“It is my understanding, however, that protective crowd control will be one of the things they’re trained on, and I will provide my advice to the Title X commander.”
LOYALTY? Brigadier General Gronewold of the Oregon National Guard made it clear he believes he has a DUAL duty to protect America and Oregonians – and he believes that includes the Antifa protesters. If federalized he testified that he would protect the insurgents. pic.twitter.com/VmRjZGGrYJ
Then came the line that sent shockwaves through both state and national circles:
“The Oregon National Guard men and women serve two purposes: one, to defend America, and two, to protect Oregonians. So, by serving in this mission, they will be protecting any protesters at the ICE facility. That’s my desire.”
How can he “protect” people from the law? If they break the law, they are supposed to be held accountable. Sounds like sedition to me. https://t.co/m6dT59118A
To make matters worse, Gronewold appeared to sidestep questions about use-of-force protocols, saying:
“Now, to answer your question — ‘full force’ is not a doctrinal term that the Army uses, so I’m not sure exactly what that means, and I don’t want to speculate as to what level of force they will be allowed to use.”
Critics Sound the Alarm
Conservatives are outraged, calling Gronewold’s words a dangerous display of political bias within the military ranks. Commentators argue that a state general openly contradicting a federal order undermines the chain of command and emboldens the very groups responsible for chaos outside federal buildings.
“This isn’t just insubordination — it’s a direct challenge to the Commander-in-Chief,” one former military officer told The Gateway Pundit. “If a general thinks his job is to ‘protect protesters’ instead of federal officers, we’re in serious trouble.”
Online reaction has been swift and fierce. Many Americans are questioning whether Gronewold is prioritizing partisan politics over national duty. Others are demanding his resignation or removal for what they view as a betrayal of his oath.
A Broader Crisis of Obedience
The controversy comes amid growing concern that certain National Guard leaders in blue states are acting as political shields for radical activists. Portland has been a hotbed of anti-ICE protests and violent clashes for years, often fueled by progressive officials who defy federal law enforcement.
President Trump’s administration has long maintained that protecting federal facilities is a non-negotiable federal responsibility. Under Title 10, once activated, National Guard troops report directly to the President — not to state governors or local officials.
That makes Gronewold’s public comments even more alarming to constitutional scholars and national security experts, who warn that his position effectively rejects federal authority.
The Bottom Line
If Brig. Gen. Gronewold meant what he said, Oregon could soon find itself at the center of a constitutional standoff. By pledging to “protect protesters” rather than enforce federal law, he may have crossed a line from questionable leadership into outright insubordination.
The American people deserve clarity: Will the Oregon National Guard follow the lawful orders of the Commander-in-Chief, or will politics continue to infect the ranks of those sworn to defend this nation?
Either way, this confrontation is far from over — and the implications reach far beyond Oregon’s borders.
