Trump DOD Sets the Record Straight After ‘Military Member’ Protests ICE While in Uniform

Conservative News DailyJune 12, 2025

0 0

The article discusses the ongoing anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) protests in California and their expansion across the United States, including notable demonstrations in new York City, Dallas, and other locations. A viral clip features a woman in military uniform, who criticizes President Trump’s immigration policies, stating that military personnel should not be treated as pawns in his agenda. She calls upon current and former military members to resist orders that violate constitutional rights.

this clip incited varying reactions; critics of Trump praised the woman’s stance, while supporters found her behavior to be traitorous.The Department of Defense (DOD) responded by clarifying that the woman, who had been discharged from the Texas National Guard in June 2020, does not represent the U.S. Army. They emphasized that her military service ended several years prior, indicating that she does not speak on behalf of the military institution. Despite the attention the protests and the woman’s comments have garnered,the DOD aimed to distance itself from her statements,reiterating their stance on the importance of lawful conduct within the military.

As anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement riots continue to smolder in California, similar pockets of protest have cropped up throughout the country.

From Trump Tower in New York City to Dallas, anti-ICE agitators are spreading across the country.

The Dallas anti-ICE protests, meanwhile, got some headline coverage, thanks to a woman in a military uniform who appeared to be defying President Donald Trump’s orders regarding cracking down on illegal immigration.

“We are not pawns for Donald Trump’s agenda,” the woman said in the now-viral clip.

After a quick cut, she explained: “Why now? It’s because the military was called upon [against] the protesters.”

She continued: “In our oath to serve, we serve the People of the United States, the Constitution. These constitutional rights are being stripped and just denied. And the military will not be pawns to that.

“So I’m calling on the conscience of military members who served previously and now. We have a conscience, we have a mind, and we have a duty and moral obligation to say ‘no,’ and resist evil …”

Critics of Trump obviously latched onto this clip, as it appeared that an active member of the military (she was certainly speaking on behalf of them with her verbiage) was defying the president due to her “conscience.” Even most coverage of the viral clip describes her as a “military member.”

Conversely, supporters of the current administration were incensed with this seemingly traitorous defiance.

But is this actually the rebellious gesture that supporters of the anti-ICE riots are making it seem like it is?

Trump’s Department of Defense clearly doesn’t think so, and felt strongly enough about it to go on X and set the record straight — twice.

Sharing the aforementioned clip, the DOD rapid response team on X clarified this woman’s military background:

The woman in this video was discharged from the Texas National Guard on June 5th, 2020.

She does not speak for nor reflect the U.S. Army. pic.twitter.com/pX9ASE20kw

— DOD Rapid Response (@DODResponse) June 11, 2025

“The woman in this video was discharged from the Texas National Guard on June 5th, 2020,” the X post said.

It bluntly added: “She does not speak for nor reflect the U.S. Army.”

The DOD did clarify the first part of that dispute — though not the latter — in a follow-up response to itself:

Correction: This individual served in the U.S. Army from November 2010 to August 2014 and was then in the Army Reserves from August 2014 to June 2020.

— DOD Rapid Response (@DODResponse) June 11, 2025

“Correction: This individual served in the U.S. Army from November 2010 to August 2014 and was then in the Army Reserves from August 2014 to June 2020,” the DOD posted.

Regardless, it appears to have been roughly five years since this unnamed woman had served, and the DOD wanted to set that straight.

And since the DOD offered no such clarification on whether or not she spoke or reflected the U.S. Army, it appears that — regardless of this woman’s service — she’s not considered an official representative of the military.