FBI Zeroes In on the ‘Seditious Six’ After Video Urging Troops to Defy President Trump’s Orders

A political firestorm is escalating in Washington as the FBI has reportedly moved to interview six Democratic lawmakers who appeared in a video instructing members of the U.S. armed forces and intelligence agencies to disregard any so-called “illegal” orders issued by President Donald J. Trump — the current and duly elected Commander-in-Chief of the United States.

According to multiple reports, the bureau contacted the Capitol Police to arrange interviews with the group of lawmakers after their public statement raised alarms inside the Pentagon and the intelligence community.

The lawmakers — Democratic Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, and House Reps. Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, and Jason Crow of Colorado — all used their past military and intelligence credentials to lend weight to their political message.

In the video, the six declared:
“We want to speak directly to members of the military and intelligence community.”

They continued, accusing the Trump administration of weaponizing America’s armed services against citizens:
“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens … Right now, the threats 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.”

Notably, the recording provided no example of President Trump issuing an unlawful order — yet the message left viewers with the unmistakable implication that the nation’s Commander-in-Chief is a threat to the Constitution.

President Trump responded unapologetically via Truth Social: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

Fox News later confirmed that both the FBI and the Department of Justice have moved to coordinate with Capitol Police to interview all six members of Congress involved in the video.

Hegseth: “Despicable, reckless, and false”

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth issued a blistering public rebuke of the lawmakers’ message, posting:

“The video made by the ‘Seditious Six’ was despicable, reckless, and false. Encouraging our warriors to ignore the orders of their Commanders undermines every aspect of ‘good order and discipline.’ Their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion — which only puts our warriors in danger.”

Hegseth went on to reveal a legal development that stunned many observers:

“Five of the six individuals in that video do not fall under @DeptofWar jurisdiction (one is CIA and four are former military but not ‘retired’, so they are no longer subject to UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice]). However, Mark Kelly (retired Navy Commander) is still subject to UCMJ—and he knows that.”

He added that Kelly intentionally leveraged his rank and affiliation to give the appearance of military authority:

“As was announced, the Department is reviewing his statements and actions, which were addressed directly to all troops while explicitly using his rank and service affiliation — lending the appearance of authority to his words. Kelly’s conduct brings discredit upon the armed forces and will be addressed appropriately.”

ABC News reported that the War Department is now reviewing Kelly’s case — and that consequences could include being recalled to active duty to face court-martial proceedings, or administrative punishment affecting his rank or pension.

The War Department emphasized that retired personnel remain subject to UCMJ enforcement and cited 18 U.S.C. § 2387, which criminalizes attempts to degrade the loyalty and morale of service members.

“All servicemembers are reminded that they have a legal obligation under the UCMJ to obey lawful orders and that orders are presumed to be lawful. A servicemember’s personal philosophy does not justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order,” the department reiterated.

Kelly Hits Back — but Raises More Questions Than He Answers

Later that day, Kelly attempted to defend himself on X, referencing the dangers he experienced in his military and NASA careers:

He dismissed Hegseth’s criticism as political intimidation, writing:
“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. I’ve given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution.”

However, critics argue that messaging that directly calls on troops to potentially reject the Commander-in-Chief’s authority crosses far beyond the boundaries of legitimate political dissent — and lands squarely in the territory of undermining civilian leadership of the military.

Whether the Justice Department or the War Department will advance the case toward criminal prosecution or a military court remains unknown — but Washington is now on high alert.