The Pentagon

[phkrause]

The Last Days (Alex Wong / Getty)

View in browser The first person I saw when I walked into the Pentagon for the final time was Jimmy. I don’t even know his last name, but I know his story. Before he started work at the labyrinthine headquarters of America’s armed forces, he was a medic in the Marine Corps. For the past 21 years, he has been a building police officer and an unofficial, affable greeter. Jimmy only told me about his military career in 2021, the morning after 13 troops were killed in a suicide bombing at the entrance of the Kabul airport amid the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Everyone talked about the 11 Marines killed that day, but Jimmy remembered the one Navy corpsman among them, a medic who, like him, had been assigned to travel with the unit, just in case. For nearly two decades, Jimmy stood guard beside two large mosaics showing the faces of the nearly 3,000 people killed in the September 11, 2001, attacks. The displays came down during the pandemic, a symbol of a nation that had moved on from the War on Terror and was beginning to focus on new threats. Last month, President Donald Trump told troops that the country’s adversary was “the enemy within.” Nearly all of the Pentagon press corps is leaving the building this week, barred from working there under restrictions imposed by the Trump administration. My fellow journalists and I will continue to do our jobs, reporting on the U.S. military in every way we know how. But something is lost when the leadership of the Department of Defense chooses to close itself off to scrutiny in the way it has. On the most basic level, the public loses access to information it has a right to know, along with the right to ask questions of those entrusted with spending nearly $1 trillion from taxes and managing 3 million employees. But something intangible is lost too, including the privilege of meeting people like Jimmy, whose names may never appear in print but who are essential to how we understand the U.S. military. Before I had even crossed the vestibule to enter the building this morning, I was thinking about the stories I would no longer hear, the people I would never meet. In the afternoon, officials confiscated the Pentagon press badges of hundreds of journalists, including mine. Dozens of news organizations had reached the same conclusion: The Pentagon’s new, 21-page press restrictions prevented us from doing basic news gathering, compromised our First Amendment rights, and disregarded the public’s right to know. News organizations, including this one, decided that we would rather cover the military without building access than do it under the Pentagon’s terms.   “We fundamentally oppose the restrictions that the Trump administration is imposing on journalists who are reporting on matters of defense and national security,” Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of The Atlantic, said in a statement on Monday announcing that we would not agree to the new terms. “The requirements violate our First Amendment rights, and the rights of Americans who seek to know how taxpayer-funded military resources and personnel are being deployed.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in justifying what he has described as “common sense” changes, has misrepresented what journalists and Pentagon officials have done since the building opened in 1943. He has insisted that all he is doing is asking the press to wear badges, to not roam the building unfettered, and to make sure those with access to classified information do their jobs correctly. The truth is that we have always worn badges and we never had unfettered access in the building. And although serious news organizations have always taken into account national-security considerations when deciding what to publish, they do so while also considering the importance of information being made public.   As far as anyone knows, no security breach by any Pentagon journalists brought about the new restrictions. Indeed, the biggest violation of national-security norms since Hegseth entered the building 10 months ago was by Hegseth himself, when he moved sensitive plans about upcoming air strikes on Yemen from a secure government system to a non-governmental app, Signal, and shared them with this magazine’s editor in chief. Hegseth’s disdain for critical coverage of any kind has been evident since he took office. Within weeks, he evicted several news organizations from their workspaces. Then he barred journalists from using the press-briefing room. In May, he restricted the press to a handful of the Pentagon’s 17.5 miles of hallways. In all, there have been only two Hegseth press briefings and two others on camera by his top spokesperson. Instead, Hegseth and his press team have relied on social media, posting a steady stream of attacks on reporters and their stories, and even on retired military leaders. After several news organizations posted explanations of why they would not agree to the new rules, Hegseth retweeted their messages with the waving-hand emoji. Bringing back the “warrior ethos,” as Hegseth has repeatedly vowed to do, apparently includes keyboard warriors. As journalists walked out of the building, taking our collective centuries of experience on the beat with us, we passed dozens of locked doors leading to secure rooms that we have never entered. Inside those rooms sat career military officers and civilians, some of whom believe that the oath to protect secrets and the responsibility to engage with the American public through the press are two values that can coexist.   In recent days, mid-level troops have been reaching out to me, unsolicited, and promising that they would keep providing journalists with information, not to snub their civilian leaders but to uphold the values embedded in the Constitution. Retired spokespeople have written to me to say that they, too, have felt like they are losing something with the media’s departure. As I said goodbye to the cleaning crews, the Pentagon police, the troops, and the longtime civilian staffers, what I heard was, in effect, a collective sigh. I repeatedly heard stories of people asking themselves, How long can I stay here? Some said they were tired of watching colleagues be pushed out, fearful of when they themselves would be asked to sign new rules that they felt went against their oath to defend the Constitution or their personal ethics. “I am tired of new rules,” one civilian told me. “They clearly don’t want us,” an Army colonel said.   The worries I heard have been, for many, growing for some time. When Hegseth summoned the military’s top generals and commanders to Quantico, Virginia, last month, some told their staffs that they feared they would be asked to take a loyalty oath and were considering how they might respond. (There was no oath, but the defense secretary did announce plans to drive out anyone who can’t meet physical-fitness standards. Hegseth later issued a memo ordering troops to watch or read his speech.) By the time of the speech, the press corps was already preparing to have to walk out, having reviewed a draft of the new restrictions. From now on, there will be few, if any, independent journalists in the building to question top defense officials or to banter with the troops. The restrictions will likely reach military installations across the country and overseas as well. We won’t be seeing service members on the front lines, out at sea, or aboard cargo planes—unless it’s through imagery approved by the Defense Department. Some of my colleagues have put their lives on the line in defense of the public’s right to information.   Reporting in this new environment will not be easy. Even before today, the Pentagon severely restricted the flow of information to the American public. As the sound of packing tape sliding across moving boxes reverberated in our bullpen yesterday, reporters noticed a social-media post by Trump announcing that the U.S. had struck a boat near Venezuela, killing six alleged narco traffickers. As we had after the four previous strikes, we asked Pentagon officials what kind of ordnance the U.S. military used, the legal basis for the strike, and the identities of those who were killed. The Pentagon declined to answer. Similarly, officials have given scant information about the deployment of National Guard troops on American soil—in Portland, Oregon; Chicago; Washington, D.C.; Memphis; and Los Angeles—with more likely to follow. As we packed up our belongings this week—thick reports, battered helmets, expired Girl Scout cookies—department officials walked through the media area to assess what would soon be their space. The six closet-size booths assigned to television networks were largely bare, emptied of video equipment. Those spaces allowed the public to hear the phrase “Live from the Pentagon” through the Vietnam and Gulf Wars, on 9/11, and, more recently, after U.S. strikes on Iran. Because it usually takes years for reporters to feel truly comfortable in their knowledge of the Pentagon, many stay on for decades. In the print bullpen, home to a few notorious pack rats, we scrounged through papers that dated back to the previous century as well as more recent evidence that the military had once been far friendlier to the press. That included a 2007 Air Force Public Affairs directory, which listed contact information at every base. It was 86 pages. Meanwhile, we couldn’t even say goodbye to the Air Force press desk today, because their offices are located in an area Hegseth had already deemed off-limits. One way to reach our offices was to walk through a corridor dedicated to the military’s commitment to engaging with the press. At the end is a large sign outlining the department’s Principles of Information, signed less than two months after the 9/11 attacks.   “It is the policy of the Department of Defense to make available timely and accurate information so that the public, the Congress, and the news media may assess and understand the facts about national security and defense strategy” the George W. Bush–era document states. “A free flow of general and military information shall be made available, without censorship or propaganda, to the men and women of the Armed Forces and their dependents.” The day before our departure, one reporter placed signs throughout our soon-to-be-vacated spaces that read “Journalism is Not a Crime.” As soon as members of Hegseth’s staff saw the signs, they tore them down. Related: Why is the Pentagon afraid of the press? Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon is becoming a bubble.

