Poetic justice is defined by Merriam-Webster’s as “an outcome in which vice is punished and virtue rewarded usually in a manner peculiarly or ironically appropriate.” It is the irony that makes this type of restorative outcome so attractive in human narratives, the righteous man escaping injustice, and the evil man captured by the trap he set for the righteous. It is that paradox we shall explore here in light of false flag arguments that military members’ endorsement of political assassination is merely a protected First Amendment practice. In 2024, the Biden administration’s agents tasked to manage the U.S. Army gave the mechanism through which today’s military supervisors can hold oath-breaking extremists in the ranks accountable.
To set the stage, let’s look back to the Biblical story of Esther. In this fifth-century B.C. account, we read of a young Jewish woman who won over the heart of Ahasuerus, King of Persia. The king’s wicked servant, Haman, badly hated the Jewish people and set in motion a plot to have Esther’s uncle Mordecai executed by hanging. The gallows were built. But in a magnificent reversal, it was Haman who swung from the place of execution built by his order to kill his enemy. Human nature remains unchanged over the millennia since. Men and women with the heart of Haman walk the earth in every generation. Constitutionally-minded military members have been suffering persecution at the hands of this type for years.
I could list many examples here of the rampant left-wing extremism on open display by military members these last two weeks. Like Haman, thousands of those sworn to defend America have identified those of us grounded in truth as enemies. Some of them go so far as to say that conservatives deserve to die for our beliefs, upon which oaths of military service are written. Unfortunately, we’re to the point that a multi-volume book series would be needed to document the growing list of examples encapsulating murderous lust on public display. Search #RevolutionariesintheRanks online for yourself. The results are gut-churning. It should not require an extremism regulation, or the Uniform Code of Military Justice, for military members posting vile things in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination to face consequence. Any honest observer can tell that hearts attuned to such darkness are unqualified for the public’s trust and the privilege of military service.
RELATED: I Was Wrong, There IS an Extremism Epidemic in the U.S. Military
The US Military Has an Extremism Problem and Charlie Kirk's Murder Put It Under the Spotlight
On June 14, 2024, Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth—appointed by then President Joe Biden—signed a new policy titled Army Directive 2024-07 (Handling Protest, Extremist, and Criminal Gang Activities). This followed on then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s partisan hunt in 2020 for the alleged scourge of "right-wing extremism" in the military, a problem that existed only in his head. The real extremism in the ranks proved to be of the left-wing variety. Wormuth’s policy followed in the wake of the Biden administration’s obsession with ridding the military ranks of men and women who refused to bend to the tyrant’s command. As such, many parts of this document are problematic and must be reformed. Yet portions of it offer—even if inadvertently—helpful clarity in providing formal definitions of what the Army would officially classify as extremism:
Advocating or engaging in unlawful force or violence to achieve goals that are political, religious, discriminatory, or ideological in nature.
Under that definition, military members endorsing and/or advocating for violence to achieve ideological ends are engaging in acts of extremism. That kind of expression is what we have seen from thousands of service members who cheered the assassination of Charlie Kirk on their social media platforms over the past two weeks. This is not about the First Amendment, but rather speech that defies standards set forth in military regulation, Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and basic decency. The military has a long history of holding its members to a higher standard, especially when it comes to incendiary speech related to political ends. Public trust in the military is already at a low comparable to the Vietnam era. It cannot survive if extremists in the ranks are free to openly argue that morally-grounded Americans are fair targets for murder.
The left wing wanted an extremism policy to achieve political ends in the armed forces under the last administration, and they got it. The document was meant for use against those considered political enemies by Team Biden, as Haman’s gallows were meant for Mordecai. Today’s reigning defense officials can likewise redeem this policy set in place by Biden’s Army Secretary Christine Wormuth by employing it to discharge evil infiltrators from the military ranks in our time. The moment calls still, for such a time as this.
Editor's Note: Thanks to President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's leadership, the warrior ethos is coming back to America's military.
Help us report on Trump and Hegesth's successes as they make our military great again. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.