Mark Kelly Claps Back At Trump Amid ‘Death Threats’ Over US Army Remark: ‘I’m Not Gonna Be Silenced’

Good afternoon everybody seems like most of you guys are here And thank you for taking the time let me get started so throughout his entire career in business reality TV and politics Donald Trump has had one and

only one play, bullying his opponents into silence. He did it as a failed casino owner who bankrupted his properties and screwed over his contractors. He did it as a reality TV host known for firing people. And he's done it as president who tries every day to intimidate people with no regards for the rights or well-being of the American people.

I'll say this for the guy. While he's never seemed to do much else right for most of Donald Trump's career, bullying people has worked out for him. But not now. Because I won't let it happen. The American people won't let it happen.

President Trump is trying to silence me, threatening to kill me for saying what is true. And he sent his Secretary of Defense after me. And it's not going to work. Here's how we got here. A week and a half ago, Senator Slotkin and I, along with others who also served in the military and the intelligence communities,

we released a video with a simple message to service members that they must refuse illegal orders. Nothing was controversial about that. Everyone must follow the law. No one may break the law. This is pretty basic stuff. Seeing that video, here's how any other president would have responded. They would have said two words, of course.

But that's not how this president responded. We've become so accustomed to Donald Trump's behavior that it is worth emphasizing. The President of the United States said that two U.S. senators and four members of the House of Representatives should be arrested, hanged, executed for something we said, for something that is true. My family knows the cost a political violence.

My wife Gabby was shot in the head and nearly died while speaking with her constituents. The president should understand this too. He has been the target of political violence himself. The Speaker of the Minnesota House of Representatives, Melissa Hortman and her husband, were murdered in their home this year. The governor of Pennsylvania, Josh Shapiro,

had his house firebombed this year. Then Charlie Kirk was assassinated at Utah Valley University, a place I visited just a few weeks ago with Republican Senator John Curtis. Faced with a wave like this, every other president we have ever had in the history of this nation would have tried to heal the country. But we all know Donald Trump.

He uses every single opportunity to divide us. And that's dangerous. The President's words carry tremendous weight. People listen to him. And he knows that. And that's exactly why he does what he does.

He makes these threats to silence people. And if that doesn't work, he abuses his power to intimidate people. And with the consent of Republicans in the United States Senate, he has surrounded himself with people like the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, who will do whatever he says, with no question, no matter what. Trump and Hegseth, they care more about publicity than they do about the rule of law. That's how I ended up finding out via a tweet that the Secretary of Defense was ordering

an investigation into me. The same Secretary of Defense who has, from the moment he was nominated, has been historically unqualified for this position. The same Secretary of Defense who is reported to have ordered a second strike to kill shipwrecked survivors in the Caribbean. If there is anyone who needs to answer questions in public and under oath, it is Pete Hegsath.

It's a dangerous moment for the United States of America when the President and his loyalists use every lever of power to silence United States Senators for speaking up. But we all know that this isn't about me, and it's not about the others in that video. They're trying to send a message to retired service members, to government employees, to members of the military, to elected officials, and to all Americans who are thinking about speaking up, you better keep your mouth shut or else. This has been a singular focus of President Trump's second term.

Not addressing costs, not creating jobs, intimidating people, and going after the people he views as his political opponents. He's done it to companies. You better write a check to build my ballroom or I might not approve your merger. He's done it with universities. You better fire your president or I'll pull your research funding. He's even done it to late night hosts, you better not make jokes that I do not like or

I'll get you taken off the air and I'm going to take your company's broadcast license. And he does it every week with Republicans in the House and the Senate. You better toe the party line or I'll make sure you never get reelected. Folks, this comes at a cost. And not only to American companies, colleges, and comedians, it damages every American's freedom of speech and the balance of powers that form the foundation

of our democracy. Because when Republicans in Congress are too afraid to disagree with this president, it means that his bad ideas go unchallenged. He has slapped reckless tariffs on countries across the globe, skyrocketing the cost of everything from groceries to school supplies.

Republicans historically, well, at least a year ago, they hated tariffs. But when it comes to voting to undo them, they are too afraid of Donald Trump. So Americans pay more for just about everything because of spineless politicians. It's the same with health care costs. There are Republicans in the House and the Senate who really want to do something to prevent these health care premiums from spiking for millions of Americans.