[phkrause]

Pentagon press turns in badges

Nearly every Pentagon reporter, from almost every major media outlet, turned in their press badges yesterday after refusing to sign onto the Defense Department's new rules for journalists, Axios' Josephine Walker writes.

• Why it matters: Media companies broadly rejected the pledge, claiming it would criminalize national security reporting and expose those who sign the contract to potential prosecution.

The Pentagon Press Association said its members "are still committed to reporting on the U.S. military. But make no mistake, today, Oct. 15, 2025, is a dark day for press freedom."

• Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement to Axios: "This has caused reporters to have a full-blown meltdown, crying victim online. We stand by our policy because it's what's best for our troops and the national security of this country."

What's in the new rules (N.Y. Times gift link) ... The backstory.

[phkrause]

Hegseth changes policy on Pentagon dealings with Congress Leaders at the Pentagon have significantly altered how military officials will speak with Congress after a pair of new memos issued last week. Read more.

Why this matters: In an Oct. 15 memo, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and his deputy, Steve Feinberg, ordered Pentagon officials — including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — to obtain permission from the department’s main legislative affairs office before they have any communication with Capitol Hill. Previously, individual agencies and military branches within the Pentagon were able to manage their own communications with Congress.   The memo was issued the same day Pentagon reporters exited the building rather than agree to the Defense Department’s new restrictions on their work, and it appears to be part of a broader effort by Hegseth to exert tighter control over what the department communicates to the outside world. Sean Parnell, the top Pentagon spokesman, called the move a “pragmatic step” that’s part of an effort “to improve accuracy and responsiveness in communicating with the Congress to facilitate increased transparency.”

