Refusing Trump’s Orders: Military Resistance to Mass Deportation

Refusing Trump’s Orders: Military Resistance to Mass Deportation
Refuse Fascism Episode 228

Sun, Dec 08, 2024 4:22PM • 59:13

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  00:00

There’s a law called Posse Commitatus that indicates that the U.S. military is not supposed to be able to be used against the U.S. population on U.S. soil. Many people like you said, are shocked and alarmed to realize that they might be carrying out operations in their own communities. Trump is talking about culling the military leadership, and removing any military leadership who might be loyal to the Constitution more than they’re loyal to him. We’re about to be in a situation where potentially thousands of U.S. service members are going to be facing a moral crisis. What we’re going to be relying on is individual members of the military being willing to take risks and stand up and say, This isn’t right, and I’m not willing to participate in it.

Sam Goldman  01:02

Welcome to episode 228, of the Refuse Fascism podcast, a podcast brought to you by volunteers with Refuse Fascism. I’m Sam Goldman, one of those volunteers and host of the show. Refuse Fascism exposes, analyzes and stands against the very real danger and threat of fascism coming to power in the United States. In today’s episode, we’re sharing an interview with Army veteran and activist Brittany Ramos de Barros to discuss Trump’s plans to use the military to implement his mass deportation plan. It’s such a rich conversation, super thought provoking and inspiring, and I can’t wait for you to hear it.

To begin with, though, I want to thank our patrons and sustainers who make the show possible. Join our Patreon community at patreon.com/refuse fascism. Thanks to everyone who rates and reviews the show on Apple podcasts or their listening platform of choice, it really helps boost the show. So please, after listening to this episode, go and write us a review to bring this show to more folks. Thanks to everyone who shares the show, whether they share it to a friend through their listening app or posts it on social media, thanks to everyone who buys our merch to support and spread the Refuse Fascism podcast. We have a new design out, thanks to Susan, a volunteer, who made it with our slogan: In the Name of Humanity, We Refuse to Accept a Fascist America. It’s available in hoodies and sweatshirts for those of us in cold climates, and t-shirts for everyone else — see the show notes to get yours or to get a few to gift this holiday season.

Now onward, a little recap of the fascist DEF CON level and a little inspiration of some seeds of what’s needed from those of us who do not want a fascist USA. I’m gonna start there, starting with shout outs. We are beginning to see stirrings of meaningful protests, and we want to shout out the hundreds who came out in Sacramento, California, answering the call of the ICE Out of California Coalition to stand up for and defend immigrants in the face of Trump’s promised ethnic cleansing.

We also want to shout out those who took to the streets and bathrooms of Washington D.C. this week in defense of trans rights and lives against the fascist assault. Hundreds took to the streets outside the Supreme Court standing up for trans rights as the Court heard oral arguments in U.S. versus Skrmeti, and just a day after SCOTUS heard these arguments in a case that very likely will upend gender affirming care for children and adults across the U.S., dozens of protesters sat in at a Capitol building bathroom, engaged in a bathroom sit in across from Speaker Johnson’s office for implementing representative Nancy Mace’s bigoted bathroom policy. They held banners that read, “Stop pissing on our rights” and “Flush bathroom bigotry,” demanding an end to anti trans legislation. Give a listen:

Protesters (recorded)  04:13

[In call and response, repeating] Speaker Johnson, Nancy Mace, our bodies are no debate.

Sam Goldman  04:29

More than a dozen were arrested in this action. Meanwhile, as hundreds begin to take visible, courageous action here, tens of thousands upwards to, I think 100,000 did so in South Korea, successfully challenging, shutting down martial law and subsequently taking action to try to oust President Yoon, who had instituted it. The impeachment efforts have, at this point, not been successful. It’s unclear what is next. However, [that] many have expressed their determination to return to the streets, week after week against the reactionary government, is something that must be taken to heart and learned from, as is their successful stopping, their shutting down of martial law attempts. It’s something to really learn from and take heart from, even as we do not know how the situation will unfold going forward.

I do want to also give an update on a significant development regarding abortion rights that is ominous and not contained to one state. It really shows that these fascists do have momentum, and we need to up our fight — our visible opposition — very quickly. Idaho will enforce their abortion travel ban after being cleared to do so through an appeals court, making it the first state to do this, but not the last with legislation introduced in Alabama, Mississippi and Oklahoma.

The ban in Tennessee is currently blocked, although that may change going forward. As Jessica Valenti explains in a piece that’s linked to in our show notes: “The law criminalizes helping a teenager obtain an abortion in any capacity, anywhere.” The goal of such laws is to prevent people from assisting those in need of abortion care, be it a local abortion fund, an auntie giving gas money, or a bestie who texts you abortionfinder.org. This must not be another outrage we adjust to, but another reason to recommit to fighting to defeat these fascists.

I want to end this little update section with giving an update on Trump’s cabinet of horrors. Kash Patel has been put forward as Trump’s pick to be the Director of the FBI. Whereas many of these MAGA appointees are driven by cruel visions of Christian theocracy and/or a white ethno-state, Patel is mainly driven by cruelty, vengeance, and extraordinary fealty to his king, Donald Trump. In his memoir, published last year, he included an extensive, what you can think of as a hit list of dozens of political players from the last three administrations, including Trump’s first to target for prosecution, if not worse. He has also pledged to prosecute perceived enemies beyond the government, especially in the media. Just listen, this is him on Steve Bannon’s show:

Kash Patel  08:30

“We will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government, but in the media. Yes, we’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections. We’re going to come after you, whether it’s criminal or civilly. We’ll figure that out, but yeah, we’re putting you all on notice.”

