Air Force Major Argues Oath Justified Calls to Impeach Trump, Seeks Special Court-Martial

Air Force Maj. Jason Watson told an Article 32 preliminary hearing that “discomfort is not contempt,” making an unsworn statement as his defense urged that his case be referred to a special court-martial rather than a general court-martial.

Watson, speaking publicly for the first time since being charged with 10 specifications under three UCMJ articles, said his oath to the Constitution compelled his actions and that his protest was nonpartisan. He told the hearing he would have acted the same way if any official — regardless of party — violated the law.

Charges and Events

The major faces allegations that include three specifications under Article 88 (contempt toward officials), five specifications under Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) and two specifications under Article 133 (conduct unbecoming an officer). Prosecutors point to Watson’s public remarks on the steps of the U.S. Capitol in early July — when he called for the removal, conviction and impeachment of President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance — plus interviews he gave with the Defenders of Our Republic Substack and with CNN.

Defense Argument

Civilian attorney Chris Mutimer told the hearing at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling that the legal question is whether a crime occurred, not whether Watson’s words were politically wise. The defense argued that criticism and political speech do not automatically amount to contempt under Article 88, which they said is charged rarely and applied inconsistently. For that reason they urged referral to a special court-martial, which handles misdemeanor-level offenses, rather than a general court-martial reserved for the most serious felonies.

“The law will not make the same word a virtue in one officer's mouth and a felony in another's,” Watson’s lawyers argued, pointing to inconsistent outcomes in similar cases.

Precedent Cited: Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller

The defense cited the 2021 case of Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller, a Marine who publicly criticized U.S. leadership over the Afghanistan withdrawal while wearing his uniform. Scheller pleaded guilty to multiple UCMJ violations and was resolved via special court-martial, receiving the forfeiture of one month’s pay and a punitive letter of reprimand. Defense attorneys said Scheller’s treatment highlights inconsistent application of Article 88 and supports handling Watson’s case at the special-court level.

By contrast, Scheller spent nine days in pretrial confinement; Watson has been held in solitary confinement for 35 days as of Monday, the defense said. The defense also played a Fox & Friends clip in which then-acting Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth praised Scheller, and later noted that Hegseth appointed Scheller to a Pentagon personnel role in 2025, underscoring variation in outcomes for comparable conduct.

Evidence and Next Steps

The government presented 29 exhibits and called one witness: Maj. Bethany Evans, commander of the 811th Force Support Squadron, who testified about Watson’s alleged refusal to wear his Physical Training Gear while on duty at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling. Records shown at the hearing indicate Watson remained at JBAB under Evans’ command following the investigation rather than being returned to his prior post in Bydgoszcz, Poland.

Maj. Joshua Wendell, the preliminary hearing officer, has eight business days from the hearing date to forward his recommendation to the Special Court-Martial Convening Authority.