Hegseth Can't Hide Behind His Admiral
Either Hegseth ordered the killings, or the military has gone rogue. Pick one.
The Trump administration has a new defense for executing survivors clinging to wreckage in the open ocean: the admiral did it.
White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told reporters Monday that Admiral Frank Bradley “ordered the second strike” on two men who survived the initial attack on an alleged drug boat—and that he “was well within his authority to do so.”1
Let’s be clear about what this defense actually claims: that a military officer, acting on his own initiative, ordered the execution of unarmed survivors in the water. That the civilian chain of command—the Secretary of Defense, the President of the United States—had nothing to do with it.
This is not a defense. It’s an admission that the military has gone rogue.
The Chain of Command Doesn’t Work That Way
Here’s what Leavitt and Hegseth want you to forget: the U.S. military answers to civilian command. Always. Without exception.
Admiral Bradley doesn’t get to order extrajudicial killings because he feels like it. He operates under the authority of the Secretary of Defense—Pete Hegseth—who operates under the authority of the Commander in Chief—Donald Trump.
If Bradley ordered the second strike, he did so because that authority was delegated to him by civilian leadership. If Hegseth issued a directive to “kill everybody” as the Washington Post reported, then Bradley was following orders from his civilian superior.
The administration can’t have it both ways. Either:
Hegseth gave the order (or created conditions where such orders were expected), making civilian leadership directly responsible for murder, or
The military acted without civilian authorization, meaning the entire chain of command has collapsed and the armed forces are conducting unauthorized killings of foreign nationals on their own.
Pick one. Both are catastrophic. Both are impeachable. And neither lets Pete Hegseth off the hook.
“Clearly Unlawful”
The legal experts aren’t mincing words.
“I can’t imagine anyone, no matter what the circumstance, believing it is appropriate to kill people who are clinging to a boat in the water,” said Michael Schmitt, a former Air Force lawyer and professor emeritus at the U.S. Naval War College. ”That is clearly unlawful.”¹
The Pentagon’s own manual on the laws of war describes this exact scenario when discussing when service members should refuse illegal orders: ”orders to fire upon the shipwrecked would be clearly illegal.”¹
Brian Finucane, a former State Department lawyer, put it plainly: ”The term for a premeditated killing outside of armed conflict is murder.”¹
Murder. Not a “counterdrug operation.” Not “self-defense.” Murder.
The Buck Stops at the White House
Trump said Sunday that he “wouldn’t have wanted that—not a second strike.” But wanting and ordering are different things. The question isn’t what Trump wanted. The question is what his administration authorized.
When you appoint Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense—a man whose primary qualification is shouting on Fox News—you own the consequences. When your administration declares an “armed conflict” with drug cartels to justify military strikes, you own what happens next. When your chain of command produces dead men floating in the Caribbean, you don’t get to blame the admiral.
Civilian command means civilian responsibility.
Hegseth can’t hide behind his admiral. Trump can’t hide behind Hegseth. And America can’t hide from what its government is doing in its name.
There’s more below, but first: If work like this—cutting through the administration’s deflections to expose who’s actually responsible for these killings—feels worth having in the world, please consider supporting The American Manifesto. Paid subscriptions make it possible to keep documenting what they’d rather you forget.
The Bottom Line
The Trump administration is trying to diffuse responsibility for war crimes across the chain of command, hoping that if everyone is responsible, no one is responsible.
That’s not how it works.
The military answers to civilian leadership. Civilian leadership answers to the American people. And right now, that leadership is authorizing—or failing to prevent—the execution of unarmed survivors in international waters.
Let’s be honest about the alternative they’re implying: that the U.S. military is conducting extrajudicial killings of foreign nationals without civilian authorization. That admirals are ordering executions on their own initiative. That the armed forces have slipped the leash entirely.
If that’s true—if the Trump administration has genuinely lost control of the military—then we’re facing something far worse than murder. We’re facing a constitutional crisis of the highest order. An administration that cannot control its own military has no business remaining in power. Impeachment wouldn’t just be warranted; it would be an emergency.
But they haven’t lost control. They know exactly what’s happening. And they’re hoping that by pointing fingers at the admiral, you’ll forget who gave him his orders.
Call it what it is: Murder.
And the chain leads straight to the White House.
Your Move
This story is still developing. The Armed Services committees in both chambers have opened investigations.
What consequences do you think there should be for these killings?
If you’re a veteran or active service member, how does this land?
What questions should investigators be asking?
Share your thoughts below.
Ben Finley and Konstantin Toropin, “Experts explain what the law says about killing survivors of a boat strike“, Associated Press, December 1, 2025.
Comprehensive legal analysis from multiple experts—including a former Air Force lawyer, a former State Department lawyer, and a Columbia University law professor who served in the Bush administration—unanimously concluding that killing survivors clinging to wreckage is illegal under any circumstances, whether in armed conflict or not. Documents the White House’s attempt to shift blame to Admiral Bradley, quotes the Pentagon’s own manual explicitly stating that “orders to fire upon the shipwrecked would be clearly illegal,” and establishes that such killings constitute murder under both international law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Tried in an International Court of Law for war crimes.
Tried at the Hauge and then impeached and imprisoned!!