Don’t Overcomplicate the Scandal of Trump’s Lawless High Seas Attacks

What Else Is There to Know, Really?

As I was describing yesterday the Trump administration’s emerging line of defense to the unlawful strike on the survivors of the already-unlawful high seas attack, I came perilously close to falling into one of the traps of the Trump era.

Unlike political scandals of the past, where the drip, drip, drip of previously hidden facts eventually becomes an overwhelming torrent, Trump era scandals are right out in the open, not just admitted to but often bragged about. The smoking gun is bandied about like a trophy.

If investigators, especially reporters and editors, play by the old rules, they end up setting the bar impossibly high for themselves. The evidence of bad acts is right there in front of us. The traditional paradigm of digging deeper or waiting for the other shoe to drop comes under some tension when the culprits have no shame or fear. It can create a silly dynamic, like looking for a smokier gun.

In this case, the president has talked for years about summarily executing drug traffickers. His defense secretary made his whole post-military career about defending those accused of war crimes and reanimating a tired old myth that military lawyers and weak-kneed politicians forced America’s warriors to fight with one-hand tied behind their backs.

With that as context, they initiated a lawless campaign of lethal strikes at sea against alleged drug-smuggling boats that violated U.S. and international law but which they publicized, touted, and defended on the flimsiest of pretexts. They created a spectacle of U.S. military might, releasing aerial footage of the strikes on social media for maximum virality, and proudly thumped their chests.

But they also re-created a patented element of the Trump reality TV presidency: a spectacle without transparency.

How do they know the boats under attack are smuggling drugs? How do they know those aboard are complicit in the alleged drug smuggling? How do they know what drugs are aboard? How do they know the boats are destined for the United States?

The administration has offered little to nothing in the way of advance intelligence or post-action assessments to justify the attack. Instead, they offer wild and shifting factual claims. It was fentanyl or maybe cocaine. The boats were headed for the U.S. or maybe Trinidad.

As for its legal rationale, the administration could not offer any transparency there for weeks, either. It couldn’t explain to Congress or the American public the legal basis for the attacks, and when it eventually came up with one — a self-serving Office of Legal Counsel memo — it kept the document secret.

Against this backdrop of a clearly unlawful high seas campaign came the WaPo story last Friday that survivors of a Sept 2. attack had been killed in a second strike. Even this wasn’t entirely new. The Intercept reported on the attack a week later, on Sept. 10, in a story very clearly headlined “U.S. Attacked Boat Near Venezuela Multiple Times to Kill Survivors.” But the WaPo story breathed fresh life into the scandal because, although it didn’t say so, it left the impression with many readers that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had issued a second order specifically to kill the survivors.

Killing survivors at sea is egregiously lawless conduct. It was enough finally to nudge some Hill Republicans out of their Trump torpor. The who, what, when, where, why, and how still matter. But the antiquated notion that this is a cover-up of a crime that will eventually be revealed for all to see doesn’t grapple with how things work in the Trump era.

There’s been quite a bit of speculation that the Democratic members of Congress who released a video last month urging service members to follow the law and not abide by unlawful military orders must have gotten wind of the double tap strike, which prompted them to go public. Perhaps.

“A very small number of Senate and House staffers separately received highly classified briefings about the attack on Tuesday,” The Intercept reported at the time. “No senators or House members were in attendance, people familiar with the briefings told The Intercept.”

But by the time the Democrats’ video was released, the unlawful campaign was more than two months old and was by itself — independent of the double tap strike — an obvious example of illegal military orders. The OLC memo as much as acknowledged this by reportedly offering service members involved in the campaign sweeping immunity from future prosecution.

Given all of the context above, it sets the bar needlessly high to withhold judgment or to wait and see or turn the story into a kind of fox chase by getting hyper-focused on whether it was Hegseth or Adm. Frank M. Bradley who issued the key orders, whether Hegseth watched the real-time video of the second strike, and whether there is some arcane justification by which the wrecked ship with survivors clinging to it might still have posed a threat.

Again, the whole campaign is unlawful. The initial strike was unlawful. The subsequent strike was unlawful.

To say, as I am here, that we already know enough to make strong judgments about who is culpable and for what, isn’t to say that we should eschew new facts or information that provides more transparency into what has happened in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific since this summer. But it is to say we should be confident in exercising those judgments and not fall into the trap of becoming so focused on the remaining unknowns that the intentional lack of transparency becomes an obstacle that we are helpless to see through.

Trump surely isn’t waiting around. He said he would “start doing strikes on land, too.”

Quote of the Day

“Tonight is a sign that 2026 is going to be a bitch of an election cycle. Republicans can survive if we play team and the Trump administration officials play smart. Neither is certain.”–an anonymous House Republican, after the GOP won the TN-07 special election by a much narrower margin than Trump won the district in 2024

For the Record …

Hot tips? Juicy scuttlebutt? Keen insights? Let me know. For sensitive information, use the encrypted methods here.

