A group of Democrat lawmakers with military and intelligence backgrounds released a video Tuesday urging service members to "refuse illegal orders," a message conservatives blasted as a call to defy President Donald Trump and his Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.
The one-minute video, posted by Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., and viewed more than 1.6 million times, features six lawmakers invoking their prior service while telling members of the military and intelligence community that "the threats to our Constitution are coming from right here at home."
Slotkin and her colleagues have spent recent weeks introducing legislation to limit President Trump’s ability to deploy National Guard members domestically or launch military action against narcoterrorists without congressional approval
None of that context appears in the video, titled "Don’t Give Up the Ship," which instead frames the appeal as a warning to military members to "stand up for our laws" and "refuse unlawful orders."
Conservative accounts countered the viral clip, citing military law and interpreting the call to action as an alleged appeal to commit treason against the United States.
"Elected Democrats just released a video encouraging members of the military to commit treason and defy orders from Trump and Hegseth," wrote the conservative account Libs of TikTok.
Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., added: "At the end of the day, they’re mad the American people chose Trump and now they’re calling on the Military and Intelligence Community to intervene. Sounds a little ‘subversive to democracy’-ish."
The Department of War directed Fox News Digital to Hegseth’s response, which simply read, "Stage 4 TDS," referring to "Trump Derangement Syndrome."
Slotkin’s "No Troops in Our Streets Act," detailed in a Nov. 13 release, would give Congress the power to block National Guard deployments inside American cities. President Trump has expanded National Guard operations to Los Angeles, Portland and Chicago amid violent crime.
Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., simultaneously introduced a War Powers Continuing Resolution on Tuesday to block the president from ordering strikes on drug traffickers in the Caribbean—actions Crow described in a release as "unauthorized and illegal."
Both Democrats argue their bills are about asserting congressional authority, not politics. The viral video shared Tuesday, set to triumphant music, does not explicitly mention either piece of legislation.
Lawmakers appearing in the video include Slotkin, Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.; Rep. Chris Deluzio, D-Pa.; Rep. Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H.; Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa.; and Rep. Jason Crow. Several recite a version of the line: "You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders."
The branches and agencies represented among the lawmakers include the Army, Navy, Air Force and Central Intelligence Agency.
"Some in the administration and media are actively working to distort that message into something dark or divisive," Houlahan said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "Let me be absolutely clear: there is nothing more patriotic, nothing more stabilizing and nothing more true to the rule of law than reminding our military of their constitutional obligations and reassuring them that, if they are ever given an unlawful order, they do not have to carry it out."
"‘Don’t Give Up the Ship’ is not a slogan of rebellion—it is a historic naval motto that has always stood for steadfastness, duty and loyalty to country. That is the backbone of American civil-military tradition," she added.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The video follows a 43-day government shutdown during which American troops continued receiving pay under the Trump administration.
The White House, Slotkin, Kelly, Deluzio, Goodlander and Crow did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s requests for comment.
Supreme Court Greenlights Trump Admin Deportations To Third Countries
The U.S. Supreme Court approved the Trump administration’s request to pause a lower court injunction that had blocked deportations of individuals to third countries without prior notice.
The decision marks a near-term victory for the administration as it aims to implement its immigration crackdown swiftly.
The Court ruled 6-3 in favor of staying the injunction, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.
The case involved a group of migrants contesting their deportations to third countries—nations other than their countries of origin. Earlier this month, lawyers representing these migrants urged the Supreme Court to uphold a ruling by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, who had ordered the Trump administration to keep all migrants facing deportation to third countries in U.S. custody until further review.
Murphy, based in Boston, oversaw a class-action lawsuit brought by migrants challenging deportations to countries such as South Sudan, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and others that the administration has reportedly considered in its ongoing deportation efforts.
Murphy ruled that migrants must stay in U.S. custody until they have the opportunity to undergo a “reasonable fear interview,” allowing them to explain to U.S. officials any fears of persecution or torture if released into the country.