[phkrause]

Generals Go Nuclear on Hegseth Over Bonkers Quantico Rant

Top military officials told a conservative publication they’ve lost any remaining respect for the Pentagon chief.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has lost what respect and trust he still had among some top military officials over his wild rant to the nation’s generals, according to an explosive report.

Multiple high-ranking military officers told the right-leaning The Washington Times that the former TV personality’s speech to hundreds of generals in Quantico last month was a turning point for how he’s viewed.

On September 30, Hegseth summoned generals and other top military officials from around the world to the Marine Corps base in Virginia, an unprecedented move that raised national security concerns among some experts.

During his speech, he ranted about the “warrior ethos” and ending “wokeness” in the U.S. military before a room full of the most experienced military leaders in the world.

“It was a massive waste of time,” a current Army general told The Washington Times. “If he ever had us, he lost us.”

Some top military officials are questioning his leadership style, attitude and overall competency, according to the report.

Images of those watching Hegseth and President Donald Trump’s speeches last month showed a sea of straight-faced generals. The 45-year-old defense secretary even suggested during his address that those who do not agree with him should resign.

But the defense secretary’s speech that day was described as “embarrassing” and “below our institution.”

Hegseth is viewed as operating with a “junior officer’s mentality,” which has led him to micromanage policies such as facial hair and press access to the Pentagon.

Last week, nearly the entire Pentagon press corps turned in their credentials and left the building after refusing to sign a 21-page set of rules further restricting access and threatening punishment if reporters did not meet their demands.

Last week, the Defense Department under Hegseth issued another memo clamping down on military officials speaking to members of Congress.

Senior military officers traveling from around the world to watch Hegseth’s speech expected to hear about a major strategic initiative or doctrine shift and “not about f***ing haircuts” as one current Army general put it to The Times.

“Mainly what I see from him are not serious things,” a current senior officer told The Times. “It’s, ’Why did this service member tweet this?’ Or internal politics and drama. That’s mostly what I see.”

Sources who spoke to the publication raised concern that Hegseth was doing damage to the military both structurally and in how it’s viewed publicly, and that the full extent of the damage will not be apparent for months or even years.

While Hegseth and the president have touted recruitment numbers being up, top military officials have raised concerns about the senior ranks.

“Across the services, we are bleeding talent, talented generals and flag officers, for what appears to be the opposite of a meritocracy,” a current senior officer told the publication. “There are people being held back from promotions, or being fired, or removed for sometimes unknown reasons, often for favoritism, or just simple relationships.”

In a statement to The Daily Beast, Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell blasted The Washington Times report and suggested those who disagree with the direction Hegseth is taking the Defense Department should resign.

“The anonymous general and senior officer quoted in the Washington Times article should put their names to their comments if that’s what they truly believe in and consider resigning from their post. Our warriors deserve senior leaders who support the mission and put warfighting first,” Parnell said.

He argued that the “war on warriors is over” and that “political correctness has no home at the Department of War,” invoking the name change Trump announced with an order to rebrand the department with Hegseth’s support early last month.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/generals-go-nuclear-on-hegseth-over-bonkers-quantico-rant/?

[phkrause]

Pentagon Pete Unleashes Another Deadly Boat Strike as Outrage Boils Over

It marks the second strike in the Pacific Ocean in as many days.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that his department has carried out a second deadly strike in the Pacific Ocean, killing three people he described as “terrorists.”

In a post made to X less than eight hours after his previous post announcing the Trump administration’s first strike on a vessel in the Pacific, Hegseth wrote, “Today, at the direction of President Trump, the Department of War carried out yet another lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization (DTO). Yet again, the now-deceased terrorists were engaged in narco-trafficking in the Eastern Pacific.”

Hegseth claimed that the vessel was “known by our intelligence” to be involved in smuggling narcotics, and that three “male narco-terrorists” who were aboard at the time were killed in the strike.

The Pentagon has declined to share intelligence proving that any of the people it has killed in its numerous boat strikes were involved in trafficking drugs.

At present, nobody killed in the Trump administration’s strikes has been independently confirmed to have been involved in drug smuggling. At least one victim’s family has claimed their relative was a fisherman not involved in drug trafficking. The Daily Beast has contacted the Pentagon for comment.

Hegseth had previously announced the administration’s first strike on a vessel in the Pacific earlier on Wednesday that used identical language to the later post, confirming that two people were killed. Five people in total have been killed in strikes in the Pacific this week.

The two strikes in the Pacific add to the Trump administration’s growing death toll during its war on purported drug smuggling in international waters. As a result of at least six strikes conducted since early September, 29 people have died.

Backlash against the strikes is growing, with both the military’s own lawyers and Republicans expressing concern over the legality of the attacks. Sen. Rand Paul, who was snubbed by Trump after refusing to vote along party lines to end the government shutdown, condemned the strikes in a Tuesday interview with Piers Morgan.

