JEFFREY GOLDBERG: I want to move to this question of sedition.

Watch just for a moment this video that some of these Democrats put out the other day.

SEN.

MARK KELLY (D-AZ): You can refuse illegal orders.

SEN.

ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): You can refuse illegal orders.

REP.

JASON CROW (D-CO): You must refuse illegal orders.

ELISSA SLOTKIN: No one has to carry out orders that violate the law.

REP.

CHRISSY HOULAHAN (D-PA): Or our Constitution.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: So, obviously, there's two issues here.

There's the why the Democrats -- why these particular Democrats put this video out now, and then there's Trump's response.

Why did the Democrats do this and were they justified in doing so?

JONATHAN KARL: Well, I won't make a judgment going to justify, but I will say the reasoning behind this is there is growing concern, I've directly heard it from senior military officers, both on duty and retired, about the politicization of the military.

You know, obviously, you have the concerns over what's happening in the Caribbean, the targeting of the Venezuelan alleged drug boats, whether or not that is legal.

You had the head of Southern -- JEFFREY GOLDBERG: And you had to note the head of all U.S.

operations in South America, Latin America, essentially quit or forced out -- JONATHAN KARL: Retired, yes.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: -- and avoid this subject.

JONATHAN KARL: Yes.

And then you had when Pete Hegseth brought in all of the commanders from around the world for that very strange, you know, speech at Quantico, Donald Trump in that speech said that maybe we should use the streets of American cities as training ground for the U.S.

military.

So, there's a lot of concern about will they be ordered to go into the streets of Chicago and to fire on protesters?

What's going to happen next with the Venezuelan action?

There are concerns, and I think that's what those members of Congress were reacting to.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Toluse, the interesting thing here, one interesting thing to me, is that this was eminently ignorable by the president.

He didn't have to say anything, but he said a lot.

Again, part of the -- what Peter's talking about -- maybe the spinning out of control part, I mean, to go from zero to these Democratic elected lawmakers, who are veterans, should be executed, it's quite a journey.

OLORUNNIPA: Right.

And it's not like he just said it once.

He reposted, multiple posts about it.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

OLORUNNIPA: He said they should be hanged.

He said, punishable by death.

It was very clear that he was trying to get this message across.

And to Leigh Ann's point, it gets through the sense that he is spinning out of control in part because he realizes, and that's what was at the heart of this message, that some politicians and lawmakers, even within his own party, are looking past him.

They're looking at him as not the ultimate, most powerful person who's going to continue to be in power forever and ever.

He's got three more years left in office and he's basically a lame duck.

And he does not want people to think that they can ignore his orders or look past him, and that's part of the reason he wants to put this marker down, saying that if people ignore his orders, that they could be punishable by death.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Peter, it's not sedition obviously to articulate that.

It was also a little bit of a troll, maybe.

PETER BAKER: Yes.

Well, it's a complicated subject.

I mean, it's simple on the one hand.

What they said in the video is absolutely correct.

The law is that military service members should not, cannot, should obey an illegal order.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: That's as old as time.

PETER BAKER: Right.

And in some orders that are clearly illegal, that would be fine.

The problem is, it's kind of a murky thing right now.

Because, in fact, even judges right now are disagreeing with each other about what's illegal and not legal about what the president is doing with the military.

So, how is a corporal, you know, who may not be steeped in constitutional law, supposed to make that judgment.

So, you can see why any president might find that video a little problematic because it looks like you're encouraging members of the military to decide something might be illegal and therefore disobey their commander-in-chief.

But it is the reaction of course, that as always with Trump becomes the bigger story, the idea that we're going to -- even if he's just trolling them, to suggest that the death penalty is on order for members of Congress who are themselves veterans or members of the military or the National Security establishment should be, you know, prosecuted for this is, of course, not normal and would be an illegal order by the way that that we're talking about.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

One more topic I want to get to is the substance of the meeting with MBS, Mohammed bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

This is what Trump had to say about Jamal Khashoggi the journalist who was murdered by Saudi intelligence.

DONALD TRUMP: A lot of people didn't like that gentleman that you're talking about.

Whether you like him or didn't like him, things happen.

But he knew nothing about it, and we can leave it at that.

You don't have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Leigh Ann, I thought that the most interesting part of that statement was, you don't have to embarrass our guest.

It reminds me that people have often said this, that he treats the White House in a way like his hotel, and this is a guest in my hotel, and don't ask him these rude questions.

But we're talking about murder.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Yes.

And there's still a large faction in this country of people who blame him in Saudi Arabia for 9/11 as well.

So, the fact that he was even in the United States at the Oval Office visiting with Donald Trump angered a lot of people.

You know, I don't think that much is very offensive these days, but I thought that was absolutely offensive.

You know, the fact that he completely dismissed American intelligence about MBS's role in the butcher, literal butcher of Jamal Khashoggi.

So, you know -- and your paper had a great story about just the conflict of interest with Donald Trump having MBS there and how much business he is doing and his family is doing with Saudi Arabia right now.

So, there's a lot of issues with that.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes.

Jon, let me come to you with a large question that you'll have 30 seconds.

JONATHAN KARL: Yes, we'll do it all there.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: But there's a theme here.

We're seeing just developing a Ukraine peace plan that obviously privileges Russia, the aggressor in this.

You saw in the Oval Office Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

The CIA has said, approved the operation approved of the operation that led to the murder of this journalist.

Trump doesn't have a lot of sympathy for the underdog.

JONATHAN KARL: He wants -- you got to show strength.

He wants to be with a winner at all times.

It's -- I mean this -- you know, in terms of the MBS meeting, I mean, it's -- I think it's important to point out that, I mean, Saudi is an, a critical player in the region.

Obviously, the United States depends on Saudi, counterbalance to Iran, depends on next steps in Israel and Gaza.

But, you know, I mean, to see him directly give him a pass on what the CIA has found.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Well, what I was thinking when I watched that was the applause that Trump gave Putin in the Alaska meeting, last word to you, Peter, it just seems like the Ukraine trajectory is on the same trajectory as the Saudi trajectory in some ways, power.

PETER BAKER: He's picked sides.

He's absolutely right, strong people, not weak people.

And even this security guarantee he's supposedly offering Ukraine as a condition of part of this peace plan, an Article 5-like security guarantee, it's a good question what an Article 5-like security guarantee is valued from a guy who doesn't believe in the actual Article 5.

Remember, in NATO, he has said, I don't think I should have to protect NATO allies that don't spend enough.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

Well, we'll talk about Article 5 next week, probably, or the week after, but we're going to have to leave it there for now, unfortunately.