Bragg-adocious

Trump’s wild speech at a U.S. military base, with a backdrop of cheering, pre-screened soldiers, draws us one step closer to autocracy.

Photo: AFP via Getty Images

On Tuesday, Donald Trump gave a campaign-style speech at Fort Bragg military base in North Carolina.

That’s right, Trump held a political rally with our military.

If that feels inherently wrong, then you likely understand that there are long-standing military rules and practices forbidding the politicization of our armed services.

If you felt a bit queasy hearing the boos and “Hooyahs!” of uniformed soldiers joining in as Trump attacked his political enemies, you likely understand that this rally was only the latest of moves by Trump to claim the armed forces as his own, and not the country’s.

And if there’s a pit in your stomach, it’s likely because you, like many others, are left wondering why no one high up in the military has come out forcefully in condemnation of what took place.

None of this is occurring in isolation. There are federal troops on the streets of a U.S. city and an authoritarian style military parade happening in two days in D.C. What does it all mean?

We begin, once more, with how things are supposed to be, before discussing how off the rails things went, and why the deafening silence of our top military brass is the most worrisome development.

Department of Defense Directive 1344.10

I shouldn’t have to quote the Defense Department’s own policy directives back at it, but it seems we all need a solid refresher.

The rules governing limitations on active duty members participating in political activities are laid out in Department of Defense Directive 1344.10. That directive states that active duty members may participate in things like political rallies “provided the member is not in uniform and does not otherwise act in a manner that could reasonably give rise to the inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement.” (DoD Directive 1344.10. Section 4.1.4)

The FAQs for this directive put this in plain language. They state that

active duty members are specifically prohibited from engaging in partisan political activity, and all members of the Armed Forces should always avoid actions that could reasonably be perceived as implying DoD sponsorship, approval, or endorsement of partisan political activity.

So what constitutes “partisan political activity”? It’s defined as any “activity supporting or relating to candidates representing, or issues specifically identified with, national or State political parties.”

So, yes. A campaign-style rally with Trump wearing a red hat while attacking his political opponents definitely counts as “partisan political activity” that active duty members would be “specifically prohibited from engaging” in. They aren’t even supposed to show up to any such activity that could “reasonably be perceived” as implying Defense Department approval.

And in case anyone has any further questions, there’s this:

Q9. Can I ever wear my uniform when I attend political events?

A9. No; military members must refrain from participating in political activity while in military uniform in accordance with both DoDD 1344.10 and DoDI 1344.01. This prohibition applies to all Armed Forces members.

Trump’s speech was not a happy birthday to the Army

Trump was expected to show up and say some general words about the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Army’s founding. But it was clear before he even arrived that this would be a campaign-style political event.

For the soldiers who would be in the bleachers behind Trump, a message reportedly went out:

While the military has not confirmed the authenticity of this message or its directives, the screenshot was shared publicly on the Ft. Bragg based “Fancy Fancy Bear” military group on Reddit.

In addition, as Military dot com reported, a vendor hawking Trump and MAGA merchandise was permitted on the base in advance of the event. Among the items offered was a “credit card” with 0045 numberings that read, “White privilege Card Trumps Everything.” This is what a similar card offered on Amazon looks like:

By the time Trump took the stage, the bleachers behind him were pre-screened for any Trump detractors and selected for partisan support. And the soldiers put on quite a show while Trump attacked the former Commander-in-Chief, the media, woke politics, and his political enemies including California Governor Gavin Newsom.

Here are a few key moments from Trump’s speech where you can hear the troops respond and boo:

Trump attacks the media and goads the military crowd into booing the “fake news”:

Trump attacks the “Biden Administration” for changing the name of Ft. Bragg (which was originally named after a traitorous confederate general):

Trump even falsely claimed that Gov. Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass “paid” the Los Angeles protestors—a wholly baseless conspiracy claim meant to pin blame entirely on local and state leaders instead of on ICE or federal officials:

Every moment of this politicized speech rendered each of the soldiers in attendance in clear violation of DoD directives against attending political rallies while in uniform. But this was no set-up or ambush; it was an organized, pre-screened event, and the White House and the organizers at Ft. Bragg got exactly what they were hoping for.

