MS NOW host Lawrence O’Donnell on Monday commended Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) for suing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who recently announced that he will downgrade the retired U.S. Navy Captain’s rank and pension over supposedly “seditious statements.”
Kelly was among six Democratic veterans urging U.S. service members in a video last fall to defy “illegal orders,” and while this is essentially a duty explicitly noted in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, President Donald Trump seemed to suggest at the time this was “punishable by DEATH!”
Advertisement
“Senator Kelly has insisted on this program and elsewhere that he will not be intimidated by Pete Hegseth,” O’Donnell said Monday. “And today, Senator Kelly put Pete Hegseth on the defensive by literally making him a defendant in the case of Kelly versus Hegseth.”
Kelly’s complaint filed Monday in Washington, D.C., accuses Hegseth of violating his due process, as the U.S. Constitution specifically notes that it’s illegal for the government to announce a verdict in advance — which Hegseth seemingly did on social media last week.
The former Fox News personality claimed at the time on X, formerly Twitter, that Kelly and his peers released a “reckless and seditious” video, leading the Defense Department to launch “retirement grade determination proceedings” against Kelly under 10 U.S.C § 1370(f).
Advertisement
Hegseth added at the time that the retired Navy captain would thus see “a corresponding reduction” in his pension. O’Donnell called this a clear-cut case of “Lawfare for Dummies,” as Kelly’s pension was already finalized when he retired from the Navy some 14 years ago.
“Nothing in the statute authorizes the Department of Defense to reopen that determination based on post-retirement political speech,” he continued, adding that “all of the nation’s retired veterans” would live under “an ever-present threat” against their retirement if it did.
O’Donnell then reiterated the words Kelly appears to be getting punished for: “Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.” Kelly argued in his suit that the investigation seems wholly premised on “accurate statements of law” that even Hegseth once agreed with.
Advertisement
The suit notes, “In a 2016 speech, Hegseth made clear that, ‘[i]f you’re doing something that is just completely unlawful and ruthless, then there is a consequence for that. That’s why the military said it won’t follow unlawful orders from their commander-in-chief.’”
O’Donnell noted that another Trump official cited in the suit once embraced that tenet too.
He read from Kelly’s complaint, which noted: “Before her appointment to attorney general, Pamela Bondi also endorsed this principle. In March 2024, she wrote a section in a court filing titled, ‘Military Officers Are Required Not to Carry Out Unlawful Orders.’”