STARRS Town Hall: U.S. Military Opposition to the Trump Administration A Matter of Concern
“many active duty officers openly and deeply despise the Trump Administration, and they are not at all shy about expressing their opinion both in and out of uniform. One active duty Major I know estimates that it’s 1 in 4 who have this problem”
Last week I gave our loyal readers a heads up that STARRS (STAND TOGETHER Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services) was going to hold a Town Hall concerning service members who think that it is appropriate to denigrate President Trump and Secretary of Defense Hegseth, engage in “malicious compliance,” and downright defiance of lawful orders issued by the Trump Administration, especially as regards the removal of DEI: U.S. Military Opposition to the Trump Administration A Matter of Concern:
There is an enormous problem in our nation’s military, one that I have not seen discussed in depth elsewhere. I have heard from multiple sources that many active duty officers openly and deeply despise the Trump Administration, and they are not at all shy about expressing their opinion both in and out of uniform. One active duty major I know estimates that it’s 1 in 4 who have this problem…
This is an astonishingly bad problem. Putting aside for the moment that this is a clear violation of Article 88 of the UCMJ, this is how military coups take place. I guess I should not be surprised given Mark Milley’s traitorous actions towards his Commander-in-Chief, but the fact that this has permeated to lower levels of the officer corps surprises me and causes me great worry. [emphasis added].
Well the STARRS Town Hall was, in fact, held Wednesday at the appointed hour (noon Eastern), and it was excellent.
From the STARRS web page discussing the Town Hall: STARRS Town Hall | The Military’s Leftwing Ideological Resistance: Fighting Back Against the Military Reforms of the President and SecDef:
STARRS held its quarterly Town Hall meeting on 9 April 2025 with special guest speakers Sam Shoemate, a retired Army intelligence analyst, and Chase Spears, a retired Army Public Affairs Officer.
They talked about the problem of active-duty military personnel openly opposing, mocking and disparaging their Commander-in-Chief President Trump and Secretary of Defense Hegseth as well as resisting the new Executive and DOD Orders that have come out. This is a powerful, must-watch warning that even though CRT/DEI ideology has been banned in the military, this fervent religious Marxist-based woke belief system that many military people have been indoctrinated with over the years is still there. Using malicious compliance, media leaks, changing names, hiding activities, defying orders, waiting them out, influencing others in their commands, and more, this is a serious problem.
You can watch the Town Hall here:
From X:
This is a big problem, if true. https://t.co/IURGjeDpD3
— J. A. Hunsinger (@HunsingerJ9619) April 3, 2025
Trust me, it’s true.
In fact, in between the Town Hall happening and now, as we covered, Trump Fires Insubordinate Space Force Commander; Military Officer Adherence to the U.S. Constitution in Question, we have concrete evidence that it is true…unfortunately.
Anyway, please watch the STARRS YouTube Town Hall and join the voices alerting the citizenry to this abomination.
The Trump Administration needs to keep fixing this ASAP.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
If it is 1/4 that I’m afraid that’s it. You’ll never get rid of them and any attempt to cure the problem will be fought tooth and nail both inside and outside the military.
Then you fight them tooth and nail. Military reform is one place where I don’t believe the US District Judges have any jurisdiction.
That’s not to say military judges aren’t also infected with this. But at least the opponent won’t be able to forum-shop.
District judges have decided that they have jurisdiction any place that they want to stick their noses
I’m so old I remember when Obama expelled service members that failed his litmus test.
for historical reference, look at the way the royal navy handled insubordination in the 18th / 19th century–there’s a reason the brits treated it as a serious offense (as do most other military commands throughout the world)–following lawful orders from the chain of command is the foundation for any fighting force, anywhere
in the moment, when lives, ships, aircraft, armor, etc are at risk, following orders is the lifeline that holds things together
anything else and you’re just a bunch of mutineers, rebels, guerrillas
That’s one reason, but not the only one. You don’t want the military inventing its own foreign policy. Like what the former commander at Pituffik did.
If the snti-Trumpers are being vocal about it, that’s perfect. Collect all the names and fire every one of them.
Obama spent 16 years (Trump never got anywhere near full control of his military) systematically purging conservatives from the officer corps.
