Fallout from ‘illegal orders’ video escalates battle with Democrats over US patriotism

The video, released last week by six Democratic lawmakers, kicked off a bitter partisan debate over what constitutes treason and reflects a broader political debate about what constitutes patriotism in today's polarized political environment.

In the 90-second video, six Democrats, all with military or national security experience, criticized Trump and reminded service members that they have the right — even the responsibility — to disobey “unlawful orders.”

Although they did not specify which orders they were referring to, it is believed they were referring to the deployment of National Guard troops in US cities and US Navy raids on suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean.

“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence professionals against American citizens,” they said.

You swore an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution, they reminded their military listeners, and “threats to our Constitution come not only from abroad, but right here at home.”

In some ways, this rhetoric is not too different from that used by the president himself, who warned, including in speeches to military audiences, that America faces an “enemy within.”

However, Trump's reaction to the video was swift and harsh.

He called it “seditious behavior punishable by death” and said Democratic lawmakers should be arrested and tried. He also shared Truth Social posts that repeated those calls, including one that recommended hanging six people.

White House press secretary Caroline Leavitt quickly downplayed Trump's comments, saying he was not proposing public executions. But this week, the consequences the administration may face are taking shape.

On Monday morning, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed that the Pentagon was investigating whether Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, one of the six, violated military laws by participating in the video.

A retired Navy captain, combat pilot and astronaut could theoretically be recalled to active duty and face court-martial or administrative action.

The Pentagon statement noted that the Uniform Code of Military Justice prohibits interference with “loyalty, morale, or good order and discipline in the armed forces.”

According to Rachel VanLandingham, a former Air Force lawyer now teaching at Southwestern Law School, the Pentagon's attempt to recall and prosecute Kelly would have been “dead on arrival” if it had gone before a military judge.

“There has never been a sitting legislator, congressman or woman who has been involuntarily recalled to active duty,” she said. “This just doesn’t happen.”

She added that the real goal is to spectacle the Defense Department's efforts – a “campaign of intimidation.”

Kelly is not the only one who has come under intense government scrutiny. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that the FBI plans to question all participating Democrats to determine whether there is evidence of “illegal acts.”

Meanwhile, a CIA spokesman said Michigan Sen. Eliza Slotkin, who was also involved in the video, has “joined the ranks of disgraced former intelligence officers” who are pushing a “vicious and disingenuous political agenda.”

Even if it's a “spectacle” as VanLandingham suggests, it does point to a new, growing clash between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to patriotism and which side best embodies it.

Trump has long supported the flag—sometimes literally—and is an ardent supporter of American exceptionalism. He holds rallies in front of American soldiers and celebrates displays of military might. Lee Greenwood's American ballad “Proud to be” has been the president's favorite music at rallies and other public events for many years.

Many on the left are increasingly wary of such public displays, often tacitly agreeing with the old Samuel Johnson quote that patriotism is “the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

A June 2025 Gallup poll found a record low of 36% of Democrats saying they were “extremely” or “very” proud to be an American, compared with 92% of Republicans.

There have been political campaigns, such as Kamala Harris last year and Hillary Clinton in 2016, that have tried to reclaim patriotism as an attribute of the Democratic Party.

“We love our country,” Harris said at a rally in Philadelphia last August. “And I believe that fighting for the ideals of our country is the highest form of patriotism.”

But with the next presidential election nearly three years away, Democrats—either through strategy or out of political self-preservation in the face of Trump's attacks—are tackling a similar theme.

Kelly responded to news of the Pentagon investigation by saying, “I don't think there is anything more patriotic than standing up for the Constitution.”

Recent anti-Trump protests, such as last month's nationwide No Kings Day, have framed their objections by waving the American Pride flag. Democratic leaders have sought to hire military veterans for public office, including more than 30 potential House candidates, according to a recent New York Times report.

It is too early to tell whether their efforts will lead to electoral success or the rehabilitation of the Democrats' brand, which has been plagued by internal divisions since last year's presidential defeat.

But patriotism can be a powerful force in American politics. And, at least for now, the six lawmakers who have received targeted ire—and investigative attention—from Trump and his administration appear to have no interest in giving up the fight.

As Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona bluntly stated this week as Trump stepped up his attacks on Democrats.

“[Expletive] you and your investigation,” he wrote on X. “In America, we swear by the constitution, not wannabe kings.”

Additional reporting by Max Matza