Hypocrisy and double standards

We’re all old enough to remember when the right lost its mind over Joe Biden giving a speech in Philadelphia about the dangers of MAGA fascism with two active duty Marines standing behind him.

As Konstantin Toropin and Steve Beynon from Military dot com noted in their excellent coverage, the GOP was up in arms over this kind of “politicization” when it was Joe Biden.

“The only thing worse than Biden's speech trashing his fellow citizens is wrapping himself in our flag and Marines to do it,” tweeted then GOP Rep. Darrell Issa of California. Trump administration official James Hutton also blasted Biden, saying he had “used U.S. Marines as props.”

Toropin and Beynon noted dryly that none of these then-critics has posted any criticism of Trump’s speech at Ft. Bragg before a bleacher full of supportive soldiers in uniform.

As former Marine and Kentucky senate candidate Amy McGrath also pointed out, the Pentagon was quick to condemn and even punish a commander in Greenland for sending out an email that was critical of JD Vance’s visit to the island. As ABC News reported about the incident, following Vance’s short visit there, Col. Susannah Meyers had written an email to personnel distancing the base from some of his comments about Denmark, of which Greenland is an autonomous territory.

Explaining her removal, the Space Force said in a statement, “Commanders are expected to adhere to the highest standards of conduct, especially as it relates to remaining nonpartisan in the performance of their duties.”

You don’t say.

Part of a clear pattern

Trump’s political rally at Ft. Bragg didn’t take place in a political vacuum, of course. It is best understood as part of a series of White House moves politicizing our armed forces. These include

• Firing top female and Black military officers as part of its war on “DEI”;

• Reinstating soldiers terminated for refusing the Covid vaccine;

• Deploying troops to L.A. against the wishes of state and local officials; and

• Organizing a $45 million military parade for Saturday, June 14 that coincides with Trump’s 79th birthday.

As I wrote earlier this week, Trump and his cronies such as Stephen Miller are eager to create a police state that will enforce greater authoritarian rule. Part of their plan includes being able to deploy federal troops against U.S. civilian populations. In his previous term, Trump was rebuffed by the Pentagon in such attempts, so he is laying the groundwork now for a compliant, politicized military that will do his bidding without question.

General silence

The rules against politicking by active uniformed military exist for very good reasons. Following an event like we saw at Ft. Bragg, any soldiers not solidly in the MAGA/Trump camp will likely have questions and feel under scrutiny.

For example, are Democrats in the armed services now disadvantaged in some way, or are their First Amendment rights being suppressed? The apparent message to them, after all, was to self-report dissent and not be placed behind Trump physically because of potentially bad optics. But would self-reporting be a career-ruining move?

Will political loyalty matter more than professionalism? In a better world, leadership at the base would have rejected rather than participate in Trump’s propaganda. They chose fealty to Trump over the rules.

And does the President now expect troops to serve him rather than the Constitution? Will their fellow soldiers simply ignore their oaths, as they have ignored the clear rules against political activities while in uniform?

The worst part of all of this is the utter silence of top military brass, who should be uniting to condemn the rally. As Tom Nichols wrote in The Atlantic,

Trump may not know these rules and regulations, but the officers who lead these men and women know them well. It is part of their oath, their credo, and their identity as officers to remain apart from such displays. Young soldiers will make mistakes. But if senior officers remain silent, what lesson will those young men and women take from what happened today?

Where is the Army chief of staff, General Randy George? Will he speak truth to the commander in chief and put a stop to the assault on the integrity of his troops? Where is the commander of the airborne troops, Lieutenant General Gregory Anderson, or even Colonel Chad Mixon, the base commander?

Their failure to speak out against this clear violation demonstrates the worst quality any military leader can possess: cowardice.

After press reports emerged about the planning around politicization of the event, the military put out a statement focused on the third party vendor selling Trump and MAGA-themed merchandise at the event. It said, “The Army does not endorse political merchandise or the views it represents. The vendor’s presence is under review to determine how it was permitted and to prevent similar occurrences in the future."

The spokesman later added, without a trace of irony, “The Army remains committed to its core values and apolitical service to the nation.”