Six Democratic Lawmakers’ Sparks Accusations of Seditious Conspiracy — Trump Amplifies with Death Threat Rhetoric
Opinion
Washington, DC – Six Democratic members of Congress — Senators Elissa Slotkin and Mark Kelly, and Representatives Jason Crow, Chrissy Houlahan, Maggie Goodlander, and Chris Deluzio — released a video urging U.S. military and intelligence personnel to “refuse illegal orders.”
Their coordinated appeal, denouncing what they claim are law-breaking commands from the Trump administration, has been met by President Trump with a predictable, incendiary response:
Trump labeled their behavior “seditious … punishable by DEATH!” and even reposted a meme calling for their hanging. The rhetoric now raises real concerns of stochastic terrorism and even seditious conspiracy, threatening fundamental norms of civilian-military relations.
The Lawmakers’ Message
On Nov. 18, 2025, the six lawmakers, all with military or intelligence backgrounds, published a 90-second video emphasizing their shared oath to defend the Constitution. They warned that “the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home,” and insisted, “Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders … You must refuse illegal orders.” [1] [2]
Several of these members have long argued that Trump’s actions have violated the law. Representative Jason Crow, for instance, introduced a War Powers resolution on Nov. 18 to block what he characterized as “unauthorized & illegal military strikes” in the Western Hemisphere. [3] Others likewise claim that funding cuts and executive actions under Trump have flouted legal constraints.
The Legal Risk: From Free Speech to Conspiracy
Under U.S. military law, service members are required to obey lawful orders, per UCMJ Article 92, but they are also obliged to refuse “manifestly unlawful” orders — including those that “are contrary to the Constitution or the laws of the United States.”
Legal scholars argue that, by calling generically for disobedience without naming specific orders, the lawmakers’ video straddles a dangerous boundary. When repeated broadly, such messages may constitute stochastic terrorism: individually protected, but cumulatively creating a signal that could encourage disobedience or rebellion.
Taken as a coordinated effort, their plea may even raise issues under 18 U.S.C. § 2384, the federal statute for seditious conspiracy, which prohibits conspiracies “to overthrow, put down, or destroy by force the Government of the United States.” Though the lawmakers have not openly advocated violence, urging troops to choose which orders to follow can fragment the chain of command, damaging the principle of civilian control.
Trump’s Violent Retaliation
President Trump responded forcefully, and some might say, predictably. On his platform, Truth Social, he denounced the six Democrats as “traitors” and called for their arrest and trial. He wrote, “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” according to multiple reports. [4], [2]
But he didn’t stop there: he also reposted a supporter’s comment that read, “HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!”, amplifying calls for political violence. [5], [6]
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer condemned the remarks as “an outright threat … calling for the execution of elected officials.” [6]
The White House later claimed Trump did not literally want to see them executed, but critics argue that the amplification of hanging rhetoric — even indirectly — normalizes political violence. [7] Of course, those same critics say nothing of the incendiary words of the Congressmen.
Constitutional Stakes and Conservative Warning
From a constitutional-conservative perspective, the moment demands serious reflection. The six lawmakers’ message could stem from genuine concern for the rule of law, but it strains credibility that this was their actual intent. By broadly urging military personnel to disobey without specifying which orders are supposedly illegal, they are deliberately trying to erode discipline and undermine civilian control of the armed forces — fundamentals that protect our Republic.
On the other hand, Trump’s response is also deeply disturbing. When the commander-in-chief publicly suggests that lawmakers be arrested and even killed, he flirts with incitement and death-threat rhetoric. Even if his words fall short of criminal action, the tone sets a dangerous precedent: political disagreement being met with calls for violent retribution.
Bottom Line
What this episode truly reveals is yet another escalation from the left — the same kind of escalation that helped create the environment that led to the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Their coordinated “refuse orders” campaign demonstrates that many on the left genuinely believe they are in an active war with the right, and they now behave accordingly. They instigate, they inflame, and they knowingly unleash rhetoric designed to agitate the most unstable individuals among their base, allowing a deranged actor to carry out the violence they privately hope for while they publicly feign innocence.
The proper course of action, in this author’s view, is for Trump to stop joking about the situation, stop posting memes about it, and instead act: these members of Congress should be taken into custody, charged with seditious conspiracy, and tried under the law.
The left has already decided they’re at war — it’s time the right acknowledge that reality and respond with the seriousness the moment demands.