“We can’t just kill indiscriminately because we are not at war. It’s summary execution! Everyone gets a trial because sometimes, the system gets it wrong. Even the worst of the worst in our country get due process. The bottom line is that execution without process is not justice, and blowing up foreign ships is a recipe for chaos,” the senator wrote on X.

Navy Adm. Alvin Holsey, who had been overseeing Trump’s crackdown on “narco-terrorists,” announced earlier this week that he will be leaving his post in December, two years before his term is due to end. A source told Reuters that Holsey and Hegseth had clashed over the strikes conducted in the Caribbean.

Sanho Tree, global drug policy expert at the Institute for Policy Studies, told the Daily Beast that “Trump trying to apply this new military doctrine against an enemy who is quite literally incapable of surrender is, by its very definition, a forever war.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/pentagon-pete-boasts-about-yet-another-deadly-boat-strike/?

ps:So trump claims he's not a war president, but looks like he has no problem wanting to start a war!! Why not put this energy into getting russia to back off of Ukraine?????

[phkrause]

Pentagon Pete Unveils MAGA Press Corps After Real One Left

The new “Department of War” media is filled with far-right influencers and conservative outlets.

The Pentagon is stacking its new press corps with a number of right-wing media outlets, MAGA influencers, and conspiracy theorists.

It comes after the vast majority of the traditional media refused to agree to new rules rolled out under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and were forced to turn in their credentials last week.

“Today, the Department of War is announcing the next generation of the Pentagon press corps,” wrote chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell on Wednesday.

He claimed over 60 “journalists, representing a broad spectrum of new media outlets and independent journalists,” signed the Pentagon’s access policy.

Parnell did not reveal who exactly would be members of its new press corps, but it is dominated by conservative media outlets and influencers, including LindellTV, The Gateway Pundit, Real America’s Voice, Turning Points USA Frontlines, The Post Millennial, The National Pulse and RedState, as well as Timcast.

Several pro-Trump influencers and right-wing outlets have also been given greater access to the White House and Trump events as the president leans heavily on friendly personalities happy to heap praise on him and his policies since the start of his second term.

Members of the old Pentagon press corps, some of whom have covered the Defense Department for decades under multiple administrations, packed up and exited the building after refusing to sign the new media agreement.

The rules included the agreement that any Defense Department information obtained by a member had to be approved for release by an authorized official, even if it was unclassified.

The document also threatened to criminalize national security reporting and could have exposed journalists seeking information from sources to prosecution.

Hegseth downplayed the access changes and claimed the new rules were to prevent members of the press from wandering the building, including into classified areas, without badges.

However, longtime members of the old press corps repeatedly pointed out that they were already required to wear badges at the Pentagon and were not allowed to wander aimlessly, as the former TV personality-turned-defense secretary claimed.

The updated rules came as Hegseth has attempted to clamp down on a series of leaks detailing the chaos within the department and raising questions about his competency in the job.

Even the president’s favorite channel and Hegseth’s former employer, Fox News, rejected the Pentagon’s media demands.

“New media outlets and independent journalists have created the formula to circumvent the lies of the mainstream media and get real news directly to the American people,” Parnell claimed in Wednesday’s announcement. “Their reach and impact collectively are far more effective and balanced than the self-righteous media who chose to self-deport from the Pentagon.”

Among those who signed onto the new access policy was LindellTV, started by known conspiracy theorist, Trump supporter and My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell.

“From day one, our mission has been to challenge narratives, question power, and report what others won’t,” LindellTV said in a statement on joining the new press corps. “This new chapter reaffirms that commitment and expands our ability to bring vital coverage from the Pentagon straight to the American people—without censorship, without spin.”

Another new member is Timcast, which was started by right-wing political commentator and podcast host Tim Pool.

He posted on X that Timcast plans to have its White House correspondent attend briefings “when feasible to ask policy-related questions and gather insights on Pentagon operations.”

“We aim to conduct podcast interviews whenever possible but do not intend to maintain a significant presence at the Pentagon or engage in in-depth investigative reporting, as specialized outlets do,” he wrote.

The Gateway Pundit is a far-right site that often dabbles in conspiracy theories founded by Trump supporter Jim Hoft.

While members of the former press corp no longer have access to the building, the reporting on Hegseth and the department has not faltered.

It comes after the increasingly paranoid Defense Department also issued a new memo cracking down on military contact with Congress.

The new memo directs all Defense Department personnel to only engage with members of Congress through the assistant secretary of legislative affairs in advance.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/pentagon-pete-unveils-maga-press-corps-after-real-one-left/?

ps:Again I ask, Why did we change the name of the "the Department of Defense" to "the Department of War," if this president claims he's not a War president?????

