BREAKING: New videos of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have emerged, intensifying scrutiny over allegations of an illegal directive he allegedly issued during a controversial military operation. These developments are critical as they challenge Hegseth’s recent denials regarding his involvement in a deadly September 2 strike on a drug smuggling boat linked to the Tren de Aragua cartel.
According to reports from Newsweek, Hegseth purportedly gave a “spoken directive” to eliminate all individuals aboard the vessel. Following this command, Admiral Frank Bradley executed a missile strike that resulted in two survivors clinging to wreckage. Hegseth was quoted shortly after the attack, asserting he observed the entire mission live via drone footage. “I can tell you that was definitely not artificial intelligence,” he told a former colleague during a Fox News interview. “We knew exactly who was in that boat, we knew exactly what they were doing and we knew exactly who they represented.”
Despite his claims, Hegseth faced backlash last week when he labeled a report from the Washington Post as “fake news.” However, the White House confirmed that Hegseth had indeed authorized the strikes, stating that Admiral Bradley “worked well within his authority and the law.” This contradiction raises serious questions about Hegseth’s role in the military operation and the legality of the strikes.
The resurfaced videos reveal Hegseth questioning military rules of engagement at a gathering in late September. “We’re training warriors, not defenders,” he declared, emphasizing a controversial view that the military should not adhere to restrictive rules during combat. “No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement, just common sense,” he added, advocating for maximum authority for warfighters.
The Trump administration has conducted over 20 strikes targeting alleged drug smuggling vessels in the southern Caribbean and eastern Pacific, resulting in at least 83 fatalities. Critics are raising alarms about potential violations of domestic and international law, with Hegseth’s directive being described as a possible war crime.
On social media, political analysts are voicing their concerns. Brian Allen stated, “The White House swore Pete Hegseth knew nothing about the Caribbean strikes. Then a video surfaces of him bragging he watched it happen live. That’s not mixed messaging, that’s a full-blown cover-up caught in 4K.” Democratic influencer Harry Sisson echoed this sentiment, asserting, “After claiming Pete Hegseth didn’t know anything about the strikes in the Caribbean, footage has resurfaced of him in September saying he watched it LIVE. Completely exposed.”
As the situation unfolds, the implications of these revelations could spark significant political and legal ramifications. The public is urged to stay informed as more details emerge regarding Hegseth’s actions and the military’s legal standing in these operations.
The urgency of this story cannot be overstated, as new developments continue to surface, impacting not only military policy but also public perception of U.S. military engagement in drug trafficking operations.