References
- [1] The Guardian, “Outrage after Trump accuses Democrats of ‘seditious behavior, punishable by death’”
- [2] NBC Chicago (AP), “Trump says Democrats’ video message to military is ‘seditious behavior’ punishable by death”
- [3] Office of Rep. Jason Crow, “Crow Leads Resolution to Block Illegal U.S. Military Strikes”
- [4] CBS News, “Trump condemned by Democrats after he accuses 6 lawmakers of ‘seditious behavior’”
- [5] TIME, “Trump Calls for Arrests of Democrats Who Urged Troops to Refuse Illegal Orders: ‘Seditious Behavior, Punishable by Death’”
- [6] Fox News, “Schumer accuses Trump of calling for ‘the execution of elected officials’”
- [7] The Guardian, “White House walks back Trump’s suggestion of executing Democrats, stands by…”
Austin
Texas GOP Wants Closed Primaries. New Secretary of State Robert Howden Is Preparing to Fight Them.
Austin, TX – Texas Republicans spent years demanding control of their own primary. Now they have a new Secretary of State, Robert S. Howden, appointed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott, and the man taking over the state’s election machinery is inheriting a lawsuit in which his office is expected to defend the very open primary system the GOP wants to dismantle.
The Republican Party of Texas filed the federal lawsuit in September 2025, arguing that Texas’ open primary system violates the party’s First Amendment right of association. Under the current system, Texas voters do not register by party and may choose which party’s primary to vote in during an election cycle. The GOP wants only registered Republicans participating in Republican primaries.
The case is pending in federal court in Amarillo before U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk.
And Robert S. Howden has now inherited it.
Howden Steps Into the Fight
Gov. Abbott appointed Howden as Texas’ 116th secretary of state on July 17, effective July 18. Howden previously served as Abbott’s senior adviser and director of legislative affairs and has worked in the administrations of four Republican governors. As secretary of state, he is Texas’ chief elections officer.
Abbott has been quite clear about where he stands.
At the 2026 Republican Party convention, he said Texas would eventually make clear that “only Republicans vote in Republican primaries.” Abbott has also said lawmakers “can and should be more responsive to Republicans than a judge may be,” indicating that he expects the Legislature to address the issue during the 2027 session.
But that doesn’t mean the Secretary of State’s office is supposed to simply surrender in court.
That was the position taken by Howden’s predecessor, Jane Nelson.
Nelson argued that changing Texas’ primary system was a job for the Legislature, not a federal judge. In an October 2025 statement, she said it was her responsibility to defend existing election laws and that she would implement whatever changes the Legislature lawfully enacted.
The Attorney General’s office took the opposite position.
Attorney General Ken Paxton sided with the Texas GOP, asking the federal court to strike down portions of the Texas Election Code governing open primaries. According to reporting by The Texas Tribune, Nelson’s lawyers said Paxton’s office gave them less than an hour’s notice before taking the opposing position.
So the Republican Party sued the Republican-controlled state government. The Republican Attorney General joined the plaintiffs. And the Republican Secretary of State fought the lawsuit.
That’s not exactly the tidy party unity politicians like to advertise.
The Real Fight Is Over Who Controls the Nomination
The GOP argues that crossover voting allows Democrats and independents to influence Republican nominations, potentially helping candidates who are less conservative than the party base.
The lawsuit specifically pointed to the 2024 Republican primaries involving former House Speaker Dade Phelan and Rep. Gary VanDeaver. Both won their races by fewer than 800 votes, and the party argued that crossover voters helped determine the outcomes.
The party has already made closing primaries an official priority. Republicans adopted rules supporting closed primaries in 2024 and renewed that push at their 2026 convention.
But changing the system is not as simple as flipping a switch.
Texas has more than 18 million registered voters, and the state’s registration system was never designed around party registration. Moving to closed primaries could require new registration procedures, computer-system changes and a method for existing voters to establish party affiliation.
The GOP wants the courts to clear the way, preferably in time for 2028.
San Angelo, TX – San Angelo’s battle over massive data centers has moved from City Hall chambers to the ballot box, and two council members could soon have to defend their seats before voters angry about how the city has handled the projects. What began as a fight over water, power, development and transparency is now a full-blown political revolt, with recall efforts targeting Council Members Harry Thomas and Joe Self.
And the controversy comes at an interesting moment for Texas. Gov. Greg Abbott has ordered state regulators to conduct a comprehensive audit of data centers moving through the state’s electric grid interconnection process, saying the review must be completed before any data center project moves forward. ERCOT subsequently told Fox News Digital that Abbott’s directive “effectively pauses all data center projects” while the state reviews their demands on the grid.
That means the questions being shouted at San Angelo City Hall are no longer merely local complaints from residents opposed to a particular development. Texas officials are now asking some of the same questions.
Abbott directed the Public Utility Commission of Texas and ERCOT to examine pending data center projects and gather information, including projected annual and peak electricity demand, water consumption, water sources, and whether facilities intend to generate some of their own electricity. ERCOT reported that roughly 90 percent of the 474 gigawatts of large-load interconnection requests currently under review are associated with data centers, more than five times Texas’ record peak electricity demand.
Back in San Angelo, the San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition has been pushing its own accountability campaign.