Sam Goldman  08:47

He has openly embraced and praised Q-Anon — with their vision of a coming storm to wipe away the deep state — and clearly sees himself as a key figure in that mythology. His approach is terrifying, even to war criminals and other fascist monsters like Gina Haspel, Bill Barr and Mark Meadows. It is likely that even if his appointment is put up to a vote, that he will get through and become the head of the FBI, and there is no reason to believe that if that happens, he won’t use the Bureau to exact his revenge and terrorize the American people, especially anyone who steps out of line. The FBI was born, in large part, out of a xenophobic Red Scare.

It was led for decades by J. Edgar Hoover, who went beyond the law in extraordinary ways to decimate movements, destroy dreams, and ruin or even end the lives of people fighting for justice, as well as rival ruling class politicians. Without any meaningful checks from the Attorney General or the courts, with the full backing of President Donald Trump, Patel could go much further. We’ll continue to cover the developments regarding Cabinet appointments, so stay tuned.

Before the interview. I need to take a few minutes to ask for your support and involvement. With Trump’s inauguration just weeks away, now is the time to turn your anger and anguish into action. I’m calling on you to power mass opposition and resistance to Trump’s MAGA fascism by donating to Refuse Fascism today. The stakes couldn’t be higher. With the backing of a fully fascist GOP and immunity in advance from the Supreme Court, Trump will return to the White House to unleash revenge on his real and perceived enemies, and to carry out a fascist program of ethnic cleansing through mass deportations, overt white supremacy and misogynist domination, supported by a mob of tens of millions, salivating over the promise of retribution. Millions are depending on us, what we do or fail to do, what we normalize and what we put our bodies on the line to reject, will shape the future.

Each week for four years and counting, you’ve been able to count on our volunteer podcast team to expose, oppose and analyze the very real danger and threat of fascism coming to power in the United States, and with Trump returning to the White House, I know you can agree that the urgency of our podcast mission and community is dramatically heightened. But let me tell you, we can’t do this work alone. We need you with us. I’ve had the honor of connecting you with over 200 experts and activists from a variety of backgrounds and perspectives to arm us with understanding to wage this fight for the future, forging meaningful community with guests and listeners, grounded in our shared determination that in the name of humanity, we refuse to accept a fascist America.

One of the biggest things our network of listeners tells us is that, first, they appreciate my honesty, righteous rage and critical lens, and secondly, that more people need to hear this podcast. One of the biggest lessons I’ve come away with is the urgency of breaking people out of the mental shackles that keep people passive, relying on the sam institutions and politics as usual that led us here, to this nightmare. Every word of this podcast is informed both by a deep study of the roots, nature and dynamics of fascism and by our team’s personal experience of leading tens of thousands into the streets in efforts to drive out the Trump/Pence regime through sustained non violent protests, in addition to years of organizing against the war on terror, against police brutality, for abortion rights and more. Whether it’s tackling Trump’s revengers cabinet, exposing the reasons behind the Democratic Party’s enabling and accommodation or defending the rights of people under attack, we’re here to speak the truth boldly and empower you to act on it.

But to keep this work going and growing at this urgent hour, we need your help. Every donation, no matter the size, makes a difference in building the understanding and mass action we need. Now is the time to defy, disobey, disrupt. I hope you’ll join us in this fight to stop a regime that imperils humanity and the Earth itself. Donate to Refuse Fascism today. After listening to today’s show, I hope you’ll join our Patron community for as little as $2 a month at Patreon.com/RefuseFascism. Make a one time gift via refusefascism.org, just hit that donate button or give via Venmo or Cash App. Information to do so is in the show notes. Now, here’s my interview with Brittany.

Central to Trump’s fascist agenda is his pledge to conduct the largest mass deportation effort in the nation’s history. He recently affirmed that such efforts will involve a national emergency declaration and the military. To talk about this topic. I am so pleased to welcome Brittany Ramos de Barros. Brittany is a veteran and activist. She is currently the Organizing Director for About Face Veterans Against the War. Welcome Brittany, thanks for joining me.

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  14:13

Thanks so much for having me. This is a really important topic right now with what we’re about to face.

Sam Goldman  14:17

Unfortunately so. I was hoping that we could start off with when Trump promises to use the military and his plans for what I consider, really, a form of ethnic cleansing. What does that mean? How do you see that looking on the ground for people like myself who have very little experience with the military — I don’t have family in the military, I was not in the military myself. What would that mean? What would that look like? What would military personnel be called on to do exactly?

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  14:49

For folks who might not be as familiar with how the military is structured, I think something to understand is that there are two main ways that this could be executed. The primary one is that with states that have governors that are willing to mobilize their own National Guard, governors could, at the behest of Trump or in coordination, or just because they align with this project that Trump is talking about carrying out in our neighborhoods, could mobilize their state based National Guard unit to be mobilized across their state, in their own communities.

The other way that it could happen could still involve National Guard, but it would involve the National Guard being put on federal orders — so the National Guard being federalized and mobilized within their states or to other states based on what the kind of federal army and DOD are directing, and that could involve both active duty military and the National Guard, who are pulled into federal orders. Mechanically speaking, I think it’s important for people to understand that those are two of the scenarios. I think, in terms of what they would be doing, it’s hard to tell.

