Hegseth: ‘Seditious Six’ video was ‘politically-motivated influence operation’

The Hill ^ | 11/25/25 | Filip Timotija

[DallasBiff]

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the recent video in which six Democratic lawmakers called on U.S. troops to disobey illegal orders from the Trump administration was a “politically-motivated influence operation” that injected doubt into the armed forces.

“The despicable video urging @DeptofWar troops to ‘refuse illegal orders’ may seem harmless to civilians — but it carries a different weight inside the military. This was a politically-motivated influence operation,” Hegseth wrote Tuesday morning on the social platform X

“It never named a specific ‘illegal order.’ It created ambiguity rather than clarity. It used carefully scripted, legal-sounding language. It subtly reframed military obedience around partisan distrust instead of established legal processes.”

---

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: democrats; foxnewsweekendhost; incompetent; military; sedition; subversion; undermining; whiskeypete

[DallasBiff]

Well TDS is being exposed by the liberal Hill.

[CivilWarBrewing]

Congress critters or NOT, STRIP THEM OF THEIR MILITARY RANKS.

These pukes such as Mark Kelly have NO business dictating to our troops. Kelly is a RETIRED Captain. SO WHAT, he has NO authority over our troops.

Enough said. Strip them all of their rank.

[equaviator]

"This was a politically-motivated influence operation,” Hegseth wrote"

I think that is safe to assume.

[DFG]

Remember when John Glenn disgraced the Senate and Nasa by voting to acquit Bill Clinton in exchange for a Space Shuttle flight.

[1Old Pro]

Remember when John Glenn disgraced the Senate and Nasa by voting to acquit Bill Clinton in exchange for a Space Shuttle flight.

Politicians are basically disgusting people. We really need term limits because a life of unethical corruption attracts slime balls.

[odawg]

The “Seditious Six” video will become the defining moment of the Trump administration if it is not dealt with to the full extent of the law. The Senator knew what he was doing was in violation of the law and did it anyone. It was his dare to Trump. Do you really have the balls to enfore the law against a sitting senator?

If the Trump administration does not come down on this with the full weight of the law, then he just as well be the mayor of Podunk Junction. The mayor-elect of New York City is waiting in the wings to unleash, so is the governor of California, just to name two. Then it will explode nationwide and not be containable.

[SaveFerris]

I’m glad we have Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

[ridesthemiles]

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE KELLY BROUGHT UP ON CHARGES.
HE IS A HOTHEAD

[ridesthemiles]

SAME HERE

[SaveFerris]

Mark Kelly is like Hillary in a jumpsuit

[DownInFlames]

This is sedition, pure and simple. These people should face the gallows.

[Labyrinthos]

I bet that the “Seditious Six” will invoke the “speech and debate” clause in Article 1, § 6 of the Constitution as a defense.

[5Madman2]

Dear Pete

Now DO SOMETHING about it!!!!!!!!!

No Talk

No “Considering” or “Evaluating”

Recall this piece of garbage to active duty and initiate Article 32 hearings (Military Grand Jury)

These bastards are going to keep pushing until they pay a price

[Ex-Con777]

It wasn’t in the well of congress so it isn’t protected. Plus, they are all former military and can be called to active status and court martialed.

EC

[scan_complete]

Do something Pete.

[SJackson]

Recall only applies to retired military. Kelly can be recalled, the rest would be dealt with by the DOJ

[silent majority rising]

I would like the name of the operation - definite CIA psyops against the President.

[Labyrinthos]

“It wasn’t in the well of congress so it isn’t protected. Plus, they are all former military and can be called to active status and court martialed.”

IIRC, the SCOTUS has ruled that the speech and debate clause applies to any statement that a member of congress makes in his or her official capacity.

[Reily]

A retired JAG friend of mine ( Who is strong Trump supporter!) doesn’t think a conviction is possible given the wording. It basically repeats the law. Hard to get a conviction on an interpretation of what it implies.

Its clear it’s a provocation to get the Trump administration to overreact and create a martyr situation. A martyr situation the media can run with.

Correct response is laugh at them!

[proust]

A distraction that serves both sides. Everybody gets a chance to huff and puff.