Last Updated on December 31, 2025 by Serena Zehlius, Editor
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has been panicking ever since the Washington Post reported on a September Caribbean boat strike where a second strike was carried out to kill two survivors of the initial strike. According to WaPo, Hegseth issued the verbal command “Kill them all,” and the survivors were murdered when a second strike “blew them apart.” Now Hegseth thinks Admiral Mitch Bradley will take the fall for this obvious war crime.
The Post reported that on September 2, the boat in question was hit a total of four times. Twice to kill the crew and twice more to sink the boat. A group of former military lawyers, or JAGs (Judge Advocate Generals), signed a letter stating that the second strike on that boat was a war crime and everyone who was along the chain of command that day committed a war crime, or murder, and could be held accountable.
Question: Why do they need multiple strikes to sink the boat? To destroy/hide evidence or lack thereof? I’m no expert, but it seems strange to waste artillery (I speak as though I know what I’m talking about. Artillery just sounds better than bombs. I dunno. Whatever they shoot from drones. OK?) just to make sure an empty, destroyed boat sinks.
Military experts have been all over the media recently and they came to the same conclusion that the former JAGs did. Among the expert commentary I learned a few interesting tidbits that very senior/experienced military officials revealed today. 1) The head of U.S. Special Operations Command (Ussocom), Gen. Bryan Fenton, retired from his role in October. As the General in charge of the region where the boat strikes are taking place, he was still there on September 2, and he was above Admiral Mitch Bradley in the chain of command.
It looks like Hegseth’s “fall guy” wouldn’t have been the one who gave the order to kill the survivors. Not on his own, anyway. He would’ve received the order from General Fenton. Who gave him the order? The Secretary of Defense? Did he retire early because he didn’t want to be involved in war crimes? We don’t know for sure, but I’m anxiously awaiting the moment Hegseth realizes the General hadn’t retired yet in September and ruined his “fall guy” plan of naming Admiral Mitch Bradley the one who gave the order.
The Admiral likely gave the order, but only after he was given the order from the General. In the end, Admiral Mitch Bryan was not the one who made the decision to kill those men.
2) A training manual used by every single member of the military during basic training gives a clear example of “an obvious illegal order you would never obey:” A BOAT was bombed or otherwise destroyed by our military but there are survivors in the ocean. Not only are you NOT supposed to kill them, but you’re actually supposed to protect them, rescue them, and provide them with any medical treatment they need. To kill unarmed combatants is immoral. It’s illegal. It’s murder.
Killing unarmed, injured, or helpless enemy combatants (and in Hegseth’s case, civilians), is not only against the law, it’s in violation of the U.S. Military’s Rules of Engagement as well as international law.
Starting from a Shared Reality: The Lies and the Facts
Let’s begin this discussion from a point of shared reality: The drone strikes on boats in the Caribbean—which are not headed to the U.S., and are not carrying fentanyl—are illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral. They are nothing more than extrajudicial killings, war crimes, or just plain murder. (Though I hesitate to refer to them as “war crimes” considering we aren’t at war). The double-tap tactic used on September 2 is just “super-extra” illegal on top of an already illegal act.
The Lies
President Trump and Pete Hegseth have been claiming from the start of the Caribbean boat strike operation that:
- The boats are manned by narco-terrorists.
- There are enough drugs on each boat to kill 25,000 to 50,000 Americans. Therefore, each time they bomb a boat, they save about 30,000 lives.
- The previous claim seems to be insinuating that the drug on these boats is fentanyl (technically, it could also be heroin, OxyContin, or any other opiate).
- The boats are heading to the United States.
- The President has the authority to murder anyone suspected of transporting drugs to the U.S. What happened to due process?
If the Pentagon or White House were telling the truth and wanted their statements and actions to be believed, they would wait until the boats crossed into U.S. territory before striking them. That would prove the boats were coming here. Realistically, if they were being honest about any of this, the Coast Guard would be interdicting the boats so Trump and Hegseth could hold daily press conferences to brag about how many narco-terrorists they caught, standing behind a table with bricks of cocaine piled high.
Obviously, none of that is possible because this entire thing has absolutely nothing to do with narco-terrorists or drugs.
But how do you know that?
This was confirmed today after President Donald Trump pardoned a notorious drug trafficker and former Honduran President, Juan Orlando Hernández (who was put into power by drug gangs because he worked with them). He also worked with the Sinaloa Cartel, a massive, transnational organized crime syndicate that specializes in drug trafficking.
Hernández brought drugs and drug gangs into the United States, commenting how he would “shove cocaine up the gringos’ noses.” He was tried in a court of law, found guilty by a jury in an American Courtroom, and there was plenty of evidence against him.
He was sentenced to 45 years behind bars for conspiring to distribute more than 400 tons of cocaine and other drugs (that fact comes from the DOJ webpage on his case). Does Trump not think about the multi-agency effort, long hours, hard work, and determination that goes into taking down a drug trafficker?
Imagine how the prosecutors and federal agents who worked on this case are feeling right now. (Speaking of which, because he was released, and he murdered another inmate while in prison, perhaps we should provide security for the prosecutors who worked on his case and the judge who convicted him. If anything happens to anyone, including the jurors, because Trump freed this terrorist… 🤬).
Why would Trump free one of the worst narco-terrorists if he’s so concerned that he has to kill them before they get within a thousand miles of the U.S.? It’s not about the drugs. Trump has pardoned every criminal who paid him enough—regardless of the severity of their crimes. The proof is right here if you’re interested in learning about the many criminals Trump has pardoned so far.
So that was a rather long ADD moment from the list of lies to the list of facts (which were supposed to be one after the other in the article.) You can click on “list of lies” in this paragraph to jump back and refresh your memory on the lies I laid out for you
The Facts
These tiny boats only have about a 100-mile range—when you factor in the amount of fuel the gas tanks hold and the number of times the crew would need to stop and refuel in order to make the 2,000-mile-long trip to the U.S.
- The boats are not carrying fentanyl. Fentanyl enters the country through Mexico (after China transports the drug into Mexico). The drugs on these boats (if there are any) would be cocaine or marijuana.
- The people on the boats are probably drug “mules,” “gig workers” who needed some extra cash in a hurry, or fishermen.
- Americans aren’t overdosing on these drugs by the tens of thousands.
- The boats aren’t coming to the United States. They’re too small to carry the amount of fuel necessary to make it that far. Some are traveling in the opposite direction. A spokesperson originally said—after the first boat strike—that it was heading towards Trinidad).
- Finally, if the drugs were to come into the country, the amount that would fit on a single boat obviously isn’t killing 25-50,000 Americans.
The Fall Guy
Both Pete Hegseth and Karoline Leavitt claim that the order to conduct a second strike to kill the two survivors came from Admiral Mitch Bradley. It’s ridiculously obvious that the administration is trying to push the Admiral “under the boat” so speak.
Finally, let’s look at posts from Pete Hegseth. In the comments below, let me know what you think: How obvious is his plan to throw Admiral Mitch Bradley under the bus based on what he’s saying here?
