Democrats' Military Propaganda Video: A Sedition Campaign Designed to Undermine Command and Endanger Lives

November 21, 2025 - A slickly produced video released on November 18, 2025, by six Democratic lawmakers with military or intelligence backgrounds—Sens. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), and Reps. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), and Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.)—urges active-duty service members to "refuse illegal orders," repeating the phrase with dramatic emphasis as if scripting a call to arms. Titled "Don't Give Up the Ship," the 90-second clip features the group in synchronized readings, warning that "threats to our Constitution are coming from right here at home" and stressing, "You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders." While framed as a reminder of constitutional oaths, this coordinated message sows insidious doubt in the ranks, encouraging troops to second-guess directives from their chain of command—a tactic that qualifies as sedition under 18 U.S.C. § 2384, which criminalizes conspiring to oppose government authority by force or intimidation.

The video's professional polish—complete with unified phrasing, ominous music, and a nautical motif evoking naval defiance—betrays an organized propaganda effort far beyond casual advocacy. Such high-production values typically require significant funding, yet no public disclosures detail the source; similar Democratic initiatives, like 2024's $50 million election misinformation ads through Priorities USA, suggest PAC or donor backing, though FEC filings as of November 20 show no direct ties. By planting seeds of hesitation among 1.3 million active-duty personnel, the message preys on the inherent tension in Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which permits refusal of "manifestly unlawful" orders but leaves judgment to trained commanders, not individual soldiers in the fog of war. Troops lack field lawyers or time for legal consultations; even momentary doubt can cascade into chaos, where hesitation costs lives and emboldens adversaries. This is not education—it's subversion, calculated to fracture unity and render the military vulnerable at a time of heightened global threats.

The lawmakers' track record amplifies the sedition charge, as they have repeatedly branded lawful Trump directives as illegal, revealing a pattern of politicized obstruction. Slotkin sponsored the "No Troops in Our Streets Act" on November 13, falsely deeming National Guard deployments to cities like Los Angeles unconstitutional under 10 U.S.C. § 12406, which authorizes federalization for rebellion or law enforcement breakdowns—precisely the case after October 2025 riots injured 100 ICE officers. Crow and Kelly condemned the Caribbean drug boat strikes as "extrajudicial," ignoring the DOJ's October 2025 opinion affirming legality under 18 U.S.C. § 2332b for countering narco-terrorism that has killed 83 since September. Houlahan called the June 2025 Iran nuclear facility strike "illegal escalation" on CNN, disregarding the 2024 Office of Legal Counsel memo upholding it as Article II self-defense. These baseless attacks, echoed in the video's vague warnings, aim to erode trust in executive authority without evidence, mirroring tactics that paralyzed operations during the 2020 riots.

This propaganda poses a profound national security threat, endangering both troops and the nation they defend. In combat or border enforcement, orders must flow without pause. Hesitation in a firefight or riot could mean the difference between survival and catastrophe, with no time for scrolls through legal precedents. By urging self-determination over obedience, the video invites anarchy, potentially costing American lives while adversaries like China and Russia exploit the discord.

President Trump's November 20 Truth Social posts on "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL" named no individuals, yet the video's creators self-identified as targets, their reactions screaming guilty conscience. Slotkin tweeted, "This is the law. Passed down from our Founding Fathers," while Schumer erupted on the Senate floor, decrying it as "threats" and "intimidation." Murphy dropped an F-bomb in a November 19 interview, raging against "tyranny," and Lofgren labeled it "authoritarianism." Their defensive fury—admitting the posts are aimed at them without specifics—confirms culpability, as if knowing their words cross into treasonous territory under 18 U.S.C. § 2384.

This Democratic effort is sedition plain and simple: a deliberate, funded campaign to incite insubordination, fracture military cohesion, and subvert lawful command for partisan ends. By design, it risks lives and security, betraying the very oaths its makers invoke. The law demands accountability—arrests and trials must follow to preserve the republic.