There are rules. There’s a law called Posse Comitatus that indicates that the U.S. military is not supposed to be able to be used against the U.S. population on U.S. soil. I imagine that Trump’s legal team is actively working on ways that they would try to challenge or fight any Posse Comitatus challenges that states or that other folks would be trying to bring to argue that this is an illegal use of the U.S. military, an unconstitutional use of the U.S. military. If they want to avoid those fights, that might be one reason where they try to just coordinate with governors who are friendly to an effort like this and just work at the Governor level, because the regulations around the National Guard tend to have more loopholes and a lot more gray area than the federal army being mobilized on federal orders.

Posse Comitatus limitations, even assuming the courts have the integrity to uphold Posse Comitatus the way that I think you know, there is precedent for it to be upheld, which I think is a big assumption to make with our current Supreme Court situation and federal judgeships that Trump would also be in a position to try to fill any that didn’t get filled under the Biden administration. I think if we do assume that the courts had the integrity uphold it, even with that, what we’ve seen in the past is the military being mobilized to do a lot of support operations that kind of skirt the rules around military being used for police functions and other very specific guidelines that have been built into the precedent in the past.

So for example, they could say, well, the military is just being mobilized to do logistics operations in support of the mass deportation efforts that are happening. It’s actually still technically ICE agents or whatever that are doing, the arrests and the military are just supporting with the transport, the logistics, the food, like those parts of it, as a way to get around some of those regulations. I question whether we’re going to be able to rely on the integrity of the courts to uphold the constitutionality, even in blatant cases. I think that that begs the question of, what is our recourse? What can we do about all of this?  I have some thoughts about that, but I don’t want to jump too far ahead.

Sam Goldman  18:11

Thanks for that, Brittany, one of the things that I had been following is some legal scholars pointing to the language that both Trump and his team have consistently used in trying to prepare the ground for the acceptance of a legal argument, that this is an invasion and therefore those rules don’t apply, sort of thing that’s not true. It is not an invasion, but we know that the facts don’t matter in Trump land. Trump has pledged to use the military in his plans for unprecedented mass deportations.

You kind of broke down how both the National Guard could be used or active military personnel, regardless of whatever they may believe to justify the war crimes of the U.S. abroad, most military personnel did not sign up to point guns at oppressed people from their own communities. What do you see happening when Trump orders this mobilization?

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  19:11

In the summer of 2020, when there were the George Floyd uprisings, we saw an uptick of National Guard mobilizations against protesters. We also saw a massive uptick in military personnel speakingout in the media, on social media, about their opposition to participating, either if they were being directly mobilized, saying: “I’m actively trying to avoid being mobilized in my own community. I don’t think it’s right.” And we also saw at About Face, being an anti-imperialist, anti-Fascist veteran organization, we saw hundreds of veterans and several active duty people, sign up to say that they wanted to be a part of actions that About Face was doing under the kind of Veterans for Black Lives banner.

So I expect, and I hope that we see a similar thing in this case, it’s no secret that many people are not in the military because they believe that the U.S. military, for the last several decades has been fighting some kind of righteous cause for a democracy, or even is fighting for our freedoms at this point, especially with the younger generations, we’re seeing many people who join the military are very clear that they’re saying I did it for economic reasons. I was coming out of an abusive home, or I lived in this town that had no options and my family had no money, or XYZ reason that has to do with systemic economic issues in this country and the lack of social safety net options that people have available to them.

Most people are joining, actually for those reasons. But even within that context, many people like you said, are shocked and alarmed to realize that they might be carrying out operations in their own communities to this extent. To those folks, I say: Welcome to consciousness. Welcome to the movement. I think that there’s a tendency sometimes to feel a little frustration, because there are many of us who realized we had the same kind of moral opposition to those things mobilizing in someone else’s community.

To me, I say: Well, I found myself in someone else’s neighborhood in Afghanistan, walking around with machine guns and MRAPs and guns pointed at people, and realizing that little children were running around, that people were terrified, that we weren’t actually doing anything to make anyone safer, and those were the things for in my own journey that led me to start questioning, what am I doing here? I thought I was here to help protect innocent Afghan people from the bad guys, the terrorists, as they’ve been labeled in any given circumstance.

I do think that the Taliban is an extremist organization that has been horrible fo the Afghan people, which is why it was a compelling reason for me to go to Afghanistan as a true believer. But it became clear to me that, yes, the Taliban is a horrible authoritarian extremist organization, and yet the United States government does not seem actually invested in doing the work that would be necessary in order to unseat that influence or that organization in any kind of sustainable way. We knew for years that unleashing military force in the way that we did was not actually an effective approach to counterinsurgency operations.

I learned that from our own military doctrine that says that and when I found myself there, seeing that we weren’t following our own doctrine around these things, and that we knew that the things that we were doing were not actually going to support effective counterinsurgency measures, even if you believe the U.S.’s own doctrine, that raised questions for me. I think sometimes there’s a tendency amongst the rest of us who are aware of how much violence the U.S. military has been carrying out around the world, to be frustrated when people are just now getting conscious around mobilizations against immigrants in our own communities.

I don’t think we have time for that, and that’s why I’m taking the time to say that I think that I want all of us to have an orientation that people join for all kinds of different reasons. They sign service commitments, to the point that many people in the military talk about being in the military as doing time; How much time you got left? And we’re about to be in a situation where potentially thousands of U.S. service members are going to be facing a moral crisis. They’re going to be in a situation where they can no longer justify what’s right in front of them. Whether it’s because of what they’re directly being asked to do, or what they’re seeing other troops being asked to do, or what they’re seeing play out in their own communities, affecting their own neighbors, one of the main recourse that we’re going to have is relying on the moral conviction and fortitude of rank and file troops.

