Remember when Democrats spent years chanting their favorite mantra about how "No one is above the law"? They rolled it out every time they wanted to use the power of the government to attack President Trump, treating it like some sacred principle they'd defend to their dying breath. Well, once again, they’ve proven that to be a lie.
Earlier this month, six Democratic lawmakers participated in a viral video urging military members to refuse what they called "illegal orders." Sens. Elissa Slotkin and Mark Kelly and Reps. Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, and Chrissy Houlahan may not have mentioned Trump specifically, but the implication was clear. They were accusing Trump of issuing illegal orders and telling our troops they didn’t have to follow his orders.
The most commonly cited example of these supposedly "illegal orders" involves Trump's use of the National Guard to enforce immigration law in areas where local officials refuse to do so. Democrats act like this represents some unprecedented abuse of power, conveniently forgetting basic history. President Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard in 1957 with Executive Order 10730, sending 1,000 troops from the 101st Airborne Division to enforce school desegregation at Little Rock Central High School. President John F. Kennedy did the same thing three times. In 1962, he activated the Mississippi National Guard to handle the chaos surrounding James Meredith's enrollment at the University of Mississippi. In 1963, he ordered the Alabama National Guard to enforce desegregation. Past presidents have federalized the National Guard for all sorts of purposes when enforcing federal law. The difference here boils down to policy disagreements, not legality.
But, I digress. The video was a blatant attempt to encourage military personnel to defy President Donald Trump's authority, which, of course, is a violation of federal law.
When civilians encourage troops to defy lawful orders, they may face serious federal charges under statutes such as 18 U.S. Code § 2387, which criminalizes efforts to undermine loyalty or discipline in the armed forces. That's why the FBI started seeking interviews with the six lawmakers involved. Rep. Chris Deluzio appeared on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360°" with John Berman to discuss the bureau's request for an interview, and his response raised more questions than it answered.
ICYMI: Can You Believe Donald Trump Said This About Tim Walz?
When Berman asked whether he'd agree to a voluntary FBI interview, Deluzio answered promptly, "I'm not planning on sitting down for a voluntary interview, no."
"Oh? Why not?" Berman asked.
After a brief pause, Deluzio responded, "Well, everyone in this country has a right to refuse to do that. And I think this is a clear attempt to intimidate us." He insisted that, as a member of Congress, he shouldn't face pressure for his political statements, claiming the FBI's inquiry was politically motivated to discourage criticism of Trump.
"I'm not planning to sit down for a voluntary interview," says @ChrisForPA when asked about the FBI seeking to talk with him and five other Democratic lawmakers who made a controversial video urging service members and intelligence officials to disobey illegal orders. pic.twitter.com/RPLcRDFH9o
— Anderson Cooper 360° (@AC360) November 27, 2025
That’s cute. But here's the problem with that defense: Refusing a voluntary interview doesn't make the investigation disappear. It typically leads to harsher steps as investigators continue their work. If the video was truly harmless or misinterpreted, why would these lawmakers avoid answering questions about it? The refusal suggests they're dodging accountability or hiding something about who organized and scripted the video.
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) already admitted he received a "script" for it, raising obvious questions about coordination.
🚨 BREAKING: Conservatives are calling for ALL communications to be subpoenaed, after Sen. Ruben Gallego reveals a SEDITIOUS "SCRIPT" went out for the infamous video calling for the troops to rebel against President Trump.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 24, 2025
"The script got to me..." pic.twitter.com/KizI3FWrmm
Who is being protected here?
Now, speculation is mounting that all five other Democrats might follow Deluzio's lead and refuse FBI interviews, hoping to slow or stall the investigation. That would amount to a cover-up, plain and simple.
Democrats spent years insisting no one stands above the law when they wanted to target their political opponents. Now that they face scrutiny for potentially encouraging military insubordination, they are refusing to cooperate with federal investigators.
Sorry, but if they think the Trump administration is going to let them get away with deliberately trying to undermine Trump’s authority as commander-in-chief, they’ve got another think coming.