[phkrause]

?️ 1 film thing: Pentagon vs. Netflix thriller

Rebecca Ferguson as Capt. Olivia Walker, the most senior officer in the White House Situation Room, in "A House of Dynamite." Photo: Eros Hoagland/Netflix

The writer of Kathryn Bigelow's new nuclear-fallout thriller — "A House of Dynamite," now streaming on Netflix — is pushing back on a Pentagon memo contending the film is overhyped and underestimates U.S. defense capability. "It is a thriller, not a documentary," Noah Oppenheim — the award-winning screenwriter and former NBC News president — told me. "But that doesn't mean we didn't take very seriously the obligation to be accurate." The filmmakers constantly consulted technical advisers with knowledge of U.S. defense systems. ? The plot: When a single, unattributed missile is launched at the continental U.S., "a race begins to determine who is responsible and how to respond." 18 minutes could decide the fate of civilization. The U.S. military must "hit a bullet with a bullet." Spoiler alert: An internal memo by the Defense Department's Missile Defense Agency — first reported by Bloomberg, and obtained by CNN — says that the "fictional interceptors in the movie miss their target ... [F]acts and results from real-world testing tell a vastly different story." "A House of Dynamite" shows that "deterrence can fail, which reinforces the need for an active homeland missile defense system," the memo adds. ? Oppenheim tells Axios: "We're thrilled the Pentagon watched the movie and has chosen to join this debate with policymakers and scholars over missile defense." "Triggering more discussion of these issues was one of the reasons we made the movie," he added. "We believe all the experts who told us the current system is highly imperfect — and hope the dialogue leads to solutions that make us all safer." Watch the trailer ... Read an interview with Oppenheim ... Guide to the cast.

[phkrause]

⚡ Pentagon readies riot force

Photo illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios. Photo: Jason Armond/Getty Images

The Pentagon is creating National Guard riot control forces in every state that could respond to civil unrest, The Wall Street Journal and The Guardian report. Why it matters: The new "quick reaction" units — with about 500 soldiers each — reflect the Trump administration's push to expand the military's role in responding to protests and unrest inside the U.S. The soldiers will be equipped with batons, body shields, Tasers and pepper spray and receive training in crowd control and handling. President Trump signed an executive order in August directing each state to have National Guard troops that could be quickly deployed for "quelling civil disturbances and ensuring the public safety and order." Go deeper (WSJ gift link).

[phkrause]

New Pentagon policy undercuts trans troops’ ability to ask to stay in the military, AP learns

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon has rolled out a new policy that will severely undercut the ability for transgender troops who have been banned from the armed forces by the Trump administration to turn to boards of their peers to argue for their right to stay in the military, according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-troops-ban-military-trump-9c3018034a2608a28f6146fe17f0fe4b?

[phkrause]

Pentagon says it’s investigating Sen. Mark Kelly over video urging troops to defy ‘illegal orders’

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon announced Monday it is investigating Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona over possible breaches of military law after the former Navy pilot joined a handful of other lawmakers in a video that called for troops to defy “illegal orders.”

https://apnews.com/article/pentagon-mark-kelly-troop-investigation-4882f76b05dcdfa3060c284c2c84dd12?

[phkrause]

Pentagon watchdog finds Hegseth’s use of Signal posed risk to US personnel, AP sources say

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon’s watchdog found that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth put U.S. personnel and their mission at risk when he used the Signal messaging app to convey sensitive information about a military strike against Yemen’s Houthi militants, two people familiar with the findings said Wednesday.

https://apnews.com/article/hegseth-signal-war-plans-inspector-general-5a315349f428e22e5bf6a424287738eb?

[phkrause]

Pentagon knew boat attack left survivors but still launched a follow-on strike, AP sources say

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon knew there were survivors after a September attack on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean Sea and the U.S. military still carried out a follow-up strike, according to two people familiar with the matter.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-hegseth-pentagon-drug-boats-caribbean-ae33b738a2481932ffefaf58e0a2d6ab?

[phkrause]

Department of War Disputes Second Attack on Boat Strike Survivors Was a “Double-Tap”

Special Operations Command pushed back on the contention that Adm. Frank Bradley ordered a double-tap attack when the U.S. military conducted a second strike killing survivors of the September 2 boat attack in the Caribbean, first reported by The Intercept.

https://theintercept.com/2025/12/02/caribbean-boat-strike-double-tap/?

[phkrause]

Pentagon Pete Plots Cull of Top Generals in Major Power Grab

The former Fox News host is looking to axe decades of combined experience from among top brass.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is charging ahead with a radical Pentagon power grab as part of a plan to dramatically overhaul the military and downsize major headquarters overseas.

Sources say Hegseth is on track to slash the number of top generals and admirals, representing decades of combined experience, while also scaling top-level military headquarters around the world down from 11 to just eight, the Washington Post reports.