I think if we can’t rely on the courts and we can’t rely on a Department of Defense that has any kind of integrity, in a scenario where Trump is talking about culling the military leadership and removing any military leadership who might be loyal to the Constitution more than they’re loyal to him, then we can’t necessarily depend on the fact that we’re going to be relying on even senior military leadership to refuse illegal orders, despite the fact that they have a legal duty to do that under military law. So what we’re going to really be relying on is individual members of the military being willing to take risks and stand up and say: This isn’t right, and I’m not willing to participate in it.

Sam Goldman  24:19

I’m wondering, given the long and extensive history of resistance within the ranks of the U.S. military, what you think people in and out of the military today should be learning from that history?

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  24:33

One is just for people to know that it exists. That was another thing for me. I started looking for vets who had more progressive values while I was still in the military, and I found About Face when I was still an army captain. I joined the organization, and it was through that that I started learning about the history of what many people call GI resistance — active duty military being involved in anti-war organizing and activities. I had never heard of such a thing. When I learned about it. I had never heard of an anti-war active duty activist period. I don’t think I had even really registered that there were anti-war veterans in any kind of meaningful numbers.

The military tells you: Oh, we have to be apolitical — that’s not true. The military is supposed to be non-partisan. The military is fundamentally a political body; to carry a gun, to be willing to do violence for the government, whether you think it’s justified or not, is fundamentally a political question, and it is fundamentally a political thing to put that uniform on. But in the military, there’s this culture that makes you feel that if you have political beliefs that question — whether the things that the military has been asked to do or is being asked to do, that questions the integrity of our government, or has values that might be left or progressive values or liberal values, even — that you’re the only one. It has this kind of chilling effect within the ranks that makes you feel like you’re the weird one; you’re the only one.

What I want people to know is: not only are you not the only one, that there are thousands and thousands of people in the military right now, who, if you ask them what they believe about immigration rights, about gender and reproductive rights, about racial justice, about a lot of the things that we think of as progressive values, that they would be very aligned with our movements — social justice movements. There are thousands and thousands of people in the military who align that way, and many of them think that: I’m the only one — I’m the odd duck out. But also, in our education system, there’s very little teaching about the role that military people have played in anti-war organizing in the past.

I recommend the documentary, Sir! No, Sir! You can watch it for free on YouTube. I think it’s also on Netflix to stream, these days. I will never forget, I was sitting in my living room watching that documentary, and I felt like the drain exploding emoji the entire time. I was just like What?! There were 500,000 active duty people estimated that were active in anti-war organizing and activism during the U.S. war in Vietnam, half a million. That’s not counting the additional half a million people who chose to go AWOL rather than participate in a war that they didn’t believe in or didn’t think was morally just. That’s a million people total who had some kind of resistance role as a person who was supposed to be active duty.

There were hundreds of anti-war newspapers that were published in the barracks and circulated to help raise consciousness amongst other active military members. There were meetings that were organized and hosted. People were involved in all kinds of direct actions, including prison uprisings, including what people call a particular type of search mission, where people would be sent out on these search and destroy missions, but they would essentially just go out and not carry out the mission, and they would report back that they did, or that they didn’t find anything as a way to say: Hey, we’re here, but we’re finding ways to resist participating in the mission — We’re still putting on the uniform and pretending like we’re going about our ways, going about our orders, but we’re finding ways to resist something that we don’t think is morally right.

People were also publishing their personal experiences, telling the story that otherwise, outside of that the government will do what they can to try to kind of keep the messiness, the ugliness of these kinds of operations as quiet as possible. Active duty military have always played a critical role in pointing the spotlight on the true ugliness of what it looks like to take a force who exists for the purpose of maximizing violence — that is the purpose of a military. We have all of these euphemisms and ways that we’ve tried to relate to the military differently in American society.

So I think it’s important for folks to remember a military is an organization that is designed to do as much violence as efficiently as possible. That’s the purpose of a military. When you take an organization whose fundamental design is to do as much violence as efficiently as possible, no matter whether you try to have that organization do humanitarian things or do these law enforcement functions, domestically, you get an organization that does violence. Whether those were the orders or not, ultimately you end up with all of this violence that ends up happening.

Some of the only ways that we’ve been able to really have evidence of that, despite cover up attempts or sanitizing attempts, has been active duty people who are willing to take the risk to tell the story of what they saw as witnesses, or to share the evidence of that so that the American people could point to that evidence to then pick up the mantle from there and do the advocacy around that, to change course, or to try to reduce the harm.

Sam Goldman  29:35

The history that you are lifting up is really helpful and clarifying, and also points to the fact that there have been times, despite tremendous risk, personal sacrifice, danger and loss of the gains that they were in there to get, that people put it on the line — whether it be their careers, their good standing, their lives, in some sense, those who went to jail for refusing orders, that it was worth it because, as you said earlier, the moral obligation of who you want to be and what you want to be part of, and who you’re deciding is not human and disposable and in the name of empire is okay to be destroyed, and who isn’t.

When we think of what could potentially happen with the military being deployed and being charged with raiding meat packing plants or raiding factories and raiding churches and rounding up whole families or being responsible for the supervision of what would be the equivalent of a concentration camp. These should be morally repulsive to the majority, and this should be a time where people are saying: I’m not going to participate. I’m not going to go along with this — and do defy, do resist.

