How Did Vzglyad Know That Trump’s Meeting with the Generals Was a Loyalty Test?
Because Russians Remember Hitler’s Führerreid of 1935?
Fuhrer fascism
For the first time, the White House has issued a piece of paper (lead image, top), signed by the President, attempting to install a form of fuhrer fascism to deter, arrest, and if need be shoot to kill any form of expression which amounts to disloyalty to the President and to his MAGA doctrine.
The paper defined that as “targeted intimidation, radicalization, threats, and violence designed to silence opposing speech, limit political activity, change or direct policy outcomes, and prevent the functioning of a democratic society.” This includes public expression of the terms “fascist” and “anti-fascist”.
According to the White House paper, those who speak in such language are hiding under “the umbrella of self-described ‘anti-fascism.’ These movements portray foundational American principles (e.g., support for law enforcement and border control) as ‘fascist’ to justify and encourage acts of violent revolution. This ‘anti-fascist’ lie has become the organizing rallying cry used by domestic terrorists to wage a violent assault against democratic institutions, constitutional rights, and fundamental American liberties…anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, anti-Christianity…and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.”
The paper, drafted by Stephen Miller, deputy chief of the White House staff, was signed by Trump on September 25. It is titled “NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM/NSPM-7”. Its subject is “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence.” Read the Miller Memorandum in full here.
It was followed by the Pentagon order for all US forces commanders and their staffs to assemble at the Quantico base in Virginia on September 30 to be addressed by Trump and Peter Hegseth, the Defense Secretary.
Since May 6, they have been under the direct threat of purge. Hegseth announced he was commencing to cut by 20% the 3 and 4-star general ranks of the main forces, by 10% in other flag officers of the main forces, and a 20% cut in the general ranks of the National Guard. No time line was announced for the cuts to be decided in two phases.
He was starting, Hegseth also claimed, “the most comprehensive review” of headquarters and operational command structures and areas of responsibility since 1986. When that takes place, there will be “a minimum of an additional ten percent reduction of general and flag officers throughout the DOD, in conjunction with the realignment of the unified command plan.”
The sword of Damocles wasn’t a stab in the back. “This is not a slash and burn exercise meant to punish high ranking officers, nothing could be further from the truth,” Hegseth claimed in anticipation of resistance from the generals.
None of these proposed cuts or reorganizations of commands were confirmed in the four months before Trump ordered the generals to assemble. None of the mainstream media journalists at the Pentagon nor of the alt-media military podcasters has reported a general source as admitting the link between the purge plan, the Miller Memorandum, and Trump’s summons to Quantico. The President then made this obvious.
In his speech to the assembled flag officers (lead image, bottom), Trump declared:
we are under invasion from within. We’re stopping it very quickly. After spending trillions of dollars defending the borders of foreign countries, with your help, we’re defending the borders of our country from now on. We’re not going to let this happen… San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, they’re very unsafe places and we’re going to straighten them out one by one. And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That’s a war too. It’s a war from within. Controlling the physical territory of our border is essential to national security. We can’t let these people live… If it’s OK with you generals and admirals…I say, they spit, we hit. Is that OK? I think so. They spit — it’s a new thing. They spit, we hit… This is going to be a big thing for the people in this room because it’s the enemy from within and we have to handle it before it gets out of control. It won’t get out of control, once you’re involved…With leaders like we have right here in this beautiful room today, we will vanquish every danger and crush every threat to our freedom in every generation to come, because we will fight, fight, fight and we will win, win, win.
Trump also issued the loyalty warning: “I’ve never walked into a room so silent before. This is very — don’t laugh! Don’t laugh, you’re not allowed to do that! You know what, just have a good time. And if you want to applaud, you applaud. And if want to do anything you want, you can do anything that you want. And if don’t like what I’m saying, you can leave the room. Of course, there goes your rank, there goes you future.”
That was at the beginning of Trump’s hour-long speech. Then at the end, the warning was repeated: “I’ll tell you, Pete and General Caine and all of the people that I’ve met that have been lifted up in rank. And we got many of them out of here. To be honest with you, I didn’t like doing it, but we got many of you out of here because we weren’t satisfied.”
Viewed in Moscow, the Kremlin-supported security analysis platform Vzglyad has reported the political significance of the loyalty oath assembly in Quantico when most US experts have missed it. This is because the Russians remember Adolf Hitler’s loyalty oath (Führereid) and what followed for Russia. Between 1934 and 1935, first for military personnel and then for civilians, Hitler ordered the state loyalty oath to be changed from the secular language, “I swear loyalty to the Reich’s constitution” to: “I swear by God this holy oath that I shall render unconditional obedience to the Leader of the German Reich and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces”.
