In a dramatic on-air segment that has reverberated across the American political landscape, Fox News host Jesse Watters delivered a scathing and detailed takedown of what he termed the “seditious six,” a small, yet influential, collection of congressional members and ex-military figures accused of a profound and potentially treasonous act: actively encouraging the United States Armed Forces to revolt against the sitting Commander-in-Chief. Watters presented this alleged plot not as a mere political stunt, but as a calculated and insidious “hoax straight out of the CIA playbook,” designed explicitly to inject a corrosive sense of distrust into the very heart of the American military—an institution built on the principle of loyalty and adherence to the lawful chain of command.

The core of the matter, as detailed by Watters, involves a public, yet utterly unfounded, campaign suggesting that the current president is preparing to issue a series of illegal orders. The group in question—described as a “congressional crew of ex-military” cobbled together by a former CIA analyst—attempted to leverage their collective background in national security and military service to lend credence to their extraordinary claims. They are accused of planting “the seeds for a revolution,” a dangerous narrative meant to serve as a permission slip for insubordination. Watters’ analysis cuts through the veneer of their patriotism, exposing their actions as a desperate attempt to create a political crisis where none existed, concluding simply that these “rebels don’t have a cause.”

The rhetoric employed by this group has reached levels of near-insanity, according to Watters. He detailed the specific, chilling, and—crucially—imaginary threats they are using to justify their call for military resistance. These fabricated “illegal orders” include sensational scenarios that seem ripped from a dystopian novel: the deployment of U.S. troops into American cities like Chicago, the stationing of armed forces at polling stations to influence or intimidate voters, the abhorrent order to kill the families of terrorists, and even the shocking demand to arrest and execute members of Congress. These are not merely exaggerated fears; they are explicit and incendiary fabrications designed to shock the conscience and turn the military against its civilian leadership.

Watters emphatically dismissed the entire framework of these alleged threats, labeling everything they are fighting against as “imaginary.” The attempt to legitimize their fear-mongering through cinematic references was particularly scrutinized. The segment highlighted how the group had to “pluck it from Hollywood,” specifically citing popular culture examples like the Tom Cruise movie A Few Good Men, where service members were told to follow illegal orders and subsequently prosecuted. The argument, as presented by the former CIA analyst, was that resisting now is an act of foresight, preventing a similar crisis. Watters flipped this on its head, pointing out the absurdity of a decorated professional forming a political resistance based on a movie plot, sarcastically noting, “come on.”

The professional credentials of the “seditious six” are not incidental; they are, in fact, the weapon being deployed. The six individuals all possess military or national security experience, a background they are deliberately “leaning into” to achieve maximum impact. This strategic move, Watters argued, is intended to “give a wink and a nod to the 1.3 million active duty service members” in the U.S. Armed Forces. By using their veteran status, they are attempting to bypass the traditional chain of command and speak directly to the enlisted men and women, “conditioning the country to think something’s bad going to happen at the hand of Trump” and simultaneously assuring the military that they have “an obligation to resist him.” This deliberate attempt to subvert command and influence the loyalty of troops is precisely what elevates this from partisan politics to a grave national security concern.

The accusation that this entire episode smacks of treason is not an overstatement, according to the segment’s legal analysis. Watters posed the fundamental question: if the group is urging the military to “disobey” any illegal orders that the president might issue, doesn’t that inherently “sound like treason”? The gravity of their actions is reinforced by established federal law. The segment cited U.S. Code Title 18 Section 2387 and sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which explicitly prohibit civilian or military acts that “encourage troops to disobey or lose loyalty.” This makes the entire effort straightforwardly illegal, a fact that Watters notes the political opposition seems to think they can simply subvert and get away with.

The exposure of this plot has already initiated formal repercussions. Watters confirmed that a prominent figure, Pete Hegseth (likely referring to the political commentator and former Army National Guard officer), is “launching an investigation into Senator Mark Kelly who’s a retired Navy captain.” The mention of a retired Navy Captain’s involvement underscores the deliberate use of high-ranking military bona fides to advance the subversive agenda. The suggestion was even made that a Secretary of War could potentially “court martial them,” illustrating the severe legal danger that these individuals have allegedly placed themselves in by encouraging widespread insubordination. The idea that Democrats—or their aligned political actors—believe that former CIA agents should be allowed to “subvert the chain of command and get away with it” is presented as the height of political hypocrisy and, Watters states, simply “insane.”

The underlying context of this hysteria, Watters argues, is the pervasive and irrational political opposition to the president. He passionately countered the narrative of the Commander-in-Chief as an unhinged tyrant poised to destroy American institutions. He noted that the same president who is being accused of planning to “order B2s to nuke Chicago” is the same leader who has a track record of actively seeking peace and de-escalation, having “stopped eight wars.” Furthermore, Watters cited the recent, highly publicized “great meeting” the president had with the communist Muslim immigrant mayor of New York, a meeting focused on making New Yorkers “happier, healthier and wealthier.” This action—reaching across the political aisle to work with an ideological opponent for the common good—stands in stark, undeniable contrast to the tyrannical image the “seditious six” are attempting to project.

In conclusion, the segment argued that this entire operation is not a legitimate warning, but a calculated act of political destabilization. It is a cynical attempt to use the cherished institution of the U.S. military as a pawn in a baseless ideological war, substituting actual evidence for fear-mongering and the plotlines of Hollywood thrillers. The goal is clear: to sow seeds of division, erode confidence in the Commander-in-Chief, and ultimately undermine the democratic process by encouraging the armed forces to turn against the elected government. The exposure of the “seditious six” and their propaganda video, which failed to cite a single illegal order, reveals their hand as being “caught red-handed.” It is a compelling and urgent reminder for all Americans to reject the frantic, fear-driven rhetoric and ground themselves in the documented reality of the administration’s actions versus the “insane” accusations of those who have “gone mad” in their quest for political leverage. This incident demands that all citizens and, most importantly, all service members, stand firm against those who would exploit military loyalty for partisan gain.