New York Times Column Complains U.S. Military Won’t Defy Commander in Chief Trump
“It now seems clear to us that the military will not rescue Americans from Mr. Trump’s misuse of the nation’s military capabilities.”
This week, the New York Times published a guest essay in their opinion section by Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson, two former members of the Obama administration. It must be seen to be believed.
In their effort to bash Trump’s decision to send federal forces into Washington, DC to help fight crime, the writers let the mask slip in astonishing fashion.
From the New York Times:
We Used to Think the Military Would Stand Up to Trump. We Were Wrong.
By ordering 800 National Guard troops to Washington, on the pretext of an illusory crime wave, President Trump has further dragged the U.S. military into domestic law enforcement, in a move credibly perceived as an ominous “test case.” This continues what the administration started in California in June as part of the its deportation efforts.
Unfortunately, though we (and others) had hoped that the military would only respond to calls to action in American cities and states kicking and screaming, we no longer expect resistance from that institution. Once, perhaps, traditionalist officers might have leaned on protocol and refused to heed a lawless order, taking inspiration from the generals — Mark Milley and James Mattis — who resisted the uprooting of established military standards in the first Trump term.
But today, general officers no longer seem to see themselves as guardians of the constitutional order.
It now seems clear to us that the military will not rescue Americans from Mr. Trump’s misuse of the nation’s military capabilities. Recent changes to the terms of the military’s employment by the Pentagon and its members’ incentives to career advancement will ultimately overcome any constitutional and moral qualms about their conduct.
Simply amazing.
New York Times is really saying the quiet part out loud, huh? pic.twitter.com/WbWmQ57YnQ
— Robert Sterling (@RobertMSterling) August 13, 2025
We used to think the military would stage an armed coup against an elected US president. We were wrong what https://t.co/OONV7Nf5Eo pic.twitter.com/IZNcS0LH2F
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) August 14, 2025
The New York Times is pro-military coup against President Trump.
What a flaming pile of trash in The Times, written by former Obama NSC officials Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson. pic.twitter.com/0Ds0LxbGUZ
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) August 14, 2025
The Times eventually changed the title of the piece.
The New York Times published a column so appalling and treasonous that they had to change the title.
(I had to confirm that the original screen shot was real. It is!) https://t.co/eLli3hkiTR pic.twitter.com/2kmh21hW18
— Cernovich (@Cernovich) August 14, 2025
FOX News actually got a response from the New York Times over the criticism:
In a statement to Fox News Digital, a NYT spokesperson defended the piece, saying it was “from two seasoned national security experts” and “thoroughly fact-checked prior to publication.”
“New York Times Opinion regularly publishes guest essays from a wide variety of writers with deep experience in their fields, and from across the political spectrum including the Trump administration,” the spokesperson said.
Simon also defended the essay, telling Fox News Digital that no one who read it could come to the conclusion that he was in favor of a military coup.
“As for actions, military leaders should give the president their best professional advice and decide for themselves whether they should resign if their advice is disregarded,” Simon said.
Last word to this guy.
Whenever the left calls you fascist just laugh
Turns out democracy is sacred until progressives lose
Then they expect a full on military coup pic.twitter.com/9dpigvMLn5
— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) August 14, 2025
Featured image is a screencap via the Internet Archive.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I always thought that the New York Times was a little crazy, but wow!
They’re totally coup-coup!
https://x.com/redsteeze/status/1956378544151675228
The column the next day said to abolish the senate, end the electoral college and pack the court.
They’ve getting very loud.
America is the richest prize in the world, people will stop at nothing to steal it all.
I am quite sure that smaller states are going to just jump at the chance to lose their clout in the Senate just to appease some Millennial Marxists or Zoomer Zohran-wannabes. That will happen at the same time Stacey Abrams flies and Rosie O’Donnell has “Trump Rules” tattooed on her forehead.
We used to live in Fantasy Land. -Signed, NeverTrumpLandia
The voice of Walter Duranty speaks.
NYTimes: We were hoping for a military coup. It didn’t happen. Here’s why that’s bad.
Also NYTimes: No, no. We didn’t say the quiet part outloud! Orangeman still bad!
Didn’t these same chuckleheads deploy the National Guard with machineguns and fences for 5 months in 2021? After refusing any security help on 1/6?
At least Trump is deploying resources to protect all city residents, instead of just protecting the elites.
Well publishing a call for a military coup is seditious. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Tell me you don’t understand how our Constitutional Republic functions and the lawful employment of the ‘militia’ by POTUS without telling me you don’t understand those things while crafting a dangerously dishonest ideological narrative.
so the nyt is admitting that the military is still mostly woke
b/c if they thought that the military was back to maga
they wouldnt even have this question
Openly supporting, lauding and encouraging insubordination, the undermining of civilian control of the military and betrayal of one’s oath — all because a Republican president resides in the White House.
