As a former U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Cir., clerk, lifetime litigator, counsel who worked for two presidents, and led investigations for two U.S. House speakers, I understand federal law. As a former ten-year U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer, I understand military law. Americans need to take a breath.
Six questions deserve immediate answers.
First, what is President Trump doing – according to Democrat partisans, anti-Trump, former military members of Congress – that warrants U.S. military personnel disobeying military orders?
Answer: While insinuated rather than stated, the unspoken allegation being fed by Democrat partisans, anti-Trump, former military members of Congress, is that three sets of actions by President Trump are unlawful, thus represent illegal orders.
The three actions, one can infer from Democrat talking points, are: Deployment of National Guard to stabilize violence in several cities; using force on the “high seas” to stop designated terror groups from trafficking drugs; and deploying ICE to arrest, detain, and deport identified illegal alien felons.
To be clear, there are no illegalities in these orders, which is one reason the unethical, insinuating Democrats – that is how Democrats play these days – refused to identify any illegal order.
Fully ten presidents since FDR (a Democrat) have deployed the National Guard under Title 10, or in concert with a governor under Title 32, to stabilize lawless cities, including Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton (both Democrats). This is exactly what Title 10 was enacted to permit, no illegalities.
Historically, the U.S. has three polices tied to engaging combatants, including terrorists, drug traffickers, and pirates on the “high seas.” We directly confront, where intelligence and prudence require, with lethal force. We support foreign “shootdown policies,” including in South America. We U.S. Coast Guard helicopters have snipers. These policies are 25 years old, so no lawlessness here.
Finally, ICE has full authority, given to them by federal statute, to arrest and deport illegal aliens guilty of felonies, and absence felony to swiftly adjudicate (administratively) a claim of asylum, and deport.
In short, normalizing illegality, then undermining a president for using the National Guard, setting shootdown policies, and deploying law enforcement is itself borderline criminal. To execute the laws and to protect public safety is what a president, constitutionally, is required to do.
Second, does any order given by President Trump or his Secretary of Defense violate federal or military law (Uniform Code of Criminal Justice, UCMJ)? As indicated above, no. The additional military law reference is important. Posse Comitatus says a president cannot use the military to fight against the American people, but the National Guard operates in support of law enforcement.
Third, what risks arise when members of Congress direct 2 million U.S. military personnel to consider disobeying direct orders from the Commander in Chief? Huge risks. Since most military personnel are not lawyers, this Democrat crossfire – creating intentional confusion – undermines U.S. military readiness, and is a disgraceful attempt to take executive authority from a president.
Fourth, did Democrats give “comfort” to the enemy, an element of treason in the Constitution? Flip the script. Imagine China’s National People’s Congress telling China’s military they can disobey President IX, Iran’s Islamic Consultative Assembly saying Iran’s military can disobey Khamenei, or Russia’s Federal Assembly questioning Putin’s orders. Give us comfort? You bet.
Fifth, was President Trump accurate when he said encouraging the military to disobey orders is “sedition,” and is it punishable by “death?” While passions run high, Democrats are reckless.
The crime of “seditious conspiracy” (18 USC 2384) does exist. The facts presented – even with the qualifier that only “illegal” orders be disobeyed – are playing with fire. Democrats, who can name no illegal act, know this is pure politics, high theater, and dangerously undermines U.S. readiness.
Is it “sedition?” “Sedition” is conspiring to use force to overthrow the government, levy war against it, or prevent the execution of any law. It is punishable by 20 years in prison.
“Treason,” by contrast, under Article 3, Section 3, of the U.S. Constitution and 18 USC 2381, is harder to prove, but does contemplate “death.” Article 94 of the UCMJ also allows “death” as punishment. That said, no one in the U.S. has been punished by death for treason since 1862.
Sixth, at this moment in history, is this discussion good for U.S. national or domestic security? Is it a thoughtful, judicious, non-political way for Democrats to defend Democrat governors unable to control crime, or defend terror groups trafficking drugs, or complain of ICE agents arresting illegals with felony records? Answer: Absolutely not.
Bottom line: What former military Democrats in Congress did, with non-military, non-lawyer Democrats like Maine’s Representative Chellie Pingree, is reckless. They insinuate what does not exist – encouraging insubordination, sowing distrust, comforting our enemies, and undermining U.S. military readiness. This kind of thing has to stop. Take a breath.
Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, Maine attorney, ten-year naval intelligence officer (USNR), and 25-year businessman. He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (North Country Press, 2018), and “Cherish America: Stories of Courage, Character, and Kindness” (Tower Publishing, 2024). He is the National Spokesman for AMAC. Today, he is running to be Maine’s next Governor (please visit BobbyforMaine.com to learn more)!
Read the full article here