First, I want to promise you, ever member of the American Armed Forces is extremely aware of both the requirement to follow all lawful orders of by those appointed above them, and the injunction to disobey illegal orders.

So the first issue is that…there is no reason for civilians unaffiliated with the military as part of their current duties to remind the troops of something so basic. Which suggests that there has to be some reason ulterior reason to “remind” them of that.

Here’s the part where, to me, it’s absolutely clear what the intent of this PSA is.

“Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk. This administration is pitting our uniform military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens like us.”

and

“And right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home.”

These are statements. Not implications, suggestions, or subtexts. It is a statement that this administration has become a domestic enemy of the people. That’s what that sentence means.

Combine this with the greater context of Democrats calling Trump “literally a fascist/Hitler” for years, and I cannot come to any reasonable conclusion other than that Senator Alyssa Slackin, Senator Mark Kelly, Representative Chris Duzio, Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander, Representative Chrissy Hulahan, and Congressman Jason Crowe are attempting to suborn the United States Military into disobeying lawful orders by attempting to conflate policy positions and actions that are unpopular with unlawful orders.

Each person in the video is also former military or intelligence service, so there is no possibility that they are misspeaking or mistaken, as many persons who never served do not have a very good understanding of what unlawful orders are. These people know.

And there’s one final bit of dishonesty in this video. Military law does not say that you can disobey unlawful orders. It states that you MUST disobey unlawful orders. It is not something that servicemen and women need debate about or question.

If you are ordered to summarily execute a POW, that is a manifestly illegal order, and you are required to disobey it. If your commanding officer orders you to drop a bomb on a machinegun nest located in a school that may or may not have civilians in it, that is a lawful order and you must obey it. “Can” is not part of the equation.

A final point I will make. I’m autistic. I’m not usually very good at reading subtext. Yet even to me, the subtext here is glaringly, blatantly obvious. Hell, maybe even moreso to me, because to me it’s very strange to remind people of something that they know about intimately.

Especially when you know how much training they have on the matter. So why would a body of people hostile to the sitting president remind people who are already very well aware that they “can” disobey unlawful orders?

You’re really going to sit there and try to tell me with a straight face that there’s no subtext here? What’s more, I believe that the two lines I highlighted above take their statements beyond subtext into sedition.