If there is one thing I’m sure my kindly editor does not want right now is yet another column commenting on the recent events in Venezuela (Ed: correct!). You have likely heard all you want to hear about the extraction, or kidnapping, or seizing, or whatever you want to call it, of Nicolás Maduro. Though he is undoubtably a terrible criminal who stole his last election, his removal by the U.S. military in a raid that killed dozens in a foreign country raises a number of questions and, frankly, creates a troubling international precedent, wherein President Donald Trump has essentially declared if you have enough military power any nation can seize the leader of another country they find offensive, on foreign soil.

Given Trump’s reckless and dishonest actions in other areas, he should be grateful no other nation would have the ability to pluck him from his gilded bathroom and drop him off at the Hague.

But, as I said, I’m not going to talk about that (Ed: oh really?).

Instead, I want to draw your attention to a recent Colorado Politics story that should trouble every American who believes in free speech and separation of powers. Yesterday, Defense Secretary (given the illegality of the departmental name change, I just can’t bring myself to call him “Secretary of War”) Pete Hegseth, the man who is second only to RFK Jr. in being utterly unqualified for his current job, announced he is issuing a Letter of Censure to U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona. This letter, the first part of a series of actions Hegseth plans to take, are about Kelly’s participation in that famous video wherein Kelly and five other elected officials who are veterans reminded current military members that they are not to obey illegal orders.

Hegseth is only going after Kelly in this way because Kelly is the only one of the six (including our own terrific U.S. Rep. Jason Crow) who is a military retiree, having served more than 20 years on active duty and formally retiring from the Navy. The others in the video served on active duty for varying lengths of time, but not the full 20 required to retire from the service.

Technically, retirees, like Kelly (and me and many, many others) remain in the military, and our pensions are considered reduced compensation for reduced service, as opposed to a “regular” non-military pensions that’s awarded for having been employed for a certain number of years.

Hegseth has called the video “sedition” and this letter of censure is the first step, his office explained, in ultimately punishing Kelly by reducing his retirement pay and his military rank. Kelly, I’ll remind you, flew 39 combat missions, was a graduate of test pilot school, and was an astronaut with four shuttle missions under his belt.

Again, it is very important to remember that the video that so enraged the Trump people was the legal equivalent of my reminding drivers, back when I was a military cop, to obey stop signs. Kelly and the others, concerned about the type of orders Trump and his people were getting ready to issue, reminded the troops that illegal orders are, well, illegal.

Kind of like kidnapping a nation’s leader in the dead of night? Hm…

There are likely two goals here for the Trumpers. Recall Trump himself (a man with zero actual military experience) called the video sedition and said elected officials in it should be executed for treason. How insecure do you have to be to utter such nonsense?

First, Trump wants to settle a petty grudge with a man who has a career behind him that included bravery, excellence, skill, and who, unlike Trump, faced death in service of his nation dozens of times. Going after Kelly like this is purely petty retribution, with a level of spitefulness usually reserved for elementary school playgrounds.

Secondly, Hegseth wants to send a chilling message to any other retirees who might dare to criticize Trump.

Hegseth’s actions are especially spiteful because Kelly’s speech is protected by the U.S. Constitution (as is the speech of others in the video, like Crow, who are in the US Congress). The Founders wanted to ensure that debate between U.S. House and Senate members would always be energetic and free flowing. They did not want elected officials to have to worry that their expression of strong views against, say, a tyrannical president, might result in said president coming after them with the powers of the executive.

Therefore, the Founders included what is often called the “speech and debate” clause of the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 6, where it says senators and representatives “shall not be questioned in any other Place for any Speech or Debate in either House.” Simply put, our elected House and Senate members are free, everywhere and on any subject, from retribution from petty tyrants like Trump and Hegseth.

So, given that the Constitution itself protects Kelly, the aforementioned petty men slunk around, looking for some other way to go after, and to punish, Sen. Kelly. And someone poking around in the regulations that apply to retirees found that bit about technically still being on duty, which allows, he thinks, Hegseth to censure and then demote in rank and retired pay, any retired service member.

That should send a chill through all retirees. Even if you are a MAGA supporter now, you know in your heart there will be a Democratic president in the future (hopefully near future). Shall that Democratic president go after you for your anti-American comments (from the perspective of the new and powerful president?)

Remember General Mike Flynn? Recall please that he pled guilty to lying to the FBI. He was pardoned, of course, by Trump, but he pled guilty. And if you can take it, do a quick search on his comments, and see if you see anything that a future Dem might find “seditious.”

Hegseth’s action against Sen. Kelly won’t work, of course. Should he be briefly successful in reducing Kelly’s rank and pay, such an action would not likely stand up to a legal challenge. And, of course, that future Dem president can issue an executive order restoring Kelly’s well-earned rank and pension.

I admit, as a military retiree with no congressional protections myself, I have a bit of worry about the Hegseth team reading columns like this and deciding to make another example of a retired lieutenant colonel, but I suspect that’s a long shot worry at best. But Ido  know other retired flag-rank officers (generals and admirals) for whom free speech worries have already kicked in, and that’s more than a shame, it’s a moral outrage.

What will happen to Kelly? I honestly don’t know, but I have faith in the military justice system.

In any case, stay tuned.

Hal Bidlack is a retired professor of political science and a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who taught more than 17 years at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.