First, any officer that wasn’t on board with out-homosexuality was purged, then any officer who wasn’t pro trans was purged, or who wasn’t for lowering standards to let women into combat positions, then anyone who refused to take the radically experimental Covid vaccine..
There is no choice now but to do a counter purge, while hiring back as many of the good officers who Obama got rid of as they can.
This is the result of Obama getting rid of Majors and Colonels in 2009-2015. As well as senior enlisted men and women. It allowed him to promote officers and senior enlisted who would follow the lefts ideology. It will take 10 years to weed out these ashats.
and Trump did little to nothing about this in his first four years. Either he wasn’t committed then, or he was trying to get reelected by being a nice guy.
A president can do a lot to form the military. FDR had a long window of time to do it, serving for over 3 terms, but there were only about 8 years before his inauguration in 1933 and our entry into WW2 in 1941. And in that time he had Colonel Eisenhower promoted to a high ranking general at least.
Though obviously approved by FDR, it was Chief of Staff George C Marshall who ensured Eisenhower was promoted and assigned to plan and command D-Dat
Unless they continue to send emails
What a freaking idiot
Take some of the more egregious cases and hammer ’em; Article 88 court-martial, reduction in rank, forced separation. Then pass the word: Get with the program or get out, NOW. Pour encourager les autres.
Let’s start with that officer (name escapes me) who’s twin brother is a congressman, who testified before Congress, in uniform, defying his allegiance to the chain of command.
That traitor belongs in the brig.
Or better than that, shot at sunrise
His name is Vindman.
Vindman didn’t get an autopen pardon I believe which means he can be recalled to active duty and:
1) Posted to Ukraine as an observer, or
2) Court martialed, reduced in rank to 2nd louie, and dishonorably discharged.
Trust me, it’s true.
TY James… I knew it was bad, but not this bad. I see Pete trying so hard. Out doing PT with the guys.. He must know.. they must all know about this issue.
It just seems counterintuitive.. military is “gung ho”, all together. Those 1 out of 4 guys(people) are in favor of trans bs? 1 out of 4 think chain of command is a suggestion? SMH
DEI vs merit must be at the heart of this. That is why they hate Potus and Pete.
Since Milley actually committed treason and he escaped appropriate punishment, the chances of this getting out of hand are probably good.
Military training of officers needs to be purged of all woke elements and woke instructors. Flag officers and field grade officers need to be purged of woke believers.
To correct this you are not going to just have to purge the officer corps, you will have to purge the senior enlisted ranks (but probably by not as much), the civilians associated with the military, the CIA, the NSA, the DIA, and all the other military focused three letter agencies. That is a lot of people, Are you prepared to not be able to put every ship (well 2/3s) of them to sea and degrade the readiness of the other services (probably less so the marines).
As to where the start let’s be blunt.
– military academy graduates the last 15 years
– ROTC graduates
– blacks (yes there it is – See the just fired Chairman Joint Chiefs)
– women (ahh yes more there it is – see the recently fired JCs for coast guard and navy)
Not all of course and probably not most but enough. What’s worse the democrats and press will positively howl and do everything they can to obstruct, I can already hear the racism, misogamy wails,
If indoctrination in the ideology has been going on for many years, wouldn’t another way of thinking need to be offered to help people think their way out? Maybe that’s happening, idk. But, it’s not a given that everyone will be relieved to be free of the ideology and things will go back to normal.
The Pentagon should invite/compel all officers to a meeting who want to share their disagreement with Trump/Hegseth’s military doctrine. Once there tell all of them they are fired
Meyers was not insubordinate according to the UCMJ.
“In general, a service member can be accused of insubordination if they assault, disobey, or disrespectfully treat a superior officer.”
Meyers did none of those things.
First, mere disagreement is not “insubordinate.” More importantly, Meyers could not have been “insubordinate” to J.D. Vance because the Vice President is not in the chain of command. You cannot say she is “insubordinate” because Vance has no standing in the military.
Secondly, Meyers did violate the UCMJ in making a political statement while in the capacity of a member of the military. She even used the military email system. If she wanted to criticize Vance, and even Trump, as a private citizen, she has that right. Writing the email as she did is a violation of the UCMJ.
Third, the writing of the email and being so completely unaware of the UCMJ and political statements would most likely be “conduct unbecoming an officer.”
