>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
He continued, “They have a secret list of 20 something — 24 organizations that they have now authorized to use — use kinetic action against without the normal approach that we have for law enforcement. Hey, we don’t want drugs in this country, especially fentanyl. But all these drugs, we — we should be working really hard to interdict them and prosecute the individuals that are smuggling drugs, not putting young service members at great, legal jeopardy.”
Interestingly, ABC’s official transcript omitted the word “jeopardy,” despite it being clearly audible during the broadcast — a detail many noticed as the controversy grew online.
Kelly, a former Navy combat pilot and astronaut, might have thought he was showing concern for the troops. But his critics argue his warning could sow confusion among service members about obeying the lawful orders of their commander-in-chief.
Some have even suggested his statement borders on encouraging mutiny — urging troops to second-guess commands from the President based on the fear of a future Democrat-led prosecution. Notably, Raddatz did not challenge Kelly on the implications of his words, leaving many questions unanswered.
Kelly’s fellow Arizona Democrat, Senator Ruben Gallego — a Marine veteran of Iraq — took things even further. On NBC’s Meet the Press, Gallego outright accused the Trump administration of “murder.”
“It’s very dangerous what he’s doing…to these men and women who have to make these calls for a president who has zero understanding about the responsibility someone has when it comes to having to make life and death decisions,” Gallego said.
That kind of language didn’t sit well with conservatives or members of the military community. Many called the statement not only reckless but a direct insult to the men and women risking their lives to protect America from narco-terrorism.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham — an Air Force JAG veteran with decades of service — wasted no time firing back on Face the Nation.
“Senator Gallego, on another network, accused President Trump and our military of committing murder by attacking these drug boats. To our men and women in uniform, you’re not murdering anybody. You’re making America safer by going after a narco-terrorist. You’re following lawful orders,” Graham said.
He reminded viewers that past presidents used military force to stop threats in America’s backyard: “When President Bush, 41, took Ortega out in Panama, Reagan went into Grenada to deal with the Cuban influence… This is not murder. This is protecting America from being poisoned by narco-terrorists coming from Venezuela and Colombia.”
Pressed further about international law, Graham dismissed claims that Trump’s strikes could be “war crimes.” He explained that the actions were justified national defense.
“No, not at all,” Graham responded. “I don’t know what manual you’re referring to, but I know what President Bush, 41 did… Here’s what’s new. You got a commander-in-chief’s not going to put up with this crap. We’re not going to sit on the sidelines and watch boats full of drugs come to our country. We’re going to blow them up and kill the people that want to poison America.”
The senator added that President Trump views Venezuela and Colombia as threats harboring “narco-terrorist organizations” and warned that the U.S. will no longer turn a blind eye to drug cartels flooding American streets.
While Kelly claims to be defending the law, many Americans see his comments as part of a broader Democratic effort to undermine President Trump’s authority — even if it risks confusing the troops. Veterans across the country are asking: when did defending America’s borders and stopping deadly drugs become controversial?
One thing is clear — with the Biden administration’s weak stance on border enforcement and narcotics, Trump’s bold approach to fighting cartels has once again drawn a stark contrast between strength and surrender.
At the center of it all stands Mark Kelly — a senator whose words may have just crossed a dangerous line.