When To Accommodate, and When To Fight? NY Officials Agonize and Prepare for Federal Escalation

Jackie Bray has been thinking about how quickly things could spiral out of control.

Bray is the New York state emergency leader whom Gov. Kathy Hochul tasked with averting a Chicago or Los Angeles-style surge of immigration agents and National Guard troops. At the core of the job is a dilemma that the Trump administration has imposed on blue cities and states around the country: How can the state respond to aggressive, spectacle-driven immigration operations without triggering the showdown with federal agents that the administration is trying to provoke?

Continue reading “When To Accommodate, and When To Fight? NY Officials Agonize and Prepare for Federal Escalation”

Another Blue State Effort to Crack Down on Crisis Pregnancy Centers Heads for Likely Demise

Crisis pregnancy centers, including the one at the heart of the case the Supreme Court heard Tuesday, operate on deception.

Continue reading “Another Blue State Effort to Crack Down on Crisis Pregnancy Centers Heads for Likely Demise”

Rethinking Federalism in a Time of Trump — A Response to Tom Nichols

Recently, Tom Nichols — the dissident or lapsed conservative who is a key Never Trump figure — wrote a Bluesky thread on the importance of federalism. He focused on the longstanding Democratic demand (albeit a futile one) that the president be elected by a national popular vote. I’ve made the same argument, though I’ve never treated it as a big focus since abolishing the Electoral College is all but impossible. You’re never going to get small states to disempower themselves by agreeing to such a constitutional amendment. But Nichols made the argument that some form of the Electoral College is an essential component of American federalism and that federalism is one sheet anchor of our liberties, as we’re finding out today.

Continue reading “Rethinking Federalism in a Time of Trump — A Response to Tom Nichols”

Trump White House Throws Military Under the Bus For Lawless Attack

The Wheels on the Bus Go Round and Round

It seemed inevitable that President Trump’s comments Sunday night disavowing the second Sept 2. strike, which killed two survivors of one of his lawless high seas attacks on alleged drug-smuggling boats, would ultimately lead to him scapegoating the military. But things moved quicker yesterday on this front than I might have imagined.

In an important acknowledgment, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed that a second strike targeting the two survivors took place. But on behalf of the president she threw Admiral Frank “Mitch” Bradley, commander of the Special Operations command, under the bus for the double-tap Seal Team 6 strike, while still insisting that he was “within his authority and the law.”

“Her scripted remarks at a news briefing elicited a furious backlash within the Defense Department,” the WaPo reported, “where officials described feeling angry at the uncertainty over whether [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth would take responsibility for his alleged role in the operation — or leave the military and civilian staff under him to face the consequences.

In a social media post, Hegseth similarly underbussed Bradley by wrapping him in a bear hug of blame: “Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support. I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made — on the September 2 mission and all others since.”

The precise contours of the Trump administration’s defense of the president and Pentagon chief are still emerging, but it appears to ride on a fine distinction between the general order Hegseth gave for the attack and the specific order Bradley gave for the second strike that killed the survivors of the first strike. It’s abundantly unclear whether the facts support such a distinction — or if the distinction changes the legal analysis that both strikes were unlawful.

New reporting from the NYT offered some very thinly sliced details from five anonymous U.S. officials:

  • There wasn’t a single second strike but “several follow-up strikes.”
  • Hegseth issued only a written order for the attack, not a verbal order as the original WaPo story reported.
  • The military intercepted radio communications from one of the survivors to what one official said were narco-traffickers.

Bradley is expected to brief lawmakers in a classified session this week.

Perhaps complicating matters, a Defense Department official told the WSJ that Hegseth was the “target engagement authority,” the key figure who authorized the strike. Further complicating Hegseth’s attempt to distance himself, he boasted on Fox News the day after the attack that he had “watched it live”:

Pete Hegseth on Sept 3 talking about the strike on boats where 2 survivors were later killed in a second strike: “I watched it live.”

Ron Filipkowski (@ronfilipkowski.bsky.social) 2025-12-02T02:43:03.014Z

The Sheer Lawlessness

Some deeper dives on the laws of armed conflict, military attacks on civilians, and governing U.S. laws:

  • Former Navy JAG Todd Huntley, to the New Yorker: “Basically, this is the one strike that we know about where even if you accept the Administration’s position that the United States is in an armed conflict with these drug cartels, this would still be unlawful under the laws of armed conflict, because the individuals were out of the fight and shipwrecked, and thus owed protection.”
  • Associated Press: “It doesn’t matter whether the U.S. is in ‘armed conflict’ with drug cartels as the Trump administration asserts. Such a fatal second strike would have violated peacetime laws and those governing armed conflict, the experts say.”
  • Jack Goldsmith, Harvard law professor and former Office of Legal Counsel head: “[S]urely the warrior ethos, whatever else it means, doesn’t require killing helpless men clinging to the burning wreckage of a blown-up boat.”
  • Mark Nevitt at Just Security: “The United States, which has military forces deployed around the globe, cannot build a safer world for its own service members by discarding basic laws of war. History shows that when America blatantly abandons humane norms and the law of war, it ultimately endangers its own people.”