Fourth, her conduct and stepping so far outside acceptable behavior would lead to people believing she was not able to command. After all, you can’t have “rules for me and not for thee” in the military. You can’t have superior officers essentially saying “there are no rules or standards of conduct.”
There was a lot of things the woman could have been, and should have been relieved of her command.
“Insubordination” is not one of them.
Spoken with the unshakable arrogance of ignorance. You obviously have no idea about what you are pontificating about, which is evident to anyone but you. Meanwhile, the grown ups are back in charge, so learn to deal with it.
Spoken with the unshakable inability to read what I said.
I’ll say it again…..
Meyers should have been relieved of command for reasons of political statements while in uniform as well as conduct unbecoming an officer.
By definition, she was not insubordinate.
That simple point escapes you.
Even when the statement by Space Command does not mention “insubordination” but does list other reasons, you want to illogically hold onto what you believe rather than facts.
Meyers was not insubordinate according to the UCMJ.
“In general, a service member can be accused of insubordination if they assault, disobey, or disrespectfully treat a superior officer.”
Meyers did none of those things.
Your wrong
She most certainly disrespected President Trumps stated policies to foreign nations AND personally disrespected the VP
She stated her disagreement with Vance’s comments.
Vance is not in the chain of command, so her comments cannot, by definition be “insubordination” with regards to Vance.
Meyers did not assault Trump or any superior officer. Meyers did not disobey any superior officer. Therefore in regards to those elements, she was not “insubordinate.”
Disagreeing with Trump, or any civilian authority, is not “insubordination” by any definition of the term. Saying “I disagree” is not treating Trump with “disrespectful treatment.
Furthermore, the statement from Col. Kenneth Klock, commander of Space Base Delta 1 says Meyers was relieved due to “loss of confidence in [Meyers] ability to lead,” and “commanders are expected to adhere to the highest standards of conduct, especially as it relates to remaining nonpartisan in the performance of their duties.”
Notice that there is no mention of “insubordination” as the reason for the removal of command.
There were plenty of other reasons for her removal, but “insubordination” was not one of them.
Sorry the facts does not agree with your opinion.
Those of us who have held command positions in the military are aware of how little you seem to know about this, but doubt you will let that slow you down. It does reinforce the point of the article that there are similar attitudes out there that must be expunged from the military.
Once again, you seem to think I am saying that she should not have been let go.
I know she should have.
But if you actually held a command position, you would know – or people would hope you would know – that Meyers was not insubordinate,
She was guilty of a lot of other things, but she was not insubordinate.
Try learning to read instead of assuming.
The sea lawyers are out in force today – Generation Z is alive and well in our deteriorated country.
Silent insubordination refers to a deliberate refusal to follow instructions or directives from a superior without openly stating that they are not being followed, often through passive resistance or noncompliance. It’s a form of defiance that undermines authority without being directly confrontational.
Examples of Silent Insubordination:
Passive resistance: Consistently prioritizing other tasks or working slowly to avoid completing a specific assignment.
Avoiding completion: Saying “yes” to a request but failing to carry it out.
Delegating responsibilities: Trying to pass off tasks to others without justification.
Working at a reduced pace: Deliberately slowing down work to avoid completing a task within the required timeframe.
Ignoring follow-up: Failing to respond to manager follow-up questions or instructions.
Deliberately not following instructions: Ignoring a supervisor’s instructions without explicitly stating that they are not being followed.
Consequences of Silent Insubordination:
Undermining authority: It can damage a supervisor’s credibility and the overall functioning of the organization.
Negative impact on team dynamics: It can create a toxic work environment if not addressed properly.
Disciplinary action: Depending on the severity, it can lead to disciplinary action, including demotion, termination, or even court-martial in military organizations.
Thanks, Obama .
However, I can think of one circumstance that might at least partially exonerate her. Did she alert her supervisor about the email before she sent it forth? Coordinating such a potentially problematic missive with her own command would certainly have been prudent. She could have justified it as an attempt to do some damage control with the upset contractors, and if she did so beforehand, then this might be an instance of the higher ups trying to leave her holding the bag to shield themselves. Unlikely, since that would be easy to prove, but that information would help this make more sense.
Leave a Comment