Key Takeaways
- Admiral Bradley faces a poll question regarding disciplinary action for a second strike on a suspected drug boat.
- Secretary Hegseth's alleged directive to kill all crew members is central to the controversy.
- Military legal experts suggest the alleged actions could constitute murder or war crimes.
- The incident raises questions about adherence to the law of war and command responsibility.
- Admiral Bradley is scheduled to testify before House and Senate committees regarding the strike.
Deep Dive
- The podcast introduced a daily poll question: should Admiral Mitch Bradley face disciplinary action for authorizing a second strike on a suspected drug trafficking boat?
- The host noted the focus is on the Admiral's role and potential culpability, despite Secretary Hegseth's possible involvement.
- The poll question was described as provocative, specifically targeting the Admiral who carried out the attack.
- Secretary Hegseth stated he was made aware of the need for a second attack hours after the initial strike.
- He indicated he did not see survivors due to fire and smoke from the vessel.
- Hegseth defended military actions, citing the 'fog of war' and criticizing the press for 'nitpicking' and 'fake stories'.
- He asserted President Trump empowered commanders to make difficult decisions to protect Americans.
- The Washington Post reported Secretary Hegseth ordered the killing of all crew members on a suspected drug-trafficking boat.
- Admiral Frank M. Bradley allegedly ordered a second strike when survivors were detected, complying with Hegseth's directive.
- Admiral Bradley reportedly told a secure conference call that survivors were legitimate targets to prevent alerts to other traffickers.
- President Trump initially denied knowledge of the incident and later stated he would not have wanted a second strike.
- Legal expert Todd Huntley stated that killing alleged traffickers not posing an imminent threat would be considered murder under the law of war.
- Andy McCarthy argued in National Review that if the Post's report is accurate, the action constitutes a war crime.
- Jack Goldsmith noted the Department of War manual defines persons incapacitated by shipwreck as 'hors de combat'.
- Senator Angus King cited the DoD manual, section 18.3.2.1, which states orders to fire upon the shipwrecked are illegal and must be refused.
- The host concluded Secretary Hegseth likely holds culpability due to issuing a directive.
- Senator Angus King believes both Admiral Bradley and Secretary Hegseth face legal issues.
- Admiral Bradley is scheduled to testify before House and Senate committees, with his briefing reportedly set for Thursday.
- Judge Anthony Napolitano views the action as a war crime, suggesting prosecution for all involved.