps. Chris Deluzio (D-PA), Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH), and Jason Crow (D-CO), all former members of the military, encouraged military members to “refuse illegal orders.”
“The administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,” the Democrat lawmakers claimed. “Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, right now.”
The Democrats accused the Trump administration of disrespecting constitutional guardrails, continuing, “The threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home.”
Right now, DailyWire+ annual memberships are fifty percent off during our Black Friday sale. Join now at <a href="http://dailywire.com/blackfriday" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dailywire.com/blackfriday</a>.
“Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders,” they pronounced, reiterating, “You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.”
Smith targeted Kelly, saying, “Respectfully, senator, what the hell are you doing looking into the camera and telling military men and women to ignore the commander-in-chief? How dare you? How dare you do that? That’s right, I&#8217;m calling it out.”
“I never served in the military,” he continued. “That&#8217;s true. I have family members who did. Some of my best friends have, Marines, Air Force, Navy, Army. I haven’t heard one of them, not one of them, say that was okay. How dare you do that?”
“Is it treason? No. Is it punishable by death? It shouldn&#8217;t be,” he said, in an apparent reference to President Donald Trump’s response to the video. “So the answer is no. But you know better, Senator Kelly. You know better! How dare you do that?! What are you supposed to do? You are a ranking senator. You could go to the Senate, you could go to the House, you could put up — draw up paperwork, you could try to start articles of impeachment if you think there&#8217;s something illegal.”
“I mean, damn, it ain&#8217;t like y&#8217;all haven’t done it before,” he pointed out. “You impeached the man twice. Where did that get you? Guy is behind, back in the White House. Had you left him alone in 2016 and 2020, maybe he wouldn&#8217;t be back terrorizing the Democratic Party the way that he is. But you did it! You did it! And here you are again with this nonsense. How dare you do that? I’m not a military person, and I know better than that! You don&#8217;t tell military men and women to ignore an order from the commander-in-chief. You don&#8217;t do that.”

MixCollage-27-Nov-2025-09-46-AM-5838

Stephen A. Smith Blasts Mark Kelly For Video Urging Troops To ‘Refuse Illegal Orders’

Stephen A. Smith

Menu