The always worthwhile Victor Davis Hanson popped up on American Greatness, asking a rather important question:
Who is the real, or fictional, inspiration for the new insurrectionary wing of the Democrat Party?
Not long ago, at the 1992 and 1996 Democratic conventions, liberal grandees like Bill and Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi had vowed to stop all would-be illegal aliens from unlawfully entering the U.S. Apparently, they all flipped to open borders when spiraling numbers turned the undocumented into a new Democratic constituency.
Indeed so. After all, what can we call Democrats declaring “sanctuary cities” to be immune from federal law, except insurrectionist? I suggest that the label insurrectionist is the only one that applies accurately.
This isn't just a one- off. It’s not like this is a new thing. Do you think, for example, that the Seditious Six video I’ve already written twice about from former military and intel types is something new from the Democrats?
Not hardly. Hanson points out:
In Trump’s first term, some retired four-star admirals and generals—Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice be damned—talked of a sitting U.S. President Trump leaving office, the “sooner the better”—whatever that meant. Others libeled him as a “liar” and “Mussolini,” his policies comparable to those of the executioners at Auschwitz.
Some retired lieutenant colonels in 2020 even publicly advocated using military units to confront presidential security details. Did they want an armed showdown to forcibly remove Trump from the Oval Office? And in their madness, they bragged about the purported greater lethality of their army friends to defeat the president’s supporters or security details: “Trump’s little green men, so intimidating to lightly armed federal law enforcement agents, step aside and fade away, realizing they would not constitute a good morning’s work for a brigade of the 82nd Airborne.”
Then, too, there’s Mark Milley:
He once apparently diagnosed Commander-in-Chief Trump as unhinged.
So Milley took it upon himself to warn his communist Chinese counterpart that during any existential crisis, the People’s Liberation Army head would be first contacted by Milley—if Milley ever felt Trump was too erratic to be obeyed (in Milley’s nonprofessional medical judgment).
So Milley reported his call as follows: “General Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise.”
Milley apparently also decided that he was exempt from obeying federal laws.
Yeah, to say nothing of military laws. It is logical to ask the question Hanson opens his piece with: What is the inspiration here? And perhaps, more importantly, what are the principles behind such actions as we’ve seen?
Hanson rightly points out that the Democrats began moving in this direction when they discovered a path to power that ran through non-citizens getting votes. But is there anything beyond this to support their actions? If there is, I am certainly hard-pressed to find any evidence of it.
We find instead that these insurrectionist moves are being supported and driven by people sworn to tear down America. For example, DataRepublican recently commented on the investigation into what is behind the Seditious Six:
🚨 BREAKING: It's been revealed that a nonprofit linked to George Soros is fomenting sedition within the military around the same time a "script" went out to Democrat members of Congress urging rebellion within the ranks against President Trump.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 26, 2025
There are also links to ANTIFA.… pic.twitter.com/1S4roMD4Vk
Excellent find. I think we are getting very, very warm as to whose NGO's idea it was to have the Senators produce a video about refusing illegal orders.
— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) November 26, 2025
National Lawyers Guild issued a document about refusing illegal orders on 11 November. And now they have partnered with Win… https://t.co/yu66Amnzjd pic.twitter.com/Yvm3fpkoV7
Big shock. Alex Soros again.
There are many claims online about what the Democratic Party stands for. Yet none of these align with their actions over the past decade.
Whatever valid Democratic claims of principle there might be (if any, in fact), their actions speak louder than their words ever could. What is driving them in these matters can no longer be considered “American” or “patriotic” in any way, shape, or form. The claims of the Seditious Six to that effect are insulting both to loyal military and intel types and to the American citizens they defend.
The remaining question: When will there be repercussions for their actions? When will they be held accountable?