Critics argue the changes serve to centralize decision-making and weaken regional military leaders’ autonomy, giving more authority to Pentagon leadership and, by extension, to Hegseth and the White House.

Concerns have also been raised at the prospect of diminished oversight, as the plans have not yet been fully shared with Congress even though existing laws require the Pentagon to provide detailed cost and strategic impact assessments before moving forward.

The plan is in line with the new national security strategy released by the White House earlier this month, which declared that the “days of the United States propping up the entire world order like Atlas are over.”

Sources with knowledge of the latest Pentagon plans said Hegseth’s moves align closely with those priorities, part of President Donald Trump’s wider campaign pledge to reduce U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts.

Opponents say the overhaul will only serve to place U.S. overseas interests at greater risk and increase domestic vulnerability at a time of mounting global insecurity.

“The world isn’t getting any less complicated,” Chuck Hagel, defense secretary under the Obama administration, told the Post. “You want commands that have the capability of heading off problems before they become a big problem, and I think you lose some of that when you unify or consolidate too many.”

The planned shakeup also comes as Hegseth has faced near-constant scrutiny for what his critics describe as unmitigated chaos on his watch.

Accusations of poor management have focused largely on repeat firings and purges of senior aides, including the abrupt dismissal of the Navy’s chief of staff in October. Officials have also reportedly been subjected to random polygraphs and NDAs in a wider attempt to stamp out leaks of embarrassing intel from inside the department.

Sweeping, restrictive new media policies resulted in a mass walkout of credentialed reporters, who were then replaced by podcasters and online pundits widely seen as mouthpieces for the MAGA movement.

Critics also accuse Hegseth of sidelining and antagonizing seasoned advisers over deadly strikes on alleged narcotrafficking boats in the Caribbean. Legal experts have questioned the legality of these strikes, with Hegseth accused of potentially committing a war crime in a “double-tap” strike that killed survivors.

Information security has also been a consistent source of concern, beginning with the now-notorious “Signalgate” scandal in March that saw Hegseth share sensitive, possibly classified details of military operations with a group chat to which a journalist had been unwittingly added.

Amid this backdrop, critics have accused Hegseth of trying to create a distraction by targeting Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly for his apparent criticism of the Pentagon.

Kelly, a retired U.S. Navy captain, sparked fury among conservative figures last month when he participated in a video reminding active-duty servicemembers that they can disobey unlawful orders. The video was circulated by six Democratic lawmakers, all of them former members of the military.

Trump called the clip “treason” and suggested those lawmakers should be executed, and Hegseth is reportedly now pushing ahead with an “official command investigation” that could see Kelly recalled to active duty to face court-martial proceedings.

Kelly’s attorney has warned that any such action would amount to an “unconstitutional and an extraordinary abuse of power.”

“If the executive branch were to move forward in any forum—criminal, disciplinary or administrative—we will take all appropriate legal action on Senator Kelly’s behalf to halt the Administration’s unprecedented and dangerous overreach,” attorney Paul Fishman wrote in a letter to the Pentagon on Monday.

The Daily Beast has reached out to the Defense Department for comment on this story.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/pentagon-pete-hegseth-preparing-to-cull-top-generals-in-major-department-of-defense-power-grab/?

[phkrause]

Pentagon is embracing Musk’s Grok AI chatbot as it draws global outcry over sexualized fake images Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Monday that Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence chatbot Grok will join Google’s generative AI engine in operating inside the Pentagon network, as part of a broader push to feed as much of the military’s data as possible into the developing technology. Read more.

Why this matters: The announcement comes just days after Grok drew global outcry and scrutiny for generating highly sexualized deepfake images of people without their consent. Malaysia and Indonesia have blocked Grok, while the U.K.’s independent online safety watchdog announced an investigation Monday.   Hegseth said Grok will go live inside the Defense Department later this month and announced that he would “make all appropriate data” from the military’s IT systems available for “AI exploitation.” He also said data from intelligence databases would be fed into AI systems.   Hegseth’s aggressive push to embrace the still-developing technology stands in contrast to the Biden administration, which, while pushing federal agencies to come up with policies and uses for AI, was also wary of misuse. Officials said rules were needed to ensure that the technology, which could be harnessed for mass surveillance, cyberattacks or even lethal autonomous devices, was being used responsibly.

[phkrause]

Judge blocks Pentagon from punishing Sen. Mark Kelly for call to resist unlawful orders

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge agreed Thursday to block the Pentagon from punishing Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, a former Navy pilot, for participating in a video that called on troops to resist unlawful orders.

https://apnews.com/article/pentagon-kelly-hegseth-illegal-orders-lawsuit-f028eade00c78123263bc3e28b3caa0e?

