I’m looking forward to hearing the comments from my military readers on this one!…
Stephen A. Smith didn’t walk onto The View expecting a warm embrace, but he probably didn’t expect to become the only adult in the room either. Yet here we are. The usually bombastic ESPN star ended up being the sole voice willing to say what everyone else won’t: that Sen. Mark Kelly and a handful of Democrats crossed a line when they released a political warning video encouraging military members to “refuse illegal orders” from Donald Trump. And naturally, the ladies of The View reacted like someone unplugged their teleprompter mid-sentence. Sunny Hostin called him “loud and wrong,” Joy Behar lectured him about military protocol she’s never read, and Whoopi seemed personally offended that Stephen A. dared to question a Democrat. But for once, Stephen A. didn’t back down. And honestly, good for him.
The entire fight revolves around one thing Democrats desperately want to pretend is true: that Trump was issuing illegal military orders. That’s the foundation of Kelly’s video — the quiet insinuation that Trump is a rogue commander instructing troops to do something unlawful. Except Democrats never explain what illegal order they’re talking about, because the moment they do, the whole performance collapses. The “illegal order” in question? Trump authorized U.S. forces to blow up narco-terrorist drug boats operating in international waters. These aren’t fishing vessels or innocent cruise ships. They are cartel-run smuggling crafts transporting poison into the United States — and yes, under federal law, those boats can be seized, disabled, or destroyed. It’s been that way for decades.
Here’s the part Stephen A. should have countered with, the part the women on The View conveniently left out, and the part Democrats never want to say aloud: Trump’s orders were 100% legal. Not sort of legal. Not “interpretation-dependent” legal. Fully, unquestionably legal. Under Article II of the Constitution, the President is the Commander-in-Chief. He has the authority to direct military force against hostile foreign actors. Then add the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act, which gives the United States jurisdiction to interdict and destroy vessels involved in drug trafficking — whether or not they’re flying a national flag. Pile on decades of Rules of Engagement and Title 10 authority where the U.S. has repeatedly seized or sunk cartel vessels under multiple administrations. Nothing Trump ordered was new. Nothing he ordered was rogue. Nothing he ordered violated U.S. or international law. And here’s the real kicker: the only difference this time was tone. Trump didn’t sugarcoat the mission, bury it in legalese, or hide it behind an agency press release. He showed America exactly what was happening. He showed the cartel boats being neutralized. He showed the operations. He made the consequences visible. He turned enforcement into deterrence — because when the bad guys see their boats getting vaporized on camera, the message spreads a whole lot faster than a memo from DHS. That’s what Democrats really hated. Not the legality. Not the policy. The visibility. The fact that Trump refused to be polite about taking out narco-terrorists, and instead let the entire hemisphere know the United States wasn’t playing around. And for that, apparently, the military needed a pre-emptive mutiny briefing.
That’s why Stephen A. Smith was right to call out Mark Kelly. Kelly knows the military better than the average Democrat senator. He’s a former Navy combat pilot. He absolutely knows the difference between a lawful and an unlawful command. Which is exactly why his video wasn’t about educating troops — it was about framing Trump as a danger. Kelly wasn’t teaching. He was implying. And implying that the Commander-in-Chief might issue illegal orders is not something a former officer should be doing casually on camera, especially not to score political points.
And this is where The View lost its collective mind. Sunny Hostin, who believes her law degree makes her an expert on every subject known to mankind, tried to lecture Stephen A. on the military code of conduct. Joy chimed in with the classic “He said ILLEGAL orders!” defense, as if inserting the word automatically absolves Kelly of what he was actually doing — planting doubt. Stephen A. pushed back, pointing out that the issue wasn’t the word “illegal,” it was the fact that Kelly’s video framed Trump’s lawful actions as if they were illegal. And in the military, nuance isn’t a suggestion. Troops don’t operate on the principle of “Well, the senator probably meant well.” They operate on clarity, precision, and chain of command. Anything that inserts confusion into that structure is dangerous.
This is where Stephen A. showed more common sense than the entire panel combined. He spoke to people who have actually been in the military — not people who have seen movies about the military — and they told him exactly what veterans know: even implying that a service member should question an order can get that service member into trouble. Civilians don’t get this. Talk show hosts don’t get this. But the military absolutely does. When Kelly made that video, he wasn’t sending a message to Trump. He was sending a message to the rank and file: “We’re not so sure about your Commander-in-Chief.”
If that sounds small to civilians, it isn’t small to anyone who has ever worn the uniform. The chain of command is not a suggestion. It is the backbone of the U.S. armed forces. The moment you encourage troops to individually decide which orders might be “illegal” based on partisan messaging videos, you’re not defending democracy — you’re undermining it. Because the military cannot function if troops are encouraged to operate based on political vibes. And Democrats know this. They just don’t care.
What they care about is creating the narrative that Trump is dangerous. That he’s unstable. That he’s issuing unlawful orders. And that the military must prepare to resist him. But at some point, we have to ask: resist what? Ordering the destruction of drug boats used by cartels? That’s not illegal. That’s called defending the country. It’s called national security. And it’s something Democrats were fine with back when they trusted law enforcement more than drug cartels — a long-forgotten era.
The funniest part of this whole disaster is how furious The View became at Stephen A. for simply refusing to bow. They’re used to steamrolling their guests until they apologize for existing. Instead, Stephen A. told them they were wrong, held his ground, and refused to retreat. They weren’t prepared for that. They expected a guest. They got a debate. And they lost.
Stephen A. Smith didn’t just defend Trump. He defended the truth. He defended military discipline. And he defended the idea that if politicians want to accuse a President of giving illegal orders, they should have the decency to explain which orders and why. Mark Kelly didn’t do that. He didn’t want clarity. He wanted insinuation. And Stephen A. called him on it. But let’s be honest — while Stephen A. was absolutely right, he didn’t package the argument as cleanly as it deserved. He swung hard, he swung fast, but he never quite connected with the knockout point: that the orders weren’t just not illegal — they were standard, lawful military operations that Democrats tried to spin into a crisis. In other words, Stephen A. was on the right battlefield, delivering the right message… he just didn’t fire the heaviest ammunition he had.
The bottom line is simple: Trump’s orders were legal. Mark Kelly’s video was political. The View‘s meltdown was predictable. And Stephen A. Smith was absolutely right to stand his ground and refuse to be intimidated by a table full of people who get louder the moment they get wronger.
WE’D LOVE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS! PLEASE COMMENT BELOW.
JIMMY
Find more articles like this at steadfastandloyal.com.
h/t: Steadfast and Loyal
Leave a Comment