Given the fact that we know that there are a significant amount of military personnel partisan to white supremacy, Christian nationalism and Trump in particular, and that there also are a larger number, by all accounts, who are not — whether they’re in it just for the benefits, as you said, or because it’s the only option they see, or because they believe, or believed at some point, that the U.S. is the good guys, with the prospect of Trump using the military against immigrants, against oppressed peoples, against their political opponents. Do you see the potential for splits, for refusing orders, for mass disobedience? And how exactly do you think that that could play out in this moment in time? Another question I had that I was just thinking of was whether there’s the boots on the ground, but do you think that there’s a potential for any splits or defiance resistance higher up in ranks?

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  31:53

I think yes to both. If history is any indicator. I was speaking earlier about the U.S. war in Vietnam and the anti-war movement that happened during that and the role of veterans and active duty people in that movement, but that has continued. About Face, Veterans Against the War was originally founded under the name Iraq Veterans Against the War by active military who came back from the 2003 initial invasion of Iraq and were horrified by the discrepancy between what they had participated in, and how horrifying it was, and what the American public was being told about the war and how the war was being sold.

Our organization was founded out of this motivation that we had a responsibility to tell the truth about what we had been seeing on the ground and what folks like us could see, and that has continued for both the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan. There are folks speaking out now about the U.S. role in continuing to supply and support Israel as it carries out ethnic cleansing and genocide, and now, just continuing to expand the war crimes to several other countries. I think that there will always be some people who can see what’s right in front of them for what it is.

I think the words that I have for folks who are in the military and who might find themselves in that position: There are ways that we tell ourselves who we are. I think that we all grow up and we have this concept of ourselves. Many of us, even if we didn’t join the military because we were trying to be some kind of hero, or we ultimately believed that we would be doing something of service, and that’s honorable. At the end of the day, we don’t actually decide who we are until there’s something at stake, until it could cost us something to make the decision to uphold our values, over do[ing] the thing that’s going to cover our own behinds.

For me, when I realized that I had power — I came back from Afghanistan in 2013 and I knew that I didn’t feel proud of what I participated in. I knew that I couldn’t make sense yet of why I had actually been sent there, but the reasons that I thought I was going there were not the reasons, and that I had a lot of guilt and shame and confusion about the violence that I had seen and participated in. It took me years, honestly, to make sense of that, but once I became conscious and realized the Afghanistan papers were published, and there were many steps along the way for me — where I not just realized that it was wrong, but that I had power and that I had a responsibility to tell the truth and to not continue to kind of perpetuate the same complacency and lies that I had bought into when I first joined.

Once I realized that it was a question of what was I willing to risk to decide who I really was going to be in that moment. I sat down with my husband, and we had a conversation after I talked to a lawyer about my options, and I called the GI rights hotline, which is something I really recommend, that is a hotline where People were not trying to persuade you one path or another, but they will connect you to resources and information to know your rights, know what options you have available to you in your situation, and be able to speak confidentially with someone to kind of think through that before you take action.

So I did that, and I realized I can’t live with myself. I know. I can’t look myself in the mirror for the rest of my life and believe that I’m a leader of any kind of integrity if I don’t tell the truth now and do it publicly in a way that matters, so that both my own troops that I’m responsible for, who are being impacted by these continued lies, and also the American public that’s out there that if I don’t do that, that I can’t believe that I am who I’ve thought that I was my whole life. I made that choice, and I told my husband: Look, I think that they’re gonna try to court martial me. If they do, they’ll probably try to court martial me for conduct unbecoming an officer. And the maximum sentence for that at the time, was a year in prison. I said: I can do a year in prison in exchange for keeping my integrity. I have to do this.

We had a serious conversation and kind of family planning about what it would look like for me to potentially go to prison for a year — over just, literally telling the truth; the truth that our own report shared. I didn’t leak information. You’ve had other people like Daniel Hale, who spent years in prison because he leaked the evidence that proved that the Obama administration was lying about the drone warfare program. The Obama administration was trying to sell drone warfare as this precise, targeted, more humane way to carry out the so called Global War on Terror, and the evidence that Daniel Hale released proved that nine out of ten targets who we struck and killed with drones were unintended targets by our own definition, meaning they were not the people who we thought were guilty by our already sometimes very lax evidentiary standards, to assassinate people, or to murder people in a warfare context.

By our own admission, we were killing — 90% of the people were innocent to the extent that our documentation showed. He is the only person who did prison time for essentially showing that the U.S. military was knowingly carrying out war crimes, intentionally striking innocent people, to the point that even if that strike wasn’t intentional, it was at a scale that could easily be characterized as gross negligence, to the point that there’s got to be a serious responsibility for that level of disregard for civilian casualties — what the military would like to call collateral damage. There’s a whole scale. I ended up not being court-martialed — I ended up getting out of my situation unscathed, and Daniel Hale ended up going to prison.

So there’s a whole range of consequences that people have faced, but what I know is that I have not talked to a single person who has faced punitive consequences, or life consequences, indirect consequences, just because of it being unpopular amongst your friends or family or your community or whatever it is. I have not met a single person who has done that who would do it differently if they could do it again, because you cannot put a price on your integrity. There is nothing like being able to sleep at night knowing that no matter what other nightmares might haunt you, that in the end, once you knew better, you did the right thing.