Murphy emphasized that his order does not prevent Trump from “executing removal orders to third countries.” Rather, he clarified in a prior ruling that it “simply requires” the government to “comply with the law when carrying out” such removals, in accordance with the U.S. Constitution and in response to the Trump administration’s surge of last-minute removals and deportations.
In appealing the case to the Supreme Court, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that Murphy’s ruling had prevented the government from deporting “some of the worst of the worst illegal aliens,” including a group of migrants sent to South Sudan earlier this year without due process or prior notice.
In a separate argument, he reiterated that the migrants must remain in U.S. custody at a military base in Djibouti until each has the opportunity to undergo a “reasonable fear interview,” allowing them to explain to U.S. officials any fears of persecution or torture if released into South Sudanese custody.
U.S. judges have consistently ruled that the Trump administration violated due process by failing to notify migrants of their impending removals and denying them the opportunity to challenge their deportations in court, a stance the Supreme Court has upheld, albeit narrowly, on four separate occasions since Trump took office.
Meanwhile, White House officials have criticized so-called “activist” judges for pursuing a political agenda and have consistently rejected claims that illegal immigrants are entitled to due process protections.
As many as a dozen individuals from various countries, including Vietnam and Myanmar, were reportedly ordered deported to South Sudan, a move that lawyers for the immigrants previously contended was in “clear violation” of Murphy’s order.
“Fire up the deportation planes,” tweeted Assistant Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin.
“The SCOTUS ruling is a victory for the safety and security of the American people,” McLaughlin added. “The Biden Administration allowed millions of illegal aliens to flood our country, and, now, the Trump Administration can exercise its undisputed authority to remove these criminal illegal aliens and clean up this national security nightmare.”
The head of the legal group defending the illegal aliens, however, took a different view.
“The ramifications of the Supreme Court’s order will be horrifying; it strips away critical due process protections that have been protecting our class members from torture and death,” said Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance.
“We now need to move as swiftly as possible to conclude the case and restore these protections,” she added.
JD VANCE LAUNCHES NATIONWIDE INVESTIGATION INTO VOTER FRAUD psss
JD VANCE LAUNCHES NATIONWIDE INVESTIGATION INTO VOTER FRAUD
JD VANCE LAUNCHES NATIONWIDE INVESTIGATION INTO VOTER FRAUD — AND POINTS THE FINGER THAT STUNNED AMERICA
The Capitol chamber was silent when it happened. The tension in the room was heavy, the kind that only comes before a political earthquake. Vice President
JD Vance, known for his calm but unflinching demeanor, had just announced what could become the largest election integrity investigation in U.S. history. The subject: alleged voter fraud in the New York City mayoral race
.
For weeks, rumors had been circulating about irregularities in ballot counts, missing voter ID checks, and digital inconsistencies. Most dismissed them as noise. But then Vance stepped forward with what he called “irrefutable evidence” — evidence, he claimed, that could “shake the very foundation of public trust.”
“Fairness must always come before politics,” he declared. “If America loses faith in its elections, then we’ve already lost everything else.”
It was a statement that drew both applause and alarm. But no one expected what would happen next.
THE INVESTIGATION THAT SHOOK NEW YORK
It all began quietly — a few reports of discrepancies from poll workers in New York City. Several precincts had flagged suspicious patterns: duplicate ballots, misprinted barcodes, and unexplained entries in digital voter logs. At first, local officials brushed them aside as “technical errors.”
But when one whistleblower came forward claiming that certain absentee ballots were being “processed twice” through the scanning system, the situation escalated.
Within 48 hours, the Department of Justice had been alerted. Within a week, Vice President JD Vance personally requested access to the case files. And within a month, he was standing in front of Congress, calling for a full-scale federal investigation into voter fraud — not just in New York, but nationwide.
“This isn’t about one election,” Vance said during his address. “It’s about ensuring that every American vote — Republican or Democrat — is counted honestly.”
“NO ONE IS ABOVE ACCOUNTABILITY”
Vance’s tone that day was calm, but the fire behind his words was unmistakable.
