FBI, DOJ Seek Interviews with Six Lawmakers Following Video on Military Orders

FBI and DOJ seek interviews with six lawmakers over a video urging troops to disobey illegal orders amid tensions.
View of the Washington DC Capitol building under a cloudy sky. View of the Washington DC Capitol building under a cloudy sky.
By MDL.

Executive Summary

  • The FBI and DOJ have requested interviews with six lawmakers regarding a video on military orders.
  • President Trump described the video as seditious and called for the lawmakers’ arrest.
  • The Department of War is investigating Senator Mark Kelly for potential UCMJ violations.
  • Secretary Pete Hegseth criticized the video for potentially undermining military chain of command.
  • Police investigated a bomb threat at Senator Elissa Slotkin’s home amid the controversy.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Justice have reportedly contacted the U.S. Capitol Police to arrange interviews with six Democratic members of Congress following the release of a video urging military service members to disregard orders deemed unlawful. The outreach by federal law enforcement comes five days after President Donald Trump publicly called for the arrest and trial of the lawmakers, characterizing their conduct as seditious.

According to reports first published by Fox News, the inquiry focuses on a 90-second video featuring Senators Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Mark Kelly (D-AZ), along with Representatives Chris Deluzio (D-PA), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH), Jason Crow (D-CO), and Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA). In the footage, posted to social media on November 18, the lawmakers advise members of the armed forces and intelligence community to “stand up for our laws” and refuse to obey illegal orders.

President Trump responded to the video on the Truth Social platform, stating that the lawmakers’ actions constitute “seditious behavior at the highest level.” In his posts, President Trump wrote, “Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL,” adding that “an example must be set.”

Department of War Secretary Pete Hegseth condemned the video, describing it as “despicable” and an attempt to inject doubt into the military chain of command. “In the military, vague rhetoric and ambiguity undermines trust, creates hesitation in the chain of command, and erodes cohesion,” Hegseth stated. He emphasized that established procedures already exist for handling unlawful orders without political intervention.

The Department of War announced Monday that it has launched an investigation specifically into Senator Mark Kelly, a retired U.S. Navy captain. The department indicated that Kelly could potentially face recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative actions for alleged violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). A department statement noted that military retirees remain subject to the UCMJ and federal laws prohibiting actions intended to interfere with the loyalty or discipline of the armed forces.

Senator Kelly released a statement defending his participation in the video as an act of upholding his oath to the Constitution. He characterized the Pentagon’s investigation as an intimidation tactic, stating, “If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this administration accountable, it won’t work.”

Amid the escalating rhetoric, law enforcement officials have responded to security threats targeting the lawmakers involved. On Friday night, the Michigan State Police and Oakland County Sheriff’s Office responded to a bomb threat at Senator Slotkin’s residence. Authorities searched the property and confirmed no immediate danger was present; Slotkin was not home at the time.

Constitutional and Military Legal Implications

The involvement of the FBI and the Department of War in matters regarding sitting members of Congress raises significant constitutional questions concerning the separation of powers and legislative speech. The Department of War’s assertion of jurisdiction over a retired officer currently serving in the Senate presents a complex legal conflict between military code and civilian governance. Furthermore, the investigation highlights the tension between the military’s strict requirements for good order and discipline and the political oversight role of the legislature. It is important to note that all individuals facing investigations or accusations of criminal or military offenses are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Add a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Secret Link