What I hope is that people in uniform who might be facing being used as tools of a government who wants to carry out these racially motivated, hate motivated crimes in our own communities, that you question whether that’s something that you can live with. You will face consequences potentially. But that doesn’t mean that you don’t have choices, or that you don’t have options. The military, because the culture is so intense and pervasive, makes you feel like you don’t have a choice, and that becomes a kind of passive excuse for allowing yourself to be used as a tool. But it’s not true, you do have a choice. There might be consequences associated with that choice, but I just want people to weigh those consequences in a sober way against what it means to live with those choices for the rest of your life.

Sam Goldman  38:36

That was such a powerful and I think, compelling rationale for people to resist. And I think that there’s that point where you move from just being the instrument to being part of the machine. If you don’t want to be part of it, then you have to break from it, or you are part of it. No matter what lies you might tell yourself to sleep at night, this is what you’re participating in, and therefore this is what you are a part of — whether it be ripping thousands, potentially millions, from their mother’s arms, or whether it being okay with sending people to their deaths — even if you aren’t killing them when you’re deporting them back to their deaths, you are part of that — whether it’s being okay with ripping people from their homes, terrorizing communities, and letting them languish in camps for however long it takes to deport them. 

I think those are real choices that people are going to be given. I think that there’s the choice about who they become, but it’s also the choice of what they’ve done to others. I think that this is a moment where we’re, as you said before, courage only counts when you’re faced with these kind of choices. Being a person of principle matters when — it only comes into play when — you’re given that kind of horrific choice. It’s worth emphasizing that Trump is going into the White House at war with the military leadership, attempting to disregard even the fig leafs of diversity and National Law and constitutional obligation, turning it into a fighting force for white Christian male domination on a mission from a vengeful god, both at home and abroad. 

This isn’t the main topic of what we’ve been discussing, but I did want to get your thoughts on: How do you see this purge actually playing out? And: Do you think that there will be meaningful resistance from the top or the rank and file in response to this purge? And: Are there any factors that might impact this?

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  40:30

I think that there will be some. Trump said that he wants to hold these hearings where he’s going to evaluate all of the generals. Generals are appointed directly by the commander in chief, and there are some other approval mechanisms, but ultimately that’s a heavily like executive branch owned function, because the President is the Commander in Chief of the military, the leadership of the DOD, all of that is executive branch agencies. There is not a lot of recourse if Trump decides that I want generals who are loyal to me, like Putin — that’s what he said. Which means: Loyal to him, not the rule of law.

Right now, at least one of the checks on the U.S. military is that, at least senior leaders, technically, take their oath to the Constitution. I’m not saying that Trump would change what the technical oath is, but in practice, I think what his intention is to remove people who would have the kind of moral compass and conviction to stand up to him and say: Actually, we can’t give these orders because these are illegal orders. Or: I can’t follow these orders that you’re giving me because they’re illegal under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Right now, military officers who carry out illegal orders can be prosecuted. Don’t quote me on this, because I am not a military law scholar, and I could be remembering this wrong, but if I remember this correctly, there is not a statute of limitations on that.

So after a Trump presidency, if you carried out illegal orders, theoretically you can be recalled and tried in military court for carrying out illegal orders. That’s something that, also, military personnel should be aware of, is that there is precedent for this, and that you are responsible, and I think the standard is like: If a reasonable person would know that an order is illegal, that if you carry it out anyway, you are personally liable under the UCMJ for carrying that out that order. In the past, in other circumstances, that would theoretically be the recourse.

Now, that is only as enforceable as we have military and civilian courts willing to enforce that, and as we have a chain of command that’s willing to enforce that. I don’t know that we can rely on those things, at least in the short term. Again, I don’t know what the statute of limitations is on these, but I believe is at least for officers in particular, I don’t know that there is a statute of limitations. Because of that, you might have some senior leadership who gets through Trump’s culling, but then still find themselves in a situation where they’re like, this is actually not worth it to me, to put myself in a legal situation where I could be tried for carrying out illegal orders, or for war crimes, or, who knows what other charges they could be brought up on?

I think that it’s not impossible that we see some of that, but I think that because Trump is already looking to try to remove senior leaders who would kind of have the guts to stand up to him, I think that that might have a chilling effect on how much of that we see. I think that the biggest potential comes from the mid-range officers, because Trump can’t go through every colonel, every Lieutenant Colonel, every major, I’m speaking in army terms, so just cross apply this to the other labels for the other branches officers, but every captain — it’s not realistic for them to, like, interview everyone and essentially ask them in in no uncertain terms: Will you follow the president regardless of what he asks you to do? kind of thing.

That’s where I’m the most hopeful that people from across political lines, even, will have the courage to kind of stand up for at least those baseline commitments that they made as a condition of their leadership in the U.S. military, and based on the values that they probably joined the military thinking that they were going to try to uphold. 

Sam Goldman  40:34

Appreciate your perspective. As we close out this conversation, I wanted to move to resistance. I wanted to start with what types of outreach to the military community and veteran community? Do you think that movements that are opposing Trump’s fascism, that are seeking to defend the rights and lives of immigrants and others targeted by these MAGA fascists. What outreach should those movements be doing? 

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  44:27

I want to just start with the place that movements should be doing outreach to veterans and to military communities. That’s not everyone’s ministry. Different organizations exist to organize different bases. About Face exists to organize veterans and military personnel who are standing up to situations just like this; when the U.S. is carrying out violence that is unjust or is for the purposes that outside of what they’re claiming it’s for — which is usually these altruistic reasons when there are actually profit motives, right, and other reasons that the U.S. is doing what it’s doing.