He laid out a series of documents, displaying charts, timestamps, and digital records allegedly showing inconsistencies in vote counts across multiple boroughs. According to him, the data pointed to “a systematic manipulation of ballot entries,” though he stopped short of naming individuals.
“Whether it’s an error, negligence, or deliberate fraud,” he said, “we will find out. No one is above accountability — not politicians, not officials, not anyone.”
The room buzzed with tension. Democrats accused him of fearmongering. Republicans rallied behind him, demanding transparency. But as the minutes passed, Vance’s evidence began to paint a chilling picture.
He claimed that some ballot boxes had been tampered with before collection, and others were linked to private organizations with partisan affiliations. “We have receipts,” he added, “and we’re not afraid to use them.”
THE MOMENT THAT CHANGED EVERYTHING
Just when it seemed the hearing had reached its peak, Vance paused mid-sentence. He looked across the chamber, his eyes narrowing.
Then, slowly, he raised his hand and pointed — directly at someone sitting in the audience.
Gasps filled the room. Cameras swiveled. Every eye turned to see who it was.
At first, the figure looked calm, even dismissive. But as Vance’s gaze remained fixed, whispers began to ripple through the crowd. The person in question was a high-ranking New York election official, someone who had publicly dismissed all allegations of voter fraud as “conspiracy theories.”
“You told this nation there was nothing to see,” Vance said firmly. “But the evidence says otherwise.”
The official’s face went pale. Reporters scrambled to capture the moment. Within seconds, social media exploded. Clips of Vance’s finger-pointing were trending under the hashtag #VanceExposesTruth.
The hearing devolved into chaos. Security moved in as reporters shouted questions. Members of both parties exchanged accusations across the aisle. And through it all, Vance remained steady, his expression unreadable.
THE EVIDENCE REVEALED
In the days that followed, the documents Vance referenced were released to the public. They included internal emails between election supervisors discussing “ballot batch irregularities,” time-stamped photos of double-processed envelopes, and forensic data showing unusual access patterns in New York’s electronic voter registration system.
Independent analysts confirmed that while not all the data proved deliberate fraud, the sheer number of irregularities was “highly unusual.”
“This is not a small discrepancy,” said one cybersecurity expert. “This is systemic. It points to either gross mismanagement or something far more intentional.”
Vance seized on that conclusion, calling for bipartisan oversight committees in every state. “We need to rebuild trust,” he said. “And trust only comes from transparency.”
THE POLITICAL FALLOUT
Predictably, the fallout was immediate.
Democrats accused Vance of politicizing the issue, claiming his investigation was an attempt to discredit their string of recent victories in mayoral races across the country.
“Every time Democrats win, Republicans cry fraud,” one senator said. “This is just another political stunt.”
But the evidence made that argument harder to sustain. Even neutral observers began demanding answers.
Meanwhile, the Republican base hailed Vance as a hero — a man willing to confront what others ignored. His approval ratings surged, and calls for him to lead a national election reform task force began circulating within hours.
Conservative commentator Jeanine Pirro praised the move as “a defining moment for justice in American democracy,” while others warned that the investigation could spark a constitutional crisis if wrongdoing was proven at higher levels.
“FAIRNESS COMES BEFORE POLITICS”
In a follow-up press conference, Vance reiterated his stance.
“This investigation isn’t about party lines,” he said. “It’s about one principle — fairness. Every citizen deserves to know that their vote carries equal weight, and I will not rest until that’s guaranteed.”
He emphasized that those found guilty of tampering with ballots or violating election law would face the maximum federal penalty.
“Anyone caught undermining democracy will pay the highest price — prison, public disgrace, and the permanent loss of trust,” he stated. “This isn’t a warning. It’s a promise.”
The firmness of his tone sent chills through the press room.
THE MAN BEHIND THE MISSION
JD Vance’s rise to political prominence has been anything but conventional. Once a venture capitalist and author, he entered politics with a reputation for candor and an unyielding sense of accountability. His brand — part populist reformer, part traditionalist conservative — has resonated deeply with voters disillusioned by establishment politics.
But this investigation has elevated him to a new level entirely.
