Some Democrat Lawmakers Video Stirs Debate

“Don’t give up the ship,” they said. The irony? The last time that phrase was famously uttered, the ship was given up — captured by the British, no less. A noble sentiment, sure, but not exactly a winning strategy. And now, in 2025, a group of Democrat lawmakers has dusted off that same dramatic line and repackaged it into a minute-and-a-half video aimed directly at the U.S. military and intelligence community. The message? If you don’t like the orders from the commander-in-chief — which, just to be clear, is President Donald J. Trump — go ahead and ignore them.

Let’s not play dumb here. They never say Trump’s name, but come on — they might as well have rented a Times Square billboard that screams “We don’t recognize this administration.” This wasn’t a subtle civics lesson about the chain of command. This was a politically-charged wink-and-nod to anyone in uniform who still listens to MSNBC at the gym.

The video, posted by Sen. Elissa Slotkin on social media, features the usual suspects from the “we know better” wing of the Democrat Party: Slotkin, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), and Reps. Chris Deluzio, Chrissy Houlahan, Maggie Goodlander, and Jason Crow — all former military or intel folks, all deeply embedded in the Beltway groupthink, and all seemingly convinced that they get to decide which orders count as lawful.

They claim their goal is to uphold the Constitution. That sounds noble — until you realize they’re essentially telling soldiers, sailors, airmen, and analysts to start making their own judgment calls about which orders are “legal” and which ones aren’t. As if the chaos of war or high-stakes intel work needs more ambiguity. This isn’t about protecting the Constitution. It’s about undermining the Commander-in-Chief — and doing it with a smile on camera.

Senator Kelly, who flew combat missions in the Navy, now apparently thinks the battlefield needs more lawyers. He accuses the Trump administration of “pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.” Sure, Mark. That’s definitely what’s happening — not, say, a serious effort by this administration to root out corruption, restore border security, and re-establish law and order after years of bureaucratic overreach and activist-driven policy disasters.

Then comes the kicker. Over and over, they say it: “You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders.” Well, who determines what’s illegal, exactly? A uniformed officer acting on orders from the chain of command? Or a D.C. politician with a Twitter account and a grudge?