One, is like: If that’s not your ministry, but if you’re in a place where there are a lot of military personnel or veterans, start thinking about how you can connect with people and send them our way — send them to an organization like About Face Veterans Against the War. Our website is AboutFaceVeterans.org. We’re on social media as VetsAboutFace. We’re an organization that is ready to connect with people, even if they’re not ready to join an organization like ours, but are just feeling complicated about what’s happening, and want people who have military experience and are connected to military community to talk with about it, we’re here with open arms. 

I think that there’s an assumption that folks who are progressive and part of movement and leftist, there’s just an assumption, often unconscious, that people make, that people in the military aren’t reachable — that they’re like, enthusiastic about whatever us violence is being carried out. Part of that is just because people don’t understand that a lot of people in the military have service requirements that mean that it’s almost a form of indentured servitude, where they actually can’t get out of the military without being in legal trouble that could impact them for the rest of their lives. 

Until they’re faced with an immediate situation that they’re like: Actually, I can’t participate in this, they kind of just go through the motions and are trying to, you know, do their time and get out and get their benefits or whatever. Whatever feelings people have about that are valid. It’s valid for communities who have been impacted by U.S. military violence, which is a lot of communities, to be like: I’m not trying to empathize with, or have compassion, or even just think about why military members might be doing what they’re doing.

What I’m making is a strategic argument. It’s not about how you feel about it. It’s that the right and fascist organizations, white nationalist organizations, are actively trying to organize, particularly disgruntled military members, into white nationalist pipelines, and they’re being very effective — I think it’s one in three right now, is the estimation. Part of the reason that is, is because, similarly to the way that I think that the election results really speak to an electorate, that it’s not so much that they are deeply bought in to the hateful ideology that Trump and white nationalists are trying to advance, but more so a rejection of the establishment.

Unfortunately, many people still kind of believe this idea that Trump is this outsider that is taking on the establishment and is trying to remove the corruption, and many people see the establishment as the thing that has failed us, and they’re right, the Democratic Party as an establishment, party has carried out unspeakable violence as well, has carried out unspeakable anti immigrant program under their leadership, and failed to do the things that were needed to protect our communities.

I think similarly, within the military, there’s a lot of people who are confronted with the kind of inner workings of the machine, find themselves disillusioned and disgruntled, and they’re either going to be organized into a pro liberation belief, in a vision that is bought into the idea that the people should lead, that we need a government that is more accountable to the collective and not to the ultra wealthy, who right now pull the political strings — an idea that we should be spending our resources to invest in the things that our communities need, that everyone should be able to live.

They’re either going to be organized into that vision in response to their disillusionment, or they’re going to be organized into a white nationalist version of how to make sense of their disillusionment. Right now, the left, for the most part, most left organizations, are not actively trying to organize military members and vets who are disillusioned into a pro-liberation vision or world view in response to their disillusionment. About Face exists there, are a couple other small organizations that exist, but we’re small, and we face a lot of assumptions that organizations make about whether it’s worth it to try to organize vets, or whether it’s important — a lot of understandable mistrust with folks who are trying to do that.

That’s something that people need to be aware of. It’s not a question of our feelings. Whatever feelings people have about U.S. troops, valid. I’m not concerned with how people feel, especially people who have been impacted directly by U.S. military violence. My concern is: What is it going to take to interrupt the growing white nationalist fascist movement to capture state power, by capturing key segments of society, and whether we like it or not military personnel and veterans are a key sector of society that hold particular skills, particular social capital in their communities and so forth, that are important sector of society for us to be thinking about. How are we organizing them, and how are we supporting them when they are willing to take the risks, to refuse and resist and take that kind of action?

Sam Goldman  49:36

I want to move into that last part. What is our responsibility and our obligation? A lot of what you were saying resonated with me. There was one thing that, it’s a slight difference, but I think is worth sharing, is that I don’t think that all, what did it get up to? 75 million people that voted for Trump — not all of them are hardcore by any means, but I do think that it’s important for people to have to reckon with the fact that that racism, that that xenophobia, that that’s disgusting — misogyny — wasn’t a fucking deal breaker! That matters. I don’t think people want to admit that there is that much of that in America. We’ve gotta confront it in order to combat it.

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  50:22

Thank you for pulling that point in. I think that’s really important. I think that’s a really important caveat.

Sam Goldman  50:27

Leaning back into what you were saying about defending those who do step up, but also as early as could be the end of next month, military personnel who step up and say: I’m not going to follow those orders. How can we be there? How can us non military personnel, support, promote, encourage, and, yes, defend military refusal and resistance to fascist orders?

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  50:52

One is letting people know, in your life, who might be thinking about it — having the conversation with them and understanding how they’re really feeling. If they’re on the fence or they’re struggling with the consequences, letting them know that you’ll be there for them and have their back. Because one of the things that’s a barrier for folks is: When you’re in the military, your housing, your whole community, often your family, everything in your life revolves around the military.

So it’s not just the legal risks that you’re facing. It’s the idea of complete isolation. That as a starting place actually really matters — it’s just having conversations with people in your life to understand where they’re at, and just let them know: Hey, if you decide this, or whatever you decide, I’m going to have your back — and particularly if that can mean in tangible ways; I’m going to give you a place to stay if you suddenly lose your housing because you take this action; I’m going to help coordinate supporting you to get a job or get on your feet or find other things that might be difficult if you face legal implications. So that’s one thing.

