A cabinet secretary or a high-ranking military officer disagreeing with the president is one thing. Working to remove him from office is another.
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who–
(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny; (2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition; (3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.
(b) A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court- martial may direct.
Article 94, Mutiny and sedition, Uniformed Code Military Justice (emphasis mine)
Recently a Facebook friend (very opposed to Trump) posted on an interview with former Secretary of Defense (and now never Trumper) Mark Esper. Secretary Esper had an issue with the decision of former President Donald Trump on troops in Germany. From a 60 Minutes interview with Mr. Esper in 2023:
“And to tell the story about things we prevented. Really bad things. Dangerous things that could have taken the country in a dark direction.”
In newly released exchanges, Esper described to O’Donnell the turbulence of working in the Trump administration including what he described as a May 9, 2020, presidential berating of U.S. military leaders and the decision Mr. Trump made a month later to order the withdraw of 10,000 U.S. troops from Germany…
…In June 2020, Mr. Trump ordered then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper, to withdraw 10,000 U.S. troops from Germany. The former president said it was because Germany was not paying enough to NATO.
“They’re delinquent billions of dollars, and this is for years,” the president said in June 2020.
Esper told 60 Minutes he “wrestled” with how to handle Trump’s order and ultimately devised a plan to relocate troops in an effort to reassure the U.S.’s NATO allies.
“We came up with a plan that ended up putting more U.S. forces in Europe to strengthen NATO, more U.S. forces in more NATO countries to reassure them, and more forces closer to Russia to deter them,” Esper told 60 Minutes. “And I thought it was a clever way by which we were able to accomplish strategic objectives, notwithstanding the origin of the president’s desire to pull troops out of Germany.”
A point I made with my friend is it’s not up for a cabinet secretary to make government policy. It’s the president decision, and this raises a serious issue.
I’ve mentioned in multiple posts how I, as an officer of the United States, if given a legal (not necessarily wise, but legal) order, have a choice. I raise my objections and give the counsel my superior should get from me, but if he still stays with his decision, I must either execute to the best of my ability or resign.
What I’m reading from Mr. Esper’s interview is he deliberately going against the orders of his president. That is called insubordination. And if President Trump had heard of this, he would be completely justified in dismissing the man from the cabinet (no, he doesn’t need to ask Esper for his resignation).
More concerning is something that followed. The reported action of a four-star officer (emphasis mine).
In Esper’s new book, the former defense secretary described a May 9, 2020, meeting between President Trump and U.S. military leaders that became so tense Esper said that one of the four-star officers present told him later that he researched the 25th Amendment.
In and of itself, reading about the 25th Amendment is not sedition. Acting on it is. Again, he cannot in good conscious follow this order, then resign. An example of how to handle this matter came a few years earlier, when then Secretary of Defense James Mattis submitted his resignation, based on his disagreements with President Trump on allies. From General Mattis’s letter (emphasis mine):
…One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies…
…My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.
Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position…
Another example was the late Army Colonel David Hackworth. By all accounts a soldier’s soldier (2 Distinguished Service Crosses, 10 Silver Stars, 8 Bronze Stars with Valor Device, and 8 Purple Hearts over 25 years). No question, if he had stayed, he likely would have become a general (General Creighton Abrams, then commander in Vietnam and future Army Chief of Staff called Colonel Hackwork “the best battalion commander I ever saw in the United States Army”). But Hackworth was disheartened by the conduct of the Vietnam War, stated his issues publicly on the ABC show Issues and Answers, then retired. He reached his impasse and got out. Colonel Hackwork (from all accounts) did not look at getting President Nixon removed from office.
After reading the Facebook post I remember the Esper interview (then refreshed my memory with a Bing search) and if he has his issues, fine. I find his actions against the president’s guidance distressing. But the possible actions of senior officers very disturbing.
Again, reading about removing a president is not a crime. However, if flag officers were looking at getting the 25th Amendment initiated and replacing the current chief executive is as serious as it gets (it’s a capital offense for a reason, I recommended to my friend Seven Days in May). This needs to be investigated. If this was just a flag officer venting his frustration, fine. If it was more, people need to be held to account. If some of his fellow generals knew of this and did nothing, their asses need to be hung out to dry.
Michael A. Thiac is a retired Army intelligence officer, with over 23 years experience, including serving in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and the Middle East. He is also a retired police patrol sergeant, with over 22 years’ service, and over ten year’s experience in field training of newly assigned officers. He has been published at The American Thinker, PoliceOne.com, and on his personal blog, A Cop’s Watch.
Opinions expressed are his alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of current or former employers.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
1 thought on “None Dare Call It Sedition”