[phkrause]

🤖 Silicon Valley's thorny Pentagon dilemma

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

As the Pentagon and Anthropic wage an ugly and potentially costly battle, three other leading AI labs are also negotiating with the department — and deliberating internally — about the terms under which they'll let the military use their models, Axios' Dave Lawler and Maria Curi write. Why it matters: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wants to integrate AI into everything the military does more quickly and effectively than adversaries like China. Hegseth is insisting AI firms give unrestricted access to their models with no questions asked — and showing he's willing to play hardball to force their hands. The Pentagon is threatening to sever its contract with Anthropic and declare the company a "supply chain risk" if it's unwilling to lift certain restrictions on its model, Claude. The military's use of it in the Nicolás Maduro raid deepened tensions. 🔬 Zoom in: Claude is the only model available in the military's classified systems through Anthropic's partnership with Palantir. Three other models — OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini and xAI's Grok — are available in unclassified systems. Negotiations to bring those companies into the classified domain are now more urgent as the Pentagon ponders how to replace Claude if necessary — a process a senior official conceded would be massively disruptive. One acknowledged that the fight with Anthropic was a useful way to set the tone for negotiations with the other three. Keep reading.

[phkrause]

Pentagon's drone domination push

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

The Pentagon is putting small, inexpensive drones and their makers through the wringer in a high-stakes competition starting this week as the U.S. attempts to learn the lessons of war in Ukraine, Axios Future of Defense author Colin Demarest writes. Why it matters: The tests — known as the Gauntlet — run through early March and are part of the Defense Department's Drone Dominance push, which seeks to arm American troops with hundreds of thousands of expendable drones in a few short years. The Pentagon expects to spend a little more than $1 billion on the program over four increasingly competitive phases. Jeff Thompson, CEO of drone maker Red Cat, told Axios: "They're very blunt ... if you can't produce them and deliver them on time — if you're two weeks late — you're out." 🔭 Zoom out: Some 70-80% of casualties in the Russia-Ukraine war are caused by drones, according to a recent Latvian intelligence report. Kyiv alone is said to be using 9,000 drones per day. The U.S. isn't ready to deploy or destroy cheap drones on that scale. Keep reading.

[phkrause]

Anthropic ultimatum

Illustration: Allie Carl/Axios

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has summoned Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei to the Pentagon tomorrow morning for what sources say is likely to be a tense meeting over terms for military use of Anthropic's Claude, Axios' Dave Lawler and Maria Curi scoop. "Anthropic knows this is not a get-to-know-you meeting," a senior Defense official told Axios. "This is not a friendly meeting. This is a sh*t-or-get-off-the-pot meeting." Why it matters: Claude is the only AI model available in the military's classified systems, and the most capable model for sensitive defense and intelligence work. The Pentagon doesn't want to lose access to Claude, but is furious with Anthropic for refusing to lift its safeguards entirely. The two sides are heading into the meeting on two totally different pages. An Anthropic spokesperson said: "We are having productive conversations in good faith." Defense officials say negotiations have shown no progress and are on the verge of breaking down. 🔎 Zoom in: Anthropic is willing to loosen its existing usage restrictions, but wants to wall off two areas: the mass surveillance of Americans, and the development of weapons that fire without human involvement. The company "is committed to using frontier AI in support of US national security," the spokesperson said. The Pentagon says it's unduly restrictive to have to clear individual uses with the company, and has demanded that all AI labs make their models available for "all lawful uses." President Trump greets Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during the National Governors Association dinner in the East Room on Saturday. Photo: Al Drago/Getty Images Friction point: The Pentagon has threatened to declare Anthropic a "supply chain risk" — not only voiding its contracts, but forcing other companies that work with the Pentagon to certify they aren't using Claude in those workflows. The Pentagon is discussing other potential tools to force Anthropic's hand. A Defense official said Hegseth would effectively be presenting Amodei with an ultimatum. It would be a massive task to offboard Anthropic and replace it with another AI lab that currently has inferior capabilities.

[phkrause]

Anthropic gets Pentagon ultimatum

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is giving Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei until Friday night to offer the U.S. military unfettered access to the company's AI model, Axios' Dave Lawler and Maria Curi report exclusively. Hegseth told Amodei in a meeting today that the Pentagon will either cut ties with Anthropic and declare it a "supply chain risk," or invoke the Defense Production Act, forcing it to tailor its model to the military's needs. 🚀 Anthropic has said that it's willing to work with the Pentagon — but won't allow its model to be used for mass surveillance of Americans, or to develop weapons that fire without human involvement. Anthropic's Claude is the only AI model currently used for the military's most sensitive work. 🥶 A senior Defense official said the meeting was "not warm and fuzzy at all." Another source told Axios that it remained "cordial" with no voices raised on either side, and that Hegseth praised Claude. Hegseth told Amodei that he won't let any company dictate the terms under which the Pentagon makes operational decisions, or object to individual uses. An Anthropic spokesperson told Axios: "We continued good-faith conversations about our usage policy to ensure Anthropic can continue to support the government's national security mission in line with what our models can reliably and responsibly do." 🤖 What we're watching: Elon Musk's xAI recently signed a contract to bring its AI model, Grok, into classified military settings. The Pentagon is hastening similar talks with OpenAI and Google, sources tell Axios. Go deeper.