According to Vzglyad’s writer, Gevork Mirzayan, “hundreds of American generals were offered a choice. In the understanding of liberals, the choice is between personal loyalty to Trump and loyalty to the American state. [In] July 1935, the German generals were summoned to an extraordinary meeting in Berlin and informed that their previous oath of allegiance to the Weimar Constitution was invalid and that they must take a personal oath to the Fuhrer. ‘Most of the generals have taken a new oath to retain their positions,’ retired General Ben Hodges commented on the Quantico meeting.”
The Russian interpretation is not placed between the lines. This is a message directed by a leading policy medium at the Kremlin, not a message from the Kremlin to the audience outside the Kremlin wall.
The message is that Trump is running a fuhrer fascist state and this is as dangerous for everybody, Americans and Russians, as Hitler was. The implication of Vzlgyad’s message is the reminder of the Russian precedent. It is likening Josef Stalin’s decision to accept Hitler’s terms in the Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact of August 1939, which in Stalin’s calculation was necessary to buy time to prepare for the expected German invasion, to President Vladimir Putin’s “understandings” with Trump at the Anchorage summit meeting of August 2025, and then his response to Trump’s subsequent threats to escalate the military and economic war against Russia, inside Russia and on the high seas.
August 23, 1939, at the Kremlin: Joachim von Ribbentrop, Josef Stalin, and Vyacheslav Molotov at the signing of the non-aggression pact.
August 16, 2025, at Anchorage, Alaska: Yury Ushakov, Sergei Lavrov, Putin, Trump, Mario Rubio, Steven Witkoff.Questioned for his reply to the Tomahawk missile threat, Putin had said last Thursday:
this is a very powerful weapon, even if, truth be said, it is not exactly up to date, but it is still a formidable weapon that does pose a threat. Of course, this will do nothing to change or affect in any way the situation on the battlefield…Will this damage our relations considering that we have finally started seeing light at the end of tunnel? Of course, this would be detrimental to our relations. How can it be otherwise? You cannot use the Tomahawks without the US military personnel’s direct involvement.
About the military attacks on Russian oil tanker movements, Putin said he was not going to be provoked. “This is akin to piracy. And what do you do with pirates? You eliminate them. How can you deal with pirates in any other way? This does not mean that a war will ravage the entire World Ocean, but this would of course substantially heighten the risk of clashes. Judging by the example of the French Republic, I believe that this is what is happening. I believe that today, this effort to ramp up tension and increase the level of escalation is primarily driven by the attempts to distract people in their own countries from the snowballing challenges the countries doing this have been facing domestically. They want us to retaliate – this is what they are waiting for, as I have been saying all along.”
September 30, 2025: French troops board the Boracay, a Benin-flagged oil tanker carrying Russian oil off St. Nazaire on the French coast. The Chinese captain was arrested and taken to Brest where he was charged with refusing to comply with naval orders and failing to justify the nationality of the ship's flag.“This would instantly change the political focus by enabling them to cry wolf and claim that they are under attack. Who is after you? – The horrifying Russia! Everyone must close ranks and coalesce around their political leaders.” This is the main objective, and people in these countries must know that this is what they are after – they want to mislead their people, to defraud them and prevent them from taking part in protests rallies, including from taking into the streets, while also suppressing civic engagement while retaining their grip on power.”
Putin said he meant this to apply to the politics of the European states. He did not mean US politics and Trump.Vzglyad is warning Putin to change his mind.
Source: https://vz.ru/world/2025/10/2/1363856.html
In the text which follows, the translation is verbatim without editing. The US opinion poll charts have been added for the English reader. 
October 2, 2025
American liberals will be eradicated by the army
By Gevorg Mirzayan, Associate Professor at the Financial University
It seems that a fundamentally new stage is coming in the political confrontation within the United States – the split between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. US President Donald Trump is dragging the Armed Forces into this conflict – and wants the army to fight his internal enemies. What are we talking about and what will be the consequences?
In the last days of September, US President Donald Trump and the head of the Military Department, Pete Hegseth, gathered hundreds of generals and admirals at the Marine Corps base in Quantico and forced them to listen to the new vision of the American army. In particular, according to Hegseth, the US Armed Forces are returning to the old normality. To an army that should look exactly like an army.
Hegseth condemned fat soldiers, generals and admirals. He announced his intention to purge the army of LGBT propaganda and everything related to it, including all kinds of “sensitivity days” and “men in dresses” (which were already in the Armed Forces by the time Trump came to power – for example, trans Admiral Rachel Levin, who is actually Richard). Well, he added that there would be no exemptions for soldiers based on their race or gender (for example, the right to wear a beard or less severe tests for women). “Standards should be uniform, gender-neutral and high.… We will not be politically correct when it comes to defending American freedom,” he said.
And Trump went even further. He identified new enemies for the US Armed Forces – the Americans.