What else would one expect to be proffered, by two wretched lackeys/acolytes of the vile, lawless and subversive narcissist-incompetent-dunce, Obama?
With every passing day and revelations related to Crossfire Hurricane/Russia Collusion dirty tricks sabotage hoax, vile Obama looks more and more like a tin-pot, Idi Amin wannabe.
Obama…the more I learn about him the more anti-USA I realize he was/is.
I shudder to think where our country would be if Hillarity had won in 2016.
Even acknowledging his many laudable accomplishments in foreign and domestic policy, my belief is that #45’s and #47’s greatest accomplishments and most magnificent contributions to American and global peace, prosperity and sanity, will always be keeping vile, corrupt and narcissistic crones, Clinton and Kamuluh, out of the White House.
2001 Chicago Public Radio interview:
“And uh As radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed uh by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you. It says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.”
It surfaced briefly in 2008, but John McCain chose not to make it an issue. Barack Obama is a marxist.
18 U.S. Code § 2387 – Activities affecting armed forces generally
(a)Whoever, with intent to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States:
(1) advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States;
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
Woke types truly want to make my country into a banana republic.
GFY 😠
Legacy Media in the West is parasitic at best.
They gave away the game when they mentioned general officers, who by virtue of their positions have to be at least somewhat politically. But that means that when Trump and Hagseth started firing leftist general officers, the rest of them realized that doing what the NYT (and the left) want them to do would be immediately, and summarily, career ending.
The left, the Dems, have very little support outside of politically motivated general and senior officers. Trump supportive the military far, far, more strongly than Biden (or Obama) ever did. In six short months, the military went from big recruiting deficits, to filling their recruiting quotas six months early.
what should a constitutional republic do when the oppositional media publishes an openly seditious piece?
Would they fight if it was citizen vs citizen, and is that better, New York Sedition Times?
Retired officer here. Oath says to “obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me.” DC is a Federal City. Limited home rule was granted by statute. President is the executive (like a governor) in charge of the DC NG. He’s within his authority to put the Guard on the streets in DC. He could not do this in a State without calling their Guard into Federal service, and then he’d run into Posse Comitatus issue.
I would discount by a mile any opinion of two civilians who worked on the NSC staff in the Obama White House.
Slight quibble with your otherwise excellent post. The POTUS can federalize the NG and deploy them without running afoul of Posse Comitatus; see use of Alabama NG to force Gov Wallace out of school house door. More recently see LA.
To use Active Duty forces, other than in a protective posture of Federal Property/Personnel, you’d need to declare an insurrection to exist or to be imminent. There’s two ways to do it one is under invoking the Insurrection Act, the other is the authority used in LA to deploy Marines. Either gets around Posse Comitatus.
Clueless! They don’t know the National Guard is composed of their neighbors and under state (or DC) government control unless federalized. They are not the regular army. Also, it’s easy to say something is an illegal order (hint: they are not) when you aren’t the one who will end up in the federal penitentiary at Fort Leavenworth for disobeying it.
Mark Milley should be recalled to duty and then sent to Antarctica accompanied by staff officers Alexander and Eugene Vindman.
5 year tour.
One of the Vindmans got himself elected to congress. More stupid voters.
I thought there was only one Vindman—split down the middle.
Nah there are two. Twins. Both Porky. You kind of wonder if the army enforces any physical standards any more for officers of a certain age and rank.
There has been a long tradition of presidents calling out the military to protect Federal interests and law. Starting with President George Washington (who actually led his troops) and even President Warren Harding called out the Marines to protect the US Mail. More recently, Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Bush 1 all had the occasion to rely on Federal troops for domestic tasks.
Have you even LOOKED at enlistment numbers over the past three years to date, you giant wankers?
Interesting to watch the Communists lose their marbles over 800 National Guard restoring order in DC. I am old enough to remember when the Communists used 25,000 troops to install Biden* as President.
The Communists have long had a demonic taste for military coups and assassinations of political opponents.
“New York Times Opinion regularly publishes guest essays from a wide variety of writers with deep experience in their [leach] fields”
Very deep.
As a former soldier, I question the intelligence of anyone who would write an article not only calling for illegal action from the military, but in doing so implies that the Men and Women of the Armed Forces have no honor or code. Pretty bad look if you ask me.
The “smart people,” the “best and the brightest,” really need to Google something: From the Uniform Code of Military Justice, emphasize mine:
894. ARTICLE 94. Mutiny or Sedition
(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.
Last time I checked the President is at the top of the chain of command, and he is a civilian. So these people are encouraging a sedition at the highest level of the armed forces. Must be nice because they can say anything, but it would be these officers who pay the price.