Have you ever watched a political drama unfold in real time and wondered if the script was written by someone who genuinely hates subtlety? That’s where we are right now.
A sitting United States senator, a decorated combat pilot and astronaut no less, is being eyed by the FBI. Not for leaking secrets or taking bribes, mind you. No, the alleged offense is appearing in a short video reminding members of the armed forces that they’re allowed—actually required—to refuse unlawful orders.
Welcome to November 2025, where telling soldiers to follow the Constitution can apparently land you in the counterterrorism crosshairs.
When “Follow the Law” Becomes a Federal Case
Six Democratic members of Congress, all with serious national security credentials, put out a video last week. The message was straightforward: the oath is to the Constitution, not to any individual. If an order violates the law, service members not only can refuse it—they must.
In any other administration, this would be about as controversial as reminding people to wear seatbelts. But we’re not in any other administration.
The president saw the clip, didn’t like the tone, and within days the words “traitors” and “seditious behavior” were flying. He even mused publicly that “in the old days” this kind of talk would have been punishable by death. Let that sink in for a second.
Who Exactly Are These “Traitors”?
The lawmakers aren’t random back-benchers either. The list reads like a defense hawk’s dream team:
- A retired Navy captain and four-time space shuttle pilot who also happens to be married to a miraculous shooting survivor turned gun-safety advocate.
- A former CIA analyst who served multiple tours in Iraq.
- Army Rangers, Pentagon civilians, the works.
These aren’t people who learned about military discipline from movies. They’ve lived it. And they’re the ones now getting phone calls from the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division.
“The President directing the FBI to target us is exactly why we made this video in the first place.”
– One of the lawmakers targeted
The Defense Secretary Enters the Chat
If the FBI angle wasn’t enough, the new Secretary of Defense decided to make it personal. After the senator in question posted a photo proudly displaying his hard-earned Navy ribbons, the secretary—a former weekend news host turned cabinet official—tweeted a uniform correction.
Yes, you read that right. While the Pentagon is floating the idea of recalling a retired captain to active duty for a possible court-martial, the secretary is out here playing fashion police over medal placement.
It would be comical if the stakes weren’t so high.
A Quick Refresher on How This Is Supposed to Work
Let’s be crystal clear about something that apparently needs repeating in 2025: the American military swears an oath to the Constitution, not the president.
This isn’t some fringe legal theory. It’s literally drilled into every recruit from day one. The Uniform Code of Military Justice explicitly states that unlawful orders carry no force. The Nuremberg trials reinforced this principle for the entire world.
Yet here we are, watching the machinery of government crank up against members of Congress for stating this basic fact out loud.
The Backdrop That Makes This Particularly Chilling
Context matters, and the timing here is impossible to ignore. The video dropped shortly after the military began conducting lethal strikes on boats in international waters—operations that many legal experts argue lack proper congressional authorization.
When lawmakers ask perfectly reasonable questions about the legal basis for using deadly force, they get letters demanding transparency. When they remind troops that illegal orders aren’t actually binding, they get FBI interviews and threats of court-martial.
See the pattern?
What Recall to Active Duty Actually Means
The Pentagon floating the idea of yanking a retired officer back to active duty isn’t just theater. If it happens, the senator would lose his civilian status, his Senate immunity for speech, and potentially face military justice for statements made as an elected official.
Think about that. A co-equal branch of government could have one of its members stripped of office because the executive branch doesn’t like what he said.
We have a term for governments that silence legislators through threats of arrest. They’re not usually described as constitutional republics.
The Broader Implications Nobody’s Talking About (But Should)
This moment feels like one of those quiet turning points historians look back on and wonder why more people didn’t sound the alarm.
If Congress can be intimidated into silence on matters of war and peace—if reminding troops of their legal obligations can be treated as sedition—what exactly is left of civilian control of the military?
And perhaps more immediately: what active-duty officer is going to feel comfortable raising legal concerns about an order when they see what happens to retired flag officers and members of Congress who do?
“No amount of intimidation or harassment will ever stop us from doing our jobs and honoring our Constitution.”
– Joint statement from targeted House members
Good words. The question is whether they’ll still feel that way after the interviews start, after the investigations drag on, after the legal bills pile up.
Because that’s how this usually works. Not with tanks in the streets, but with investigations that never quite conclude, with security clearance reviews that stretch for years, with the slow grinding pressure that makes people decide it’s easier to just stay quiet.
Where This Road Might Lead
I’ve covered politics long enough to know that today’s “unprecedented” often becomes tomorrow’s “new normal.” The first time a president calls for jailing his opponents, people clutch pearls. The tenth time, it barely makes the news.
We’re not there yet. But watching the FBI get deployed against lawmakers for protected political speech—while the Defense Department threatens to strip a senator of his civilian status—feels an awful lot like watching the guardrails get tested.
And guardrails only work until they don’t.
The lawmakers say they won’t be bullied. I believe them. The real question is whether the institutions around them have the same backbone.
Because if this can happen to a senator with four combat missions over Iraq and four trips to space, it can happen to anyone.
And that’s not drama. That’s just math.