The solutions are simple. But President Trump says he doesn't want to. So nothing happens. Nothing except a government shutdown. It goes on and on. The president has gone too far. Everybody needs to wake up. The occupant of the Oval Office is ignorant to the Constitution and has no regard for the rule of law. Trying to silence me, in proposing to court-martial me, in threatening to kill me for fighting back when our democracy demands that we must fight back. President Trump has crossed the line. And this time, it's not going to work.

I will not be intimidated by this president. I am not going to be silenced by this president or the people around him. Because I've given too much in service to this country to back down to this guy. In 1991, when Donald Trump was driving the Taj Mahal casino into bankruptcy, I was getting shot at over Iraq and Kuwait. In 2001, after Donald Trump said that the collapse of the Twin Towers meant he now owned

the tallest skyscraper in Manhattan. I was carrying flags honoring 9-11 victims into space on a rocket ship. In 2003, when Donald Trump was writing birthday greetings to the monster Jeffrey Epstein, I was the first on the scene to recover the bodies of my fellow astronauts who died when Space Shuttle Columbia exploded during reentry. In 2011, when Trump was hosting a reality show and peddling conspiracy theories against President Barack Obama, I was sitting

next to my wife's hospital bed as she recovered from a gunshot wound to the head. My point is this. I've been through a lot worse in service to my country. The President and Pete Hegsath are not going to silence me. They aren't going to keep me from speaking out and they're not going to keep me from doing my job. Enough of the bullying, enough of the intimidation, enough of the

threats, enough of your nonsense doesn't help anyone in our country afford their groceries or pay their medical bills, and it erodes the rights of every American. My job is to fight for them, to stand up for the Constitution and nothing, nothing is going to stop me from doing my job. Thank you and I'll take some questions. One second.

Give me, give me, give me that folder.

Just sit this down here.

Can you – I know it's Manu from CNN, but for everybody, just starting with you, just say who you are, what station. The White House said today that Admiral Bradley gave the order for that second strike on the

Venezuelan gulf. They also said this was a lawful strike. Yesterday you said the second strike could be a war crime.

Do you think that Bradley committed a war crime?

Let me just start, Manu, by saying that there needs to be an investigation. We need to pull some of these members of DOD and the military into the armed services committees in the House and the Senate. You know, that's what the White House is saying. I hope what has been reported is not accurate. I have such – I revere members of the United States Navy, especially Special Operators, Navy SEALs.

These are the most highly trained individuals in our military. I have deep, deep respect for them. So I hope what we are hearing is not accurate. I will say, though, as somebody who has sunk two ships myself, that folks in the military need to understand the law of the sea, the Geneva Conventions, what the law says. And I'm concerned that if there were in fact, as you know survivors clinging to a damaged vessel

That that could be you know over a line. I Hope it's not the case. I truly do Again I am You know not sure of all the facts yet. I don't want to prejudge before we have all the information. I think it's important for there to be an investigation. The inspector general, inspectors general of DOD needs to investigate this.

Unfortunately, an unqualified secretary of defense fired a bunch of them and got rid of a bunch of lawyers. Pete Hegseth, do I have a lot of confidence in DOD? Well hopefully we have inspectors general there that will be doing an impartial investigation. I think we should wait for the results of those investigations. You know, like I said in my remarks, I was notified of a potential court-martial through a tweet by the Secretary of Defense.

I mean, think about that for a second. How ludicrous is that? That's the only notification that we have received to date. And I think that says a lot about who Pete Hegseth is and what he cares about. He doesn't care about the law.

He doesn't care about process. He doesn't care about accountability. He cares about views on his Twitter account. And that's a big problem. I'm going to ask you guys this question. Have you ever in the history of our country seen a less qualified or less professional Secretary of Defense? I cannot think of one.

Yeah, Senator Kelly, Nathaniel Reuben Scripps News. Um, are you concerned about threats on your life? Have you stepped up your personal security and

of course, the security of your wife? Hey, I'm no stranger. You know, Gabby and I are no stranger to political violence. We get a lot of threats already. She continues to get threats. She gets threats on her life more so today because what Donald Trump said about me 10 days ago, that I should be hanged, that I should be executed. The threats on us have obviously gone up. I'm not going to get into details about my personal security. We take these threats very seriously. And I take the threats from this president seriously.

