A Republican write-in candidate for Florida's 5th Congressional District posted a nearly seven-minute video on X calling President Donald Trump "the Antichrist" and declaring he "must be killed", drawing swift condemnation from the U.S. Marine Corps, the Secret Service, and the acting Navy secretary.
William Upham, a former Marine first lieutenant who describes himself on X as a prosecutor "running to fix a broken political system," delivered his remarks in apocalyptic, religious terms, citing Bible passages and invoking his Marine officer oath to defend the Constitution "against all enemies, foreign and domestic."
The video drew immediate institutional responses. The Marine Corps condemned Upham's words on X. The Secret Service confirmed it is aware of the comments. Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao publicly disowned him. And yet, as of the latest reporting, no arrest or criminal charge has been announced, and neither the FBI, the White House, nor Upham's own campaign has responded to press inquiries.
In the video, first reported by Fox News Digital, Upham does not hedge. He names the sitting president of the United States and says plainly:
"He is a false messiah. And he is your enemy. And he must be killed."
Later in the same video, Upham escalates further:
"President Trump is the Antichrist. And he will be killed and sent to hell. God will prevail against evil."
He also states: "We are led by a president who is the enemy of God." The remarks are framed in religious and apocalyptic language, but the plain meaning is unmistakable, a congressional candidate publicly calling for the death of the president.
This is not a stray social media post from an anonymous account. Upham is a declared candidate for Congress, posting under the handle @uphamforflorida. He entered the race, by his own account, to restore bipartisanship and return power to the working class. Whatever that platform once looked like, the video replaced it with something far darker.
The Marine Corps moved quickly. In a post on X, the service stated:
"The Marine Corps is aware of the disturbing statements made by William Upham. The comments made by Upham are a direct violation of the oath he swore to uphold and are not in keeping with the service's values."
The Corps also disclosed that Upham was medically discharged on May 30, 2025. The article does not specify whether that discharge was related to the video or was a separate, prior event. The stated medical reason for the discharge has not been reported.
Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao was blunt. In his own post on X, Cao wrote:
"Unacceptable. William Upham is no longer a Marine and does not represent our values or ethos."
The Secret Service, in a statement to Fox News Digital, confirmed awareness of the comments and said the agency "investigate[s] anything that can be perceived as a threat toward one of our protectees." The agency declined to discuss specifics, citing operational security.
Fox News Digital also reached out to the FBI, the White House, and Upham's campaign. None had responded as of the report's publication.
President Trump has already survived two assassination attempts. That fact alone should make any public call for his death, however it is dressed up, a matter of the most serious concern. Wrapping a death threat in Scripture does not make it less dangerous. If anything, it makes it more so, because it gives the call a moral framework designed to justify action.
Upham is not a fringe social media troll. He is a former commissioned officer in the United States Marine Corps. He took an oath. He is running for a seat in the United States Congress. He posted his remarks under his campaign account, to an audience he is actively trying to grow. That is not recklessness born of anonymity. It is a deliberate public act by a man seeking political power.
The Washington Examiner reported that Upham framed his remarks in explicitly religious and apocalyptic terms, and that both the Marine Corps and Acting Navy Secretary Cao moved to publicly distance the military from his statements. The Examiner identified Upham as running against incumbent Rep. John Rutherford in the 5th District, a detail that underscores how close to the political mainstream this rhetoric has crept.
Several important questions remain open. Has any law enforcement agency contacted Upham? Has the FBI opened an investigation? What, precisely, was the medical basis for his Marine Corps discharge, and did it precede or follow the video? Has Upham retracted or clarified his remarks?
None of these questions have public answers. The silence from Upham's campaign is itself notable. A candidate who posts a seven-minute video calling for the president's death and then declines to comment when the press calls is not someone engaged in good-faith political discourse.
Upham's X bio says he entered the race because the country is "broken." On that narrow point, he may be right, though not for the reasons he imagines. A political culture in which a congressional candidate can openly call for the assassination of a sitting president, wrap it in religious language, and face no immediate legal consequence is a culture with a serious problem.
Consider, for a moment, the reaction if a Republican candidate had posted a seven-minute video calling a Democratic president "the Antichrist" and declaring that president "must be killed." Every cable news desk in America would lead with the story for a week. Congressional hearings would be demanded. The candidate's party would be forced to answer for him around the clock.
Upham filed as a Republican write-in candidate, but his rhetoric bears no resemblance to any recognizable conservative platform. What it does resemble is the escalating pattern of violent language directed at President Trump, language that has, twice, been followed by real-world assassination attempts. The institutional left has spent years insisting that rhetoric has consequences. They are right. It does.
The Marine Corps and Acting Navy Secretary Cao responded appropriately and fast. The Secret Service acknowledged the threat. But condemnation on social media is not accountability. Accountability means consequences, legal, political, and professional.
When a man who swore an oath to defend the Constitution uses his campaign platform to call for the death of the commander in chief, the system is supposed to do more than post about it.