The second thing is: As you see people stepping up and resisting, amplifying their stories, one of the things that makes it bearable to deal with whatever consequences you might be facing is being able to be reminded that it was for a reason and that it’s making a difference. If people feel like their risk or their sacrifice is going to make a difference, they’re more likely to do it. Amplifying those stories, continuing to talk about it, and not just let people be like a quick social media blip and disappear as they then deal with the legal fallout that they might be dealing with their social fallout, and continuing to organize around uplifting that resistance — both because it’s narratively impactful for our movement goals, and they’re giving us this opportunity, right, to use their stories.

We can meet them by doing that, but also because it encourages more resistance. Courage inspires courage, so the more that people see people speaking out and taking different kinds of actions to refuse or resist orders, the more people are likely to do that. The third thing is economically. There will be funds inevitably that get circulated. Thinking about how, if you’re a person who has resources, whether it’s small or large, thinking about how you can set up funds or support funds that are raising resources to help support people with the economic fallout, whether that be bail funds or other things that people might face.

The fourth is, and in this case, I’m going to speak historically, because I’m not for legal purposes, encouraging anyone to do anything that breaks the law, but the types of resistance that we’ve seen historically sometimes involve people literally just removing themselves and saying: I’m going AWOL because I’m refusing and getting to a place where they could be safe, and then telling their story about why they went AWOL and why they refused. Historically, that has required networks of people who were willing to harbor those people, which is a risk that you have to take in order to be willing to help that person get to safety from prosecution they might face.

Some people go AWOL and they choose to face prosecution, and some people go AWOL and they choose to try to flee. That’s just one example, but I think that there are material ways where, historically, people have set up networks to support people who were willing to refuse and resist orders in various ways, like going AWOL. And the last thing is — this is a little bit more niche, but, if you’re a lawyer, and you have the ability to start getting involved in understanding UCMJ, understanding the laws that pertain to military rights, and you are willing, considering putting yourself out there to represent people pro bono who need legal support, because sometimes the military legal support that they’re going to get is either not gonna be good for them to consult before they’re trying to make a decision about what the legal consequences are gonna be. So they need someone who’s trusted, who they can speak to outside of the military, or the military legal representation that they’re going to get is not going to be sufficient for their needs.

The National Lawyers Guild has the Military Law Task Force, and if you are a lawyer who either is already familiar with UCMJ and has experience or can familiarize, and is willing to do the work to start getting familiarized, that could be a really meaningful way to contribute, is to get involved with the Military Law Task Force. And the last thing is the GI rights hotline. The GI rights hotline I mentioned earlier is a really important resource. It’s a confidential way that active duty folks can reach out to explore and sometimes get connected to a lawyer through them, but also just get, kind of some of the basic, know your rights, information that they might be looking for. That is run by volunteers, and not al of them are lawyers or military veterans. If that’s a volunteer thing that you might be willing to support, they have a very small crew, but they have a really great training, and I think getting more folks in their ranks as we anticipate a potential influx, could be a really important contribution and way that people can support.

Sam Goldman  55:30

Thank you so much for sharing those resources with us. Thank you for sharing with us your experience, your expertise and your insights, and of course, your time. We are gonna direct people in the show notes to AboutFaceVeterans.org. Are there any other places where you want to direct people to connect with you or to connect with the work that you do with About Face? I don’t know if there’s social media platforms that you utilize the most for this work or anything like that.

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  56:05

I think our most active is Instagram right now, but we’re on Facebook, X, Instagram and Tiktok. We have a new Tiktok account, so go follow us there. Our handle across all the social media is VetsAboutFace.

Sam Goldman  56:16

Thanks again.

Brittany Ramos DeBarros  56:17

Thanks for having me and yeah, open invitation, also, for folks who want to reach out for more information, there’s contact information on our website. If you’re trying to think about how your organization might be able to collaborate around some of these things, or you as an individual might be able to, please, don’t hesitate to reach out and subscribe to our email, where we also send out information about how people can get plugged in, whether they’re connected to military community or not.

Sam Goldman  56:37

Thanks for listening to Refuse Fascism. Got thoughts or questions off this episode? We want to hear them. Ideas for topics or guests? Yes, please! Send them to us. Have a skill you think could help? We want to know all about it. Find us on social media, @RefuseFascism, yes, of course, we’re on Bluesky. If you want to reach me, you can do so at Twitter/X, whatever you are calling it, @SamBGoldman. I’m not on Bluesky yet, so you can reach out to Refuse Fascism there. You can drop me a line at [email protected]. Or let me hear your voice — leave us a voicemail — see the show notes for the link.

Want to support the show? Amazing! Support the show by getting a t-shirt, sweatshirt or hoodie, which also spreads the imperative. You can order now and get yours delivered before the New Year. You can get yours to gift. You can send them a little picture and let them know what’s arriving soon. See the show notes to get yours today. Become a patron to support our pod and content creation to help people understand an app to stop the fascist threat. Join our Patreon community at Patreon.com/RefuseFascism. Can’t give monthly, but want to throw in to this effort? Make a one time donation via Venmo at Refuse_Fascism, or Cash App Refuse Fascism, or visit RefuseFascism.org and hit that donate button.

If you can’t give now, share the show with others. Rate and review on Apple podcasts or wherever you listen, comment on your socials or on the YouTube, it makes a difference and is so appreciated. A big thank you to our new production level patrons, Daniel P. and Joan H. As always, thanks to Richie, Marini, Lina Thorne and Mark Tinkleman for helping produce this episode. Thanks to incredible volunteers, we have transcripts available for each show, so be sure to visit RefuseFascism.org and sign up to get them in your inbox. Until next Sunday, In the Name of Humanity, We Refuse to Accept a Fascist America!