Kentucky Democrat Amy McGrath publicly backed a controversial Democratic video urging troops and intelligence personnel to refuse what the speakers call “unlawful orders” from President Trump, a move critics call coordinated and dangerous. Several Democrats linked to the video have struggled to name any specific illegal orders, and at least one senator says a “script” circulated among party circles. The episode has sparked accusations of hypocrisy, with opponents citing past instances where Democrats supported enforcing orders from President Biden. The debate raises questions about civilian control of the military, partisan messaging, and the boundaries of dissent within government ranks.

Amy McGrath is the latest Democrat to lend support to a video that tells members of the military and the intelligence community to disobey supposed “unlawful orders” from President Trump. Critics say the clip crosses a line by encouraging rank-and-file personnel to pick and choose which commands to follow. The controversy escalated fast because the message targets the chain of command and plays into fears about politicizing the armed forces.

After the video circulated, several of the six Democrats who participated were pressed to point to any actual illegal orders President Trump had issued and came up empty. That includes Elissa Slotkin and Jason Crow, and other Democrats like Amy Klobuchar also failed to name concrete examples. Instead of naming unlawful commands, many of them pointed back to judges who simply ruled against the administration, framing judicial losses as proof of illegality.

The pattern is obvious to skeptics: get a friendly judge to declare an action illegal and suddenly it becomes an “unlawful order” to follow. That maneuver turns the judiciary into a political tool rather than an independent arbiter, and it gives an easy out for elected officials who want to rile their base. The tactic looks less like a principled stand and more like a play straight out of partisan theater.

Senator Rubin Gallego of Arizona went further, saying that a “script” circulated through Democratic channels urging troops to disobey orders. If true, that would mean the stunt wasn’t spontaneous dissent but a coordinated message designed to sow discord inside our military. Coordination of that kind, aimed at inducing disobedience among service members, is what opponents describe as especially reckless.

In an interview with CNN, McGrath enthusiastically endorsed the video and its seditious, insurrectionist message.

“Yes, because look, members of Congress…the military’s not just responsible to the Commander-in-Chief, it’s responsible to Congress,” McGrath said.

Many critics also point out a sharp double standard: Democrats cheered when the Biden administration required vaccinations for troops and forced compliance under threat of removal. Those actions were widely enforced, and opposition from the Democratic caucus was muted or non-existent. That contrast undercuts claims that this new campaign is about protecting service members from illegal commands rather than scoring political points.

This is true. Congress controls spending, and we’d love to see them run on a platform of defunding the military because of their Trump Derangement Syndrome.

At best, she’s endorsing insubordination. At worst, it’s sedition and treason.

Democrats pushing this narrative are not just confusing troops; they are signaling to adversaries that a shadow network exists inside our government willing to undercut the President. That kind of uncertainty weakens deterrence and hands talking points to foreign opponents who already exploit American political divisions. The message also risks eroding the very civilian control of the military that conservatives insist must be preserved.

President Trump was elected by Americans. He won the popular vote and the Electoral College. For many Republicans, the current spectacle looks like an attempt to delegitimize an elected leader rather than a sober defense of constitutional principles.

The push to encourage service members to question orders sets a dangerous precedent, especially when it’s driven by partisan actors who cannot cite clear illegal directives. Lawful orders should be followed and unlawful ones challenged through proper legal channels, not through political theater. Democrats who back this video are forcing a debate that will not calm ranks or clarify legal standards, and that is precisely why the response has been so fierce and fast from opponents.