(Washington) Democratic elected officials, appearing in a video posted on social networks where they urge American troops to disobey “illegal orders”, claim to have been contacted by the federal police (FBI) to schedule interviews, suggesting a possible investigation.
Published at
This would be the second investigation linked to this video, coming the day after the Pentagon announced that it was examining the case of Democratic Senator Mark Kelly (Ariz.) for possible violations of military law. These actions by the FBI and the Pentagon follow accusations of sedition brought against elected officials by President Donald Trump, who declared on social networks that this crime was “punishable by the death penalty”.
These investigations mark an unprecedented escalation for federal law enforcement and military institutions, traditionally aloof from partisan conflicts. They also highlight the Trump administration’s willingness to push the legal boundaries against its critics, even when they are members of Congress. In the video, parliamentarians urge troops to refuse any illegal orders from their superiors, which they are already required to do.
“President Trump is using the FBI to intimidate and harass members of Congress,” four Democratic members of the House of Representatives denounced in a statement on Tuesday.
“Yesterday (Monday), the FBI contacted the House and Senate Sergeants-at-Arms to request interviews,” they added.
Democrats denounce an “intimidation maneuver”
Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, one of six Democratic lawmakers in the video, told reporters Tuesday evening (Monday), the FBI Counterterrorism Division sent a memo to members of Congress indicating that they are opening what appears to be an investigation into us. » Mme Slotkin called the move “an intimidation move” by Mr. Trump.
PHOTO ARIN YOON, REUTERS ARCHIVES
Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin
“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the content of the video, the question I ask myself is: Is this the appropriate response for a President of the United States to attack those who do not share his ideas and seek to exploit the federal government? » raised Mme Slotkin.
In a statement, a group of four Democratic members of the House of Representatives said: “No amount of intimidation or harassment will ever stop us from doing our jobs and honoring our Constitution. »
The six elected Democrats present in the video all served in the army or the intelligence services.
The FBI provided no explanation for the interview requests.
The FBI requested interviews with each of the six elected officials from the highest security officials in the House and Senate.
The FBI declined to comment on the situation Tuesday, but its director, Kash Patel, told journalist Catherine Herridge that it was an “ongoing matter,” justifying his refusal to provide more details.
Asked for his reaction to the video, Mr Patel commented: “My question is the same as in all cases: is there a legal basis to open an investigation? This decision will be made by career FBI agents and analysts. »
Video at the heart of investigations
In this video, parliamentarians claimed they needed troops to “defend our laws… our Constitution”. Mark Kelly, a former fighter pilot turned astronaut and then naval captain, told the troops: “You can refuse illegal orders. »
The parliamentarians did not mention specific circumstances in the video. However, at an event in Michigan on Tuesday, Mme Slotkin pointed to Trump administration orders for the military to blow up small boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific accused of transporting drugs, as well as continued attempts to deploy National Guard troops in U.S. cities despite some legal setbacks.
“It wasn’t an isolated incident, it was a huge number of people coming to us saying, ‘I’m worried. I’m being sent to Washington, to Los Angeles, to Chicago, to North Carolina now, and I’m worried that I’m going to be asked to do something that I don’t know if I should do,'” Ms.me Slotkin. This is where the problem comes from. »
Troops, and particularly uniformed commanders, have an obligation to refuse illegal orders if they deem them of this nature.
Consistent case law also establishes that the simple fact of obeying orders – commonly called the “Nuremberg defense”, because it was unsuccessfully invoked by senior Nazi officials to justify their actions under Adolf Hitler – does not exempt the troops from their responsibility.