“In recent decades, for some reason, politicians have come to believe that our task is to protect the far corners of Kenya and Somalia while America is being invaded from within,” Trump said. According to him, this invasion is no different from a situation with an external enemy, but in many ways it’s even more complicated because these enemies don’t wear uniforms. And by intruders, of course, Trump means liberals, Democrats and other antisocial elements who spread an ultra-liberal agenda and condone the development of banditry on the streets of American cities.
And Trump intends to defend these cities, including with the help of the Armed Forces. Trump has already sent National Guard units to metropolitan Washington, as well as Los Angeles and Portland. According to him, Memphis, Chicago, San Francisco, New York and Baltimore are next in line. Moreover, Trump made it clear that the army cannot stand on ceremony there. “I told Pete that we could use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military,” the US president said. He has already signed a decree on the training of rapid reaction forces that can help quell civil unrest.
All of these are liberal cities run by liberal mayors and located mostly in liberal states (in Washington, less than 10% of residents vote for Trump). Therefore, it is not surprising that the local authorities do not want to be dealt with.
“Our troops and our country deserve better than your behaviour as a petty tyrant,” said Illinois Governor Jay Pritzker. Democrats sharply criticize Trump for dividing America.
“His reckless proposal to use American cities as ‘training grounds’ for American troops is a dangerous attack on our democracy, as it treats our own communities as war zones and our citizens as enemies”, Senator Dick Durbin from Illinois is indignant.
“No American should ever be viewed as an ‘internal enemy’ or as a target for the US military,” echoes House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries. And now, most likely, the Democrats will challenge the legality of Trump’s actions in court.
“That’s what dictators do. We must not turn a blind eye to how un-American it is for the President of the United States to order our military to use force against the American civilian population,” says Congressman Gregory Meeks.
However, the judicial prospects are not so clear. Indeed, the Posse Comitatus law, passed back in 1878, prohibits the use of soldiers to enforce law and order. It applies to the army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Air Force, but it applies only to federal military personnel. The National Guard or Coast Guard forces, nominally subordinate to the states, do not fall under it – except when they are subordinated to the president and become “feds.”
However, the President has the right to use the Armed Forces to enforce federal law, suppress an uprising, or protect civil rights in a situation where the state government is unable or unwilling to do so. This, in turn, gives a very wide space for interpretation. In general, there are about two dozen exceptions to the law, which Trump uses in order, in his opinion, to “restore order” in the country.
The problem, however, is that this restoration of order could bring the country to the brink of civil war. If the majority of US residents supported or did not support Trump’s actions, then everything would be fine – however, society turned out to be deeply divided. Based on party and racial principles.
92% of Democrats oppose the practice of sending National Guard forces into cities. At the same time, this figure is 59% among independents, and 11% among Republicans. If we take it by race, 84% of blacks (who have the largest proportion of criminals) and 42% of whites are against entering.
This split is reflected in the interpretations of terms like “restoring order” used by Trump. According to sociologists, about 70% say that the level of crime and violence in American cities is at an unacceptable level. If faced with a choice between a crime-ridden city and the risk of “Trump sending troops to intimidate opponents,” 87% of Democrats and 75% of blacks would prefer the former option. For comparison, the numbers among Republicans and whites in favour of the first option are 13% and 45%.
September 22-26, 2025: NPR, PBS Marist poll And finally, this concerns everything Trump does in general. Only 36% of Americans believe that the country is moving in the right direction. But the main thing here is not the total figure, but the positions of individual segments of society. For example, only 8% of blacks (and 23% of the non-white electorate as a whole) and 4% of Democrats think so.
Until recently, the army was considered the structure that stands above this split. However, Trump is now actually dragging the Armed Forces into a political conflict.
“In one speech, Trump destroyed decades of restraint in relations between the civilian and military and proclaimed the Armed Forces his favourite weapon against domestic ‘enemies,’” writes Axios. Moreover, the president openly places the military in opposite to the inherently liberal segments of society (journalists, university professors, etc.). “Ivy League professors will never understand us, and that’s okay… the media will misrepresent us, and that’s okay,” says Hegseth. “They didn’t show you any respect… They’re Democrats. They never do that,” Trump echoes him.
In fact, hundreds of American generals have been offered a choice. In the understanding of liberals, the choice is between personal loyalty to Trump and loyalty to the American state.
“July 1935. The German generals were summoned to an extraordinary meeting in Berlin and informed that their previous oath of allegiance to the Weimar Constitution was invalid and that they must take a personal oath to the Fuhrer. Most of the generals have taken a new oath to retain their positions,” retired General Ben Hodges commented on the Quantico meeting.
In Trump’s understanding, the choice is between whether the army – the new Hegseth army, which has rejected ultra–liberal innovations – is ready to restore order in the country or whether it will watch from the sidelines as America decays.
The generals at Quantico did not give their response to Trump. They listened in silence and left in silence. Apparently, they will respond with deeds – when Trump begins to fulfill his promises and sends troops to democratic cities.