Supporters call him “the watchdog America needed.” Critics call him “dangerous.” Either way, his move has reignited a national debate about how far the government should go to ensure election integrity.
A NATION WATCHES
As the federal probe expands, more officials are expected to be questioned, and state legislatures across the country are already reviewing their own voting systems.
But the public remains divided. Some see Vance’s crusade as the dawn of accountability. Others fear it will deepen mistrust and polarization.
For now, one thing is certain: the nation is watching. Every word, every document, every new piece of evidence is being scrutinized by a population desperate to know the truth.
And as for the moment when JD Vance pointed across that crowded hearing room — that single gesture has already entered political history. It was more than a dramatic flourish. It was a message.
A message that someone, somewhere, had finally decided to stop looking the other way.
As Vance himself put it in closing:
“Democracy doesn’t collapse when people cheat. It collapses when good people stay silent. I refuse to stay silent.”
Whether history remembers this as the start of a reckoning or another chapter in America’s endless political battles, one thing is undeniable: JD Vance has set something in motion that no one can ignore — and the truth, whatever it is, will have consequences far beyond New York.
Barack Obama’s “surprising silence” has Washington on edge. The quiet comes just as Pete Hegseth calls for a federal probe, alleging the former president “made up” the entire 2016 election story. Why isn’t he responding?
White House wants Obama intel officials ‘held accountable’ for role peddling 2016 Russia hoax
‘Those who engaged in this political scandal must be held accountable,’ Leavitt said
Former Deputy Assistant Attorneys General John Yoo and Harry Litman debate on ‘Fox News @ Night.’
Intelligence agency officials like former CIA Director John Brennan must be held accountable for their role in advancing allegations about President Donald Trump’s connections with Russia during the 2016 election, according to the White House.
“President Trump was right — again,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “Those who engaged in this political scandal must be held accountable for the fraud they committed against President Trump and the lies they told to the American people.”
EX-OBAMA INTEL BOSS WANTED ANTI-TRUMP DOSSIER INCLUDED IN ‘ATYPICAL’ 2016 ASSESSMENT DESPITE PUSHBACK
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News intelligence officials from the Obama administration must be held accountable for their role in peddling the 2016 Russia hoax. (Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Leavitt’s comments come after a new lessons-learned review that CIA Director John Ratcliffe declassified Wednesday determined that the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency’s Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) examining Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election deviated from intelligence standards that led to some “procedural anomalies.”
The review determined that the “decision by agency heads to include the Steele Dossier in the ICA ran counter to fundamental tradecraft principles and ultimately undermined the credibility of a key judgment.”
The “Steele dossier,” composed by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele as part of opposition research on Trump during the 2016 campaign, featured salacious material and unfounded allegations about Trump’s connections to Russia. Trump has denied the allegations included in the document.
Then-CIA Director John Brennan speaks during the CIA’s third conference on national security at George Washington University, September 20, 2016, in Washington, D.C.
Specifically, the CIA’s new review found that the CIA’s deputy director for analysis said in a December 2016 email to Brennan that including the dossier in any capacity jeopardized “the credibility of the entire paper.”
“Despite these objections, Brennan showed a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness,” the new review stated. “When confronted with specific flaws in the Dossier by the two mission center leaders – one with extensive operational experience and the other with a strong analytic background – he appeared more swayed by the Dossier’s general conformity with existing theories than by legitimate tradecraft concerns. Brennan ultimately formalized his position in writing, stating that ‘my bottomline is that I believe that the information warrants inclusion in the report.’”
Brennan served as director of the CIA from March 2013 to January 2017 under the Obama administration.
Brennan could not be reached for comment by Fox News Digital.
Likewise, the review said Brennan had sent a note to intelligence community analysts one day before their only session coordinating on the ICA that he had met with then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-FBI Director James Comey.
In that message, Brennan told the CIA workforce that “there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our recent Presidential election.”
Fox News’ Brooke Singman contributed to this report.
CIA Director John Brennan participates in a session at the third annual Intelligence and National Security Summit in Washington, Sept. 8, 2016.
