President Trump proposed Saturday that Democratic lawmakers who encouraged military personnel to ignore orders belong behind bars.

The commander in chief issued his response after several Democrats, including Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, appeared in a video earlier this week encouraging troops to refuse commands. The clip featured the phrase “Don’t give up the ship.”

Trump took to Truth Social with a fiery response.

“THE TRAITORS THAT TOLD THE MILITARY TO DISOBEY MY ORDERS SHOULD BE IN JAIL RIGHT NOW, NOT ROAMING THE FAKE NEWS NETWORKS TRYING TO EXPLAIN THAT WHAT THEY SAID WAS OK. IT WASN’T, AND NEVER WILL BE! IT WAS SEDITION AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL, AND SEDITION IS A MAJOR CRIME. THERE CAN BE NO OTHER INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THEY SAID!”

The president followed up with another post reinforcing his position.

“MANY GREAT LEGAL SCHOLARS AGREE THAT THE DEMOCRAT TRAITORS THAT TOLD THE MILITARY TO DISOBEY MY ORDERS, AS PRESIDENT, HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME OF SERIOUS PROPORTION!”

Senior Trump advisor Stephen Miller weighed in during a television appearance after the Democratic video surfaced online. He characterized the footage as insurrection.

“It’s a general call for rebellion from the CIA and the armed services of the United States, by Democrat lawmakers.”

Miller continued by placing the video within a broader pattern of Democratic behavior.

“We have seen the Democratic Party nurse the flames of violence and insurrection against the federal government for the last ten months. When you see this continuous campaign of violence against ICE officers and Border Patrol agents, when you see Democrat sanctuary politicians and Democrat sanctuary governors side with the rioters, side with the assaulters over federal law enforcement, and that spills even into juries and grand juries. When you see Democrat jurors engage in nullification to let off violent attackers who are engaging in physical violence, physical assault against federal officers, this is a dangerous moment.”

Bryan Dean Wright, a former CIA operations officer who hosts The Wright Report podcast, argued that Slotkin deliberately created controversy with what he called a propaganda clip.

Wright pointed to her intelligence background as evidence she understood exactly what she was doing.

“As a former CIA operations officer, my job was to go out in the field and collect the intel, conduct the operation. Her job as an analyst was to figure out whether or not things like propaganda operations were successful, if they were effective.”

He emphasized that Slotkin knew what she was doing when she put that together.

The president initially responded to the footage by stating that seditious behavior was punishable by death. However, both the White House and Trump later clarified he did not actually wish to execute those lawmakers involved.

The controversy centers on whether elected officials can legally encourage active duty military personnel to refuse commands from their commander in chief. Critics argue such messaging undermines military discipline and the chain of command.

Supporters of the Democrats involved claim they were simply reminding service members of their oath to the Constitution and their duty to refuse unlawful orders. However, Slotkin herself later admitted Trump has not actually issued illegal orders to the military.

The video featured multiple Democratic lawmakers with military or intelligence backgrounds. Besides Slotkin, the clip included Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona and Representatives Chris Deluzio, Chrissy Houlahan, Maggie Goodlander, and Jason Crow.

Each participant previously served in either the armed forces or intelligence community before entering politics. Their collective backgrounds gave the video an appearance of credibility among service members who might see it.

Miller’s characterization of the current moment as dangerous reflects growing tensions between the Trump administration and Democratic opposition. Violence against federal immigration enforcement officers has increased significantly in recent months.

Some legal experts have debated whether the video rises to the level of sedition under federal law. Others argue it represents protected political speech regardless of how inflammatory the content might be.

The exchange highlights the increasingly hostile relationship between the two parties. Democrats have ramped up resistance messaging since Trump returned to office, while the administration has responded with accusations of treason and sedition.

Wright’s point about Slotkin’s CIA analyst background suggests she would have understood how the video would be received and deliberately crafted it for maximum impact. Her training in evaluating propaganda effectiveness means she likely anticipated the firestorm.

The president’s demand for jail time represents his strongest response yet to Democratic opposition tactics. Whether any legal action actually follows remains to be seen.