Trump’s threats against Dems show he is unfit to lead

The news that came from across the Potomac on Monday was shocking: the Pentagon had launched an investigation into Mark Kelly, a combat veteran and Democratic senator from Arizona, after supposedly receiving “serious allegations of misconduct.”

Kelly was unfazed. “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,” he responded on social media. “I’ve given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution.”

Last week the senator, a prominent Trump critic, appeared with five other Democratic lawmakers in a video in which they reminded military members of their duty to disobey illegal orders. “This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,” they said. “Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution. Right now, the threats coming to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.”

The group, which besides Kelly included Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Reps. Jason Crow of Colorado, Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, are all military veterans and former intelligence officials. The reminder came against the backdrop of widespread concerns that the Pentagon’s strikes against boats they have alleged are carrying drugs violate the rules of war.

The senators were well within their legal rights to make this statement — and they had a moral duty to do so. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) governs the conduct of every person in the U.S. military, and applies equally to all ranks and branches, whether in combat, or not. 

All service members are taught and expected to understand the UCMJ’s core principles. Ignorantia juris non excusat, or ‘Ignorance of the law,’ is not a legal defense in the U.S. military. Under Art. 92 of the UCMJ, members have a duty to obey all lawful commands, and they have a parallel duty to disobey all unlawful commands. Obeying a manifestly illegal order, like an order to target civilians, can expose a service member to criminal liability.

The duty to disobey manifestly illegal orders is a cornerstone of international law, with foundations in Nazi atrocities-related post-World War II trials like Nuremberg. Orders of such nature that their unlawfulness is clear and obvious, such as an order to target unarmed civilians, are considered manifestly illegal.

But as the video circulated across social media and cable news, Donald Trump became unglued, unleashing a series of posts confirming that he is a danger to all Americans and unfit to lead the military. Trump posted on Truth Social:

It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand – We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET.

“SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” he added in a later post.

Eliciting stochastic violence, Trump then reposted other posts calling the lawmakers “traitors” and “domestic terrorist Democrats” and another reading, “HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!”

On Friday, at least three of the lawmakers — Crow, Deluzio and Houlahan — said they had informed U.S. Capitol Police and filed complaints in response to the president’s threats. Speaking Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” Slotkin told host Martha Raddatz that she and her colleagues were facing threats. “I think almost immediately, you know, the security situation changed for all of us.”

The Michigan senator characterized Trump’s behavior as a diversion tactic: “He’s trying to get us to shut up because he doesn’t want to be talking about this. In fact, I would argue that one of the things that he’s been doing by repeating it and talking about it is trying to distract us from the big stories of last week, which were the [Jeffrey] Epstein files and then the economy.”

Trump has since denied he was “threatening death,” but said the group were “in serious trouble.”

The president, though, is the one who should be in hot water. Along with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, he is issuing manifestly illegal orders to murder civilians.

The pair have ordered the summary execution of at least 83 people so far in suspected drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean and Pacific. Trump and Hegseth have called these targets “narco-terrorists” because they think that means they can treat them as enemy combatants in a war that does not exist. 

It doesn’t. Even if the victims were “narco-terrorists,” for which Trump has provided zero evidence, at worst, they are citizen criminals entitled to interdiction and legal process under U.S. and international law. No country has the right to execute non-combatant civilians unless faced with imminent threat, otherwise unhinged leaders could shoot people for sport, which Trump’s snuff videos of the strikes are chillingly starting to resemble.

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

The widespread international condemnation of the president’s campaign is growing, along with a global chorus accusing him of murder that would be louder if Trump weren’t threatening foreign trade like a mob boss. Formerly strong U.S. allies, including the UK, Colombia and the Netherlands, have either refused or suspended intelligence sharing with the U.S. because of the illegal strikes. Military support groups are starting to talk in earnest, offering counseling and advice on what to do when faced with illegal order situations. 

Trump’s orders add to the well of evidence that he is unfit to lead — and is a metastasizing threat to the U.S. citizenry. Since returning to office in January, the president has used the military for domestic law enforcement, which has long been illegal under federal law; openly turned the Justice Department into a lawless political weapon; sent armed, masked and insufficiently trained federal agents to attack people in their beds, at schools and churches, and on the sidewalks; and permitted his closest advisers to publicly encourage excessive brutality as his “war” secretary praises “lethality” unconstrained by the laws of combat.

But that’s not all. Trump has advanced violence toward the media, including last week he appeared to excuse the dismemberment of a journalist on the orders of, according to U.S. intelligence, of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who was feted with an Oval Office visit and lavish dinner. The president has officially declared groups who oppose him politically to be “domestic terrorists” in clear violation of the First Amendment, and his administration has been caught lying about peaceful protesters threatening Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in order to justify brutality.

At the same time he has been violating the rule of law at home — and transforming the nation into an occupied military zone — Trump’s national security blunders have seriously increased the risk of harm from outside forces. Some of these include Sharing a plan of attack through unsecured sources; posting juvenile social media rants that gave Iran advance notice to move their enriched uranium; accidently declaring part of Mexico as U.S. territory now under American command; alienating NATO, demoralizing Ukraine and supporting Putin’s murderous regime in Russia; claiming victory in Gaza, even as both Israel and Hamas continue fighting; and, most recently, selling fighter jets to Saudi Arabia despite national security warnings.

These cumulative blunders suggest that the president doesn’t care about long-term, or even short-term, risks to national security. Trump’s plans to sell F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia ignores consistent warnings from national security officials that doing so would put the American military’s advanced technology at risk of theft from China. He either doesn’t care or he lacks the cognitive capacity to understand that Riyadh and Beijing have a formal security partnership. No matter. The Saudis, he told reporters in the Oval Office, “want to buy them, they’ve been a great ally.”

These facts trigger a duty to act, regardless of politics.

Federal officials, including the president’s Cabinet and members of Congress, all swore an oath to follow the Constitution and protect the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Legal tools within their reach include impeachment and removal, congressional oversight and the power of the purse, and the 25th Amendment.

With America in danger, this should not be a partisan issue. Federal officials’ complicity and failure to act is now a dereliction of duty in deference to a man whose cognition is in question, who still has access to the nuclear codes.