[phkrause]

Pentagon moves to blacklist Anthropic

The Pentagon asked two major defense contractors yesterday to assess their reliance on Anthropic's AI model, Claude — a first step toward designating Anthropic a "supply chain risk," Axios' Dave Lawler, Maria Curi and Colin Demarest scoop.

• Why it matters: Using that penalty against a leading American tech firm, particularly one the military itself relies on, would be unprecedented.

⚠️ That punishment is usually reserved for companies from adversarial countries — e.g., Chinese tech giant Huawei.

• Keep reading.

[phkrause]

🤖 OpenAI seals Pentagon deal; Trump hits Anthropic

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

With Anthropic and the Pentagon deadlocked over military use of Claude, President Trump called Anthropic a "Radical Left AI company." He wrote on Truth Social that he's "directing EVERY Federal Agency in the United States Government to IMMEDIATELY CEASE all use of Anthropic's technology." Just after the Pentagon's 5 p.m. ET deadline for a deal, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote on X that Anthropic will be designated a "Supply-Chain Risk to National Security," preventing any company doing business with the U.S. military from also having a commercial relationship with Anthropic. 🥊 The big winner could be OpenAI, Anthropic's fierce rival. Just before 10 p.m. ET, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman announced on X that his company had reached an agreement with the Pentagon to use its AI models, after the Defense Department agreed to safety red lines similar to Anthropic's. Earlier in the day, OpenAI announced $110 billion in new funding from Amazon, Nvidia and SoftBank. Anthropic vowed to "challenge any supply chain risk designation in court," and said no "intimidation or punishment from the Department of War" would cause it to cave on its principles. The dispute, touched off by Claude's use in January's attack on Venezuela, revolves around the use of AI for mass surveillance of Americans, which the Pentagon says is already illegal, and the development of weapons that fire without human involvement. 👀 Between the lines: Axios is told that OpenAI's agreement acknowledged that mass surveillance is illegal and that DoD would comply with that law. Similar language covered autonomous weapons and humans remaining in control of decisions. Behind the scenes: Anthropic and the Pentagon were still talking last evening. Officials still think Claude is the superior AI option for defense purposes right now, Axios' Dave Lawler and Maria Curi report. The bottom line: A week ago, the U.S. had the world's friendliest regulatory regime for AI. Now the entire industry, and its investors, are less sure. Claude problem: Federal agencies working with Anthropic.

[phkrause]

🤖 Scoop: OpenAI, Pentagon rework AI deal

Photo illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

OpenAI and the Pentagon have agreed to adjust their new contract following widespread backlash that domestic mass surveillance remained a real risk under the deal, Axios' Maria Curi writes. Why it matters: The prospect of securing an agreement with OpenAI after blowing up its deal with Anthropic appeared on thin ice unless surveillance concerns were addressed. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman approached Emil Michael, undersecretary of Defense for research and engineering, to rework the contract, the sources said. The language hasn't yet been formally signed. Altman said in an internal post to employees yesterday that "one thing I think I did wrong: we shouldn't have rushed to get this out on Friday." "The issues are super complex, and demand clear communication. We were genuinely trying to de-escalate things and avoid a much worse outcome, but I think it just looked opportunistic and sloppy. Good learning experience for me as we face higher-stakes decisions in the future." Keep reading.

[phkrause]

🤖 Anthropic sues Pentagon

Photo illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios. Photo: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images Anthropic today sued the Pentagon, alleging its designation as a "supply chain risk" violates the AI company's First Amendment rights and exceeds the government's authority, Axios' Maria Curi reports. Supply chain risk designations are usually reserved for foreign adversaries that pose a national security risk — a punishment that could be hard for the government to square as it relied on Claude for operations in Iran. 🧑‍⚖️ Anthropic is asking courts to undo the risk designation, block its enforcement and require federal agencies to withdraw directives to drop the company. The company says it's committed to serving the Pentagon amid major combat operations. An Anthropic spokesperson said: "Seeking judicial review does not change our longstanding commitment to harnessing AI to protect our national security, but this is a necessary step to protect our business, our customers, and our partners." 🪖 The other side: The Pentagon argues the dispute is about operational control, not speech. Defense officials say this has always been about the military's ability to use technology legally, without a vendor inserting itself into the chain of command and putting soldiers at risk. Go deeper.

[phkrause]

• 💰 The Pentagon "burned through $5.6 billion worth of munitions during the first two days of its military assault on Iran," The Washington Post reports. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said this afternoon that about 140 U.S. service members have been wounded amid Operation Epic Fury, adding that "the vast majority of these injuries have been minor." Get the latest.