National Security Moms Are Here
Trump's call for arresting Democrats targets new political bloc
“SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!,” Trump bellowed on social media today in one of his headline-grabbing attacks on Democrats that obscures a more important issue: the rise of the national security moms.
Ever since Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill won their governor seats, the “next” generation of Democrats have declared a multi-front war against the Party old guard, yes, but also the populist wave embodied by Zohran Mamdani. Spanberger, a former CIA officer, and Sherrill, a former Navy helicopter pilot, embody the national security state-alum-turned-politician that the Democratic Party has come to see as its salvation. Seen as the alternative to the anti-establishment Mamdani-types, they’re cast as a return to sober, responsible, and (most importantly) predictable leadership.
Other Democrats in this mold — Senators Elissa Slotkin (former CIA) and Mark Kelly (former Navy), as well as Representatives Jason Crow (former Army), Chris Deluzio (former Navy), Maggie Goodlander (former Navy) and Chrissy Houlahan (former Air Force) — circulated a video this week urging their colleagues in the military and intelligence community to resist any unlawful orders coming down from the Trump administration. Set to soaring West Wing-style music, the video featured these members of Congress rattling off their national security credentials before issuing a solemn call for American troops to uphold the Constitution.
Per the video:
”We want to speak directly to members of the military and the intelligence community who take risks each day to keep Americans safe. We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now. Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk. This administration is pitting our uniform, military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens like us. You all swore an oath to protect and defend this constitution. Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home, our laws are clear: you can refuse illegal orders.”
Trump responded by calling for the members to be “arrested and put on trial.”
“Their words cannot be allowed to stand,” Trump said in a post on social media “We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET. President DJT.”
The incident is the highest-profile moment yet for the national security moms, a term that appeared in a Democratic Party press release this summer.
In August, the Democratic Governors Association issued a post to its website titled, “The Year of the National Security Mom.” While acknowledging that national security isn’t a top policy concern for voters, the post went on to argue that national security experience signals qualities that could bring the Party back to power.
“Ms. Spanberger and Ms. Sherrill stand as an emerging model of leader, one whose experience combines maternal nurturing with ‘Who’s your daddy?’ badassery in a way that confounds partisan molds,” the post says. “Spanberger posits that for voters sizing her up, her work at the CIA can serve as a shortcut to She’s tough. She’s hardworking. She’s thorough.”
The post declared then-candidates for governor “Spanberger and Sherrill are the next generation of leadership” — a phrase echoed by Democratic Party leaders throughout and since the election.
Before the November elections, when asked if Zohran Mamdani was the future of the Democratic Party, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said simply: “No.”
Asked about Mamdani earlier this month, Congresswoman Debbie Dingell replied: “I’m going to focus on the election of Abigail Spanberger, who is clearly a moderate, as is Mikie Sherrill. Both women [have] strong military and national intelligence backgrounds.”
When asked after the election if Mamdani was now the soul of the Democratic Party, Jeffries further said that that title belonged to Spanberger and Sherrill.
Spanberger made clear her disdain for Mamdani when she asserted he wasn’t a Democrat — a puzzling remark given that he had won the Democratic nomination.
The national security moms have emerged as an alternative to the populist wave, as well as successors to the old guard. Internal talking points produced in response to Trump’s call for them to be arrested — leaked to me from a source close to the national security moms — provide some insight into their mindset. Put simply, it’s an obsession with policies and procedures, citing the Manual for Courts Martial and the Defense Department’s Law of War Manual to make the point that what they’d said was accurate and legal.
This edge-of-your-seat reading is what they want the future of politics to look like: a process-obsessed snoozefest that might make sense for a legal briefing but not talking points for the general public.
What’s more, it’s doubtful that many see the endless wars this group of politicians served in as having enhanced our national security. That’s what also makes the declaration of war by the national security moms such a losing strategy if it is intended to be the rebranding of the next generation and the path to 2028. It isn’t about any meaningful definition national security — that is, making the country safer. It is about “qualifications” to run, about process and the rules, about sticking with the possible rather than the desirable, a low risk and low collateral damage version of politics that people don’t seem to be looking for right now. It promises stability rather than change.
I’ve already written about Mamdani’s own salute to national security in keeping on NYPD commissioner Jessica Tisch and about how the full release of the Epstein files will get steamrolled by “national security concerns.” Today’s war is national security versus the people, plain and simple.
— Edited by William M. Arkin
They have no issue with the tech billionaires backing the administration right now, they’re just auditioning to run the control grid once it’s implemented and it’s their turn to be the face. Who better than these velvet glove over the iron fist veterans. Thanks for shedding light on this and staying consistent Ken!
Sad a draft dodger calls those who faithfully served as seditious.