How many times in our country's history have you heard a president of the United States say that members of the Senate and the House should be hanged and executed? I mean, I can't think of one. Those words carry a lot of weight. The number of calls, threatening calls that we get into her office have

skyrocketed and they were very graphic. I mean some of them were put not from my office but another member put them put them out there for people to hear. Ones we get are worse than that. So I take this seriously. But again, you know, that's why he does these things because he thinks he can shut me up. I have first amendment rights. I'm a United States senator. I am doing my job. I'm on the armed service of the Intelligence Committee. He ain't going to shut me up. I mean, he intimidates other people. I'm not intimidated by Donald Trump or Pete Hexeth

or anybody else.

Thank you, Senator. Nicole Flynn with CBS News. Are you aware, just back on Venezuela, are you aware of whether or not the Secretary has had, and I think Secretary Hexeth, that is, if he's had any conversations with any members of the Armed

Services Committee? And in terms of the Armed Services Committee, and in terms of these calls to investigate, do you believe the Secretary and Admiral Bradley should appear

before the Armed Services Committee?

They absolutely should appear. I've talked to the Chairman of Armed Services about it and the ranking member. They should absolutely appear. I'm not so confident they will. This is not an administration that tends to follow any norms. But we need to get to the bottom of this, of what happened. And we are not Russia and Iraq. I'm really

concerned if the reporting is correct. Again, I hope the reporting about this incident is not accurate. What the White House said today actually indicated it might be, but we're going to have to see.

Going back to the duty matter, are you considering any legal actions or threats of being court-martialed

or any of the police or prosecutor's investigations?

You mean like me suing Donald Trump for what he said? I think what he said about us is dangerous. It's ridiculous. It is a violation of our constitutional rights as Americans and our rights as senators to do our job. And he's trying to intimidate us. But I have not considered that. Not not at this point.

Yeah, But I have not considered that, not at this point. Yeah.

Thank you Senator.

I'm standing in front of the Secretary of State. Do you see this as fundamentally first amendment for you that you want to highlight against the President who's trying to silence you? And how do you see the whole process playing out?

Well again, this isn't really about me. And that's why I think people are kind of got this a little bit off here. It's not about me. It's not about the other five members in the video. It's not about Alyssa Slotkin, Chris Deluzio, Chrissy Houlihan, Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander. It's not about us. This is about a president who doesn't want anybody to say anything that he does not like. I don't think he understands the Constitution. I'm serious about this. I think he is ignorant to the Constitution

and the rule of law, and he just wants to silence us and it starts with us And that's one of the reasons people say well, why wouldn't you'd like just you know back off because this isn't about me This is about what he will do next. Who's he going to go after next which service member? You know which government employee which citizen who decides to say something that this president doesn't like and then he goes after them, in my case with the Secretary of Defense, who knows what's next? With the Attorney General?

I mean, this DOJ has been just, you know, attacking people for all kinds of stuff. And what's next? Our First Amendment rights? Ain't happen.

Yeah.

No Robertson, Washington Post. Can you tell us anything more about the FBI's involvement in the inquiry into you and the other lawmakers who appeared in the video? Did you schedule an interview with them?

We haven't heard all that much. We got notified. I think the better question is what is their motivation? Like did this come from the FBI? Do you guys think the FBI, they went into their like, you know, meeting that morning and said of all the stuff that's going on in the country right now, we got to get right on top of this. These guys said something the president didn't like and now we've got to do something about

it. Or do you think it's possible that the President told his FBI director to tell the FBI agents to reach out to these guys? So I think this is a good question for you. All of you in here should be asking the FBI those questions. I don't have the answers to them.

Yeah.

Can you tell us anything more about the Senate Armed Services Committee's inquiry into the September 2 strike, the nature of the request for information submitted, what information has been sent back from DOD so far

in your conversations with the chair?