A petition seeking the recall of Council Member Harry Thomas, who represents Single Member District 3, was submitted July 15 with more than the required signatures. The city clerk later certified the petition after determining 53 signatures were sufficient, clearing the way for a recall election.
Following public comment, the City Council voted 6-1 to call the recall election.
Thomas has maintained that he has no intention of resigning.
“I weigh every decision I’ve ever made on behalf of the 100,000 citizens in San Angelo,” Thomas said after the petition was submitted. “Every time I vote, I vote for all the citizens. I have no plans to resign from my position.”
Self is now facing his own recall effort.
The coalition submitted an affidavit seeking Self’s recall and subsequently collected the signatures necessary to move forward. On Aug. 6, Self issued a statement saying he supports residents’ right to seek a recall but rejected what he described as misinformation about his involvement with data centers.
“I have not signed any non-disclosure agreements,” Self said. “I have not benefited financially. I have not voted in favor of a data center.”
Self said the council has instead voted on regulations that would apply if a data center is established in San Angelo.
That distinction between approving a specific project and approving regulations governing potential projects has become one of the central arguments in the political fight. San Angelo officials have considered rules addressing land use, water and wastewater issues as the city confronts proposals for large-scale data center development.
The proposed Skybox project has become particularly contentious. City officials have described it as a potential $7.2 billion investment, while opponents have raised concerns about water consumption, electricity demand, infrastructure, noise and transparency surrounding the development process.
The political consequences are spreading beyond San Angelo.
Residents in Temple and Granbury have also launched recall or charter efforts amid disputes over data center development. In Temple, opponents have cited concerns about land, water consumption and heat generated by facilities. In Granbury, activists gathered signatures seeking recalls involving the mayor and most members of the City Council.
Election
Texas Senate Hopeful James Talarico Shared Pride Event Stage With 11-Year-Old Child Drag Performer
Federal Court Upholds State Limits on Minors at Adult Drag Shows
Taylor, TX – A federal appeals court has just upheld a Florida law restricting minors from attending certain adult live performances, including some drag shows. Within hours of that ruling, renewed attention was focused on Texas Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico after reports resurfaced showing he headlined a 2021 Pride fundraiser featuring an 11-year-old child drag performer promoted as one of the event’s main attractions.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled in HM Florida-ORL, LLC v. Secretary of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, allowing Florida to enforce its law restricting minors from attending certain adult live performances. Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced the decision, calling it a victory for protecting children. The ruling does not prohibit drag performances for adults, but it recognizes that states may impose limits when minors are involved.
The timing has drawn renewed scrutiny to Talarico’s record as he campaigns for the U.S. Senate against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
According to promotional materials first highlighted by the Washington Free Beacon, Talarico was a featured speaker during Taylor PRIDE’s June 26, 2021 fundraiser in Taylor, Texas. The event was organized to raise money for “rural LGBTQ communities” and included live music, Drag Story Hour, adult drag performers, and an 11-year-old performer using the stage name “Kween Kee Kee.”
Taylor PRIDE advertised the child as “the absolute cutest & youngest of our drag performers.” Promotional posts stated the child would perform a drag routine and host “Kee Kee Storytime,” where children would participate in Pride-themed craft activities. The event was held at Texas Beer Company.
Photographs published from the event show Talarico addressing attendees from the stage and posing with participants. Additional photographs and video posted publicly show Kween Kee Kee, a local preteen named Keegan, performing in a shimmering blue dress, platinum blonde wig, and theatrical makeup during what organizers described as a Youth Drag Show. One attendee shared video of the child performing the splits before the audience.
The fundraiser also featured several adult drag performers, including Brianna Brinxx, Belladonna Dior, Felecia Enspire, and a performer using the stage name Sedonya Face.
Following criticism from conservative activists who protested the event, Taylor PRIDE defended the festival on social media. The organization rejected claims that the event was sexually explicit or exploitative and encouraged the public to review photographs from the event and decide for themselves.
Talarico’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment from the Washington Free Beacon regarding his participation.
The resurfaced event adds to a broader record that Republicans have highlighted throughout Talarico’s political career. While serving in the Texas House, Talarico opposed legislation restricting drag performances in the presence of children and argued lawmakers should avoid harming what he described as Texas’ drag performers. He has also opposed Republican-backed legislation restricting certain transgender medical treatments for minors and has frequently spoken in support of LGBTQ causes.
More recently, however, Talarico has attempted to present himself as a more moderate statewide candidate. He has described previous remarks, including referring to God as “nonbinary,” as “cringey” and has removed some progressive messaging from campaign materials as he seeks to broaden his appeal beyond Democratic primary voters.
The renewed attention comes as cultural debates surrounding children and drag performances continue playing out both politically and legally. Florida’s appellate court victory represents one of the most significant recent rulings supporting a state’s authority to restrict minors from attending certain adult-oriented live performances, even as litigation over similar laws continues elsewhere.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login