Well, we had a brief on the first three strikes, and I have said this, you know, before 10 days ago that the, you know, they're tying themselves in knots trying to explain why this entire operation is legal. And I imagine eventually, I hope you have an opportunity to see the legal argument that they made to do this. It's important for the American people to see it. We have to get folks before the committee and, you know, that process might take a little

while but I ultimately think we're going to get to the bottom of this. And again, if what seems to happen actually happened, I'm really worried about our service members. I was talking about this from the beginning of this operation, that the thing that I am most concerned about is the very difficult situations that this Secretary of Defense is going to put service members into. And it's because this guy is so unqualified for the job. I mean, think about this. He runs around on a stage talking about lethality,

and warrior ethos, and killing people. We have the most competent, capable military this planet has ever seen by far. That's not the message that needs to come from the Secretary of Defense. The message should be about what's our mission and accountability and the rule of law and training

and let me make sure you're equipped to do really hard jobs. Let me give you all the tools you need to do something that often is an impossible mission. And instead, he runs around on a stage like he's a 12-year-old playing army.

And it is ridiculous, it is embarrassing, and I can't imagine what our allies think of looking at that guy in this job, one of the most important jobs in our country. In my view, after the President of the United States, it is the next most important job.

He is in the National Command Authority for nuclear weapons. And last night, he's putting out on the internet turtles with rocket-propelled grenades. I mean, have you seen this? This is the Secretary of Defense. This is not a serious person. He should have been fired after Signal Gate.

And then every single day after that. I'm from ABC News.

Just to put a fine out of my eye, because you were quite vocal about the sort of flimsy

legality that was being offered during the briefings, were these sort of stripes that

are now in the news what you were making sort of strides that are now in the news what you were making reference to when you posted that video telling members of the military that they needed to feel OK disobeying orders

that they felt were illegal?

Based on who this president is and who the Secretary of Defense is, and specifically, things that the president has said in the past and things he was talking about doing in the future. Let me give an example. 2016, he's talking about something on a debate stage that was clearly illegal and he was reminded by Brett Baer from Fox News that that would be an illegal order. Military won't do that. You know what the President's response was to that? The military will not refuse my orders. Implying that even if they are illegal, they

will not refuse them. He's also talked about shooting protesters in the legs. Then he's talking about deploying more troops to American cities and using those cities as training grounds. Do you know what that means? That means using the American people for the military to train on. So we were looking forward to try to head something off at the pass that could have been really, really bad. So

it wasn't about this specific thing.

Yeah.

Jennifer Shutt, the state's newsroom.

The NDAA conference report is set

to come out later this week or over the weekend

or early next week. In addition to that, you all have not yet

conferenced out the defense appropriations bill for the current fiscal year. Do you see either of those as options for you

and other lawmakers concerned about the Defense Department, the actions in Venezuela, and other situations I think it could be if we could get bipartisan support to do something like that. Sure. That's sometimes challenging. Because, you know, remember, my Republican colleagues, not all of them, but most of them are fearful of this president. They do not want to cross him.

I mean, they see what just happened to me. I said something that he did not like and he said, I will be hanged, executed, prosecuted. He doesn't even have the order right.

Yeah. Michael Chanel with MSNOW. You mentioned earlier that the video was meant to tell service members something that's already law, that they're not required to obey, to act on legal orders. Since it already is the law, and presumably service members are aware of the law, why didn't the six of you guys feel it was necessary to make the video?

Well, I think it's good for people to get a reminder. And we wanted to show that we had their back and we understood the situation they were in. Pretty simple. And we said something that is in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. According to the law of armed combat, you know, we stated something pretty simple.

Every service member doesn't hear these reminders as frequently as other service members. So we felt it was important to say under the circumstances. Right here.

Yeah. Thank you, Senator. Joe Capone with the Associated Press.

When you participated in the video, did you expect that the President would respond?

Was that part of your expectation? We did a video before that he did not respond to. I was really surprised that he responded at all. And I thought if he was going to respond, what I just said when I gave my remarks, I thought he would have said, of course members of the military shouldn't follow illegal orders. So when he said, you know, I was sitting in the skiff next to Alyssa Slotkin, by the way, when somebody comes in with a little piece of paper and it says, I could see what it said on it as it was handed to her, President just called for your execution.

She leaves the room, five minutes later she comes back, she says to me, he's called for your execution. She leaves the room, five minutes later she comes back, she says to me, he's called for your execution too. That was not the response we expected.

Thanks, Senator. Lisa from PBS. Two questions. As you say, you're still gathering the facts, still not clear exactly what happened here, but if the Secretary of Defense did issue an order

to kill people after a second strike like this, Well, you know, on the first question, I think that's a question for attorneys. I am not an attorney. I don't pretend to be one.

But only senators and house members.

That is true. I, of course, I do not know the specifics, you know, on that part, you you know of the law about impeachment. And again let me remind folks that we're in the early days of this and I think it's important to get all the facts for we'd understand exactly what happened. Again I hope what is being reported is not the case. But there needs to be an investigation and we are a country of laws, you know, despite the apparent situation we're in with a President of the United States who in my opinion does

not respect the law. We're a country of laws. We've got to hold people accountable. On the healthcare, you know, situation, we've got some time. I'd like to see a bipartisan solution because millions of my constituents, the people I represent in Arizona, and millions of more people across the country

are not going to be able to afford their health care. And they're one accident or illness away from bankruptcy. People lose their health care, they die. We can fix this. We have time to fix this, we know what to do. But again, doesn't seem the President of the United States wants to do anything on this. If he wants to help the American people, he should engage with the United States Congress on fixing

this spiking of premiums, fixing this issue. Have you received messages of support, public or private, from your Republican colleagues?

Yes. And some of it's public.

Can you tell us a bit about this?

Well, I mean, some people put out statements. And I got some private calls, which I will not get into. But there are some, you know, you could Google it. There are some, you know, positive, but we're in an unfortunate period here where we have a president that does not like to be crossed. I mean if he's going to say to a US senator that you should be executed for what you say That sends a very chilling message Not only through the United States Senate and the house to Republicans

But across the entire nation I wanted to see whether it's the FBI or the Department for a lot of requests and hearings

or investigations with you.

Are you planning to cooperate if that is the case? I will follow the law.

Yeah.

Jim, who's the mayor of Boston. You mentioned that some of your Republican colleagues haven't fully applied to the president.

With regards to the boat strikes in the Caribbean, what's your level of confidence in this investigation

and the Senate Armed Services Committee, Roger Wicker, Senator from Mississippi, and the Ranking Member Jack Reed. And I have spoken to him about this, and I know he's going to try to do a thorough job. Where I don't have a lot of confidence is in the Secretary of Defense and what he has done to this department.

Firing JAG officers, firing inspectors general, he's decimated it. I mean, firing people in the leadership of DOD just because of the color of their skin or if they were a woman. So I have about zero confidence in the Secretary of Defense. I have tremendous confidence in the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee. Yeah. I'm from the Bronx, Philadelphia. Senator Schatz tweeted this afternoon

and said he accepts the statistical in the month of December before we pass a defense authorization. And I'm just curious, as a member of armed services, do you agree with that approach? Should Democrats be open to potentially holding up

an EMA to leverage testimony and information to leverage this process?

I spent 25 years in the United States Navy. I understand the importance of the defense bill and the programs that we authorize and the changes we make to policy through that piece of legislation. I've talked to Senator Schatz

and we'll continue to talk about this, but in general, my view on this is we've got to be very thoughtful about how we handle the process of the defense

bill.

Yes. on the double tap of the first strike. None of your briefings have included that. If HECSF will not testify, will you call on Admiral Halsey of South Conn to come in and testify? And then lastly, on Venezuela, should the United States strike inside Venezuela's territory, do you think that would be appropriate?

So I'm going to have a conversation with the chairman and the ranking member about who specifically, you know, we bring in to testify, whether we do it in public or not. I would generally prefer public hearing. We should probably do both.

You know, one in a classified setting, one publicly so the American people could see. I'm still trying to figure out the justification that Donald Trump has if he was to, you know, conduct kinetic strikes into Venezuela. What's the goal? Why hasn't he communicated this to the American people? That's the job of the president, to lay out a case before we go to war.

And if it is about removing Maduro, I mean, how do you square that with pardoning Juan Hernandez, who is basically the same guy from a different country, who got sentenced to 45 years in prison and he's barely been there? He probably hasn't even gotten settled in yet and the president's going to release him? It doesn't make any sense. And I'll tell you what, regime change as a policy of the United States generally in our history has not worked out well.

Think of South Vietnam. Think of the Bay of Pigs, Iraq and Afghanistan. It results in the deaths of U.S. service members without the intended outcome. And in this case, I don't even think we know the intended outcome.

President needs to make a case to the American people when he is about to put thousands of American men and women in harm's way. This is not the way to manage the U.S. military. Hey, I want to thank all of you for spending the time here today.

I'm sorry the room is so warm in here, but we'll cool it down next time.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.