Leave Franklin Out of It

Responding to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s grotesque use of a children’s book character to celebrate the lawless U.S. high seas attacks, the Canadian publisher of the Franklin the Turtle series issued this statement:

Noem Touts New Travel Ban

The Trump administration continues to react to the D.C. shooting of two national guardsmen by an Afghan refugee with a clampdown on avenues of immigration and dehumanizing language toward people of color.

Now, in response to what she calls “foreign invaders,” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem is proposing a new “full travel ban on every damn country that’s been flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies.” Not at all dehumanizing:

Appeals Court: Habba Not Properly Appointed as USA

A unanimous three-judge panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that former Trump attorney Alina Habba was not validly appointed as U.S. attorney for New Jersey:

The Retribution: James Comey Edition

The Trump DOJ could present a new indictment of James Comey to a grand jury as soon as this week, CNN reports:

People familiar with the situation inside the Justice Department believe whatever comes next may happen quickly, and that no matter what, prosecutors will likely present new indictments against the former FBI director and New York Attorney General Letitia James to grand juries in the Eastern District of Virginia.

A re-indictment of James has been expected, but the statute of limitations expired on the Comey charges, making it difficult for prosecutors to continue to pursue him unless they can persuade a court of some exception or workaround to the statute of limitations problem.

Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan remains in place despite a judge’s ruling last week that she was invalidly appointed, which led to the dismissals of the original Comey and James indictments.

In related news that could make re-prosecuting Comey even more difficult, Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman has filed suit against the government for the return of materials seized from him during the Arctic Haze investigation that now form the basis of the charges against Comey. In the Richman lawsuit, first reported by Anna Bower, he is seeking:

The Retribution: Fani Willis Edition

Buried in a NYT story on the end of the fake electors case in Georgia are two data points on what the Trump DOJ is up to in the state:

  • Its investigation of Atlanta District Attorney Fani Willis, who first launched the fake electors prosecution, has issued “several dozen subpoenas,” and the FBI has begun interviewing witnesses. What was previously reported by the NYT as an investigation into a trip Willis took to the Bahamas is now a “wider inquiry” led by Theodore Hertzberg, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia.
  • Its also continuing to re-litigate Trump’s 2020 loss by “trying to obtain tens of thousands of ballots that were cast in Georgia” in that election.

A Self-Own of Historic Proportions

NYT: The U.S. Is Funding Fewer Grants in Every Area of Science and Medicine

Letter of the Day

A letter to the editor from surgical oncologist Michael Baum, on how Arcadia by Tom Stoppard, who died last week at 88, inspired a valuable new hypothesis on the metastasis of breast cancer:

h/t my former TPM colleague Kate Klonick

Hot tips? Juicy scuttlebutt? Keen insights? Let me know. For sensitive information, use the encrypted methods here.

State Lawmakers Aren’t Waiting for Congress to Get Its Act Together

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis.

As we return from the Thanksgiving holiday, we know some of our neighbors are hungry. Some are detained. And millions more are anxious about what will happen next month, when the federal government once again teeters on the brink of shutdown.

The recent federal crisis didn’t just expose GOP cruelty. It revealed a party in total control of Washington so committed to dismantling basic government that it was willing to let millions go hungry and lose healthcare to force through a budget that enriches the wealthy. Democrats in Congress faced a lose-lose choice: reopen the government so people could eat, or hold out for healthcare protections that Republican leaders have shown little interest in negotiating. SNAP is restored, for now. But there is no guarantee that Affordable Care Act subsidies will return, and no plan to prevent the next likely GOP-manufactured shutdown in January.

While dysfunction reigns in DC, real governing is happening in the states. Congress may have ground to a halt, but we kept working. As some Republican leaders congratulated themselves for finally turning the lights back on, state lawmakers like us had been scrambling in the dark. We worked late into the night to keep food benefits flowing and childcare centers open. Governors and legislators negotiated emergency funding transfers, tapped rainy-day accounts, called loudly on uncooperative state leaders to use budget surpluses to feed families, and fielded frantic calls from constituents afraid their lifelines would vanish.

Continue reading “State Lawmakers Aren’t Waiting for Congress to Get Its Act Together”

Bernie Sanders Definitely Doesn’t Think Trump Is the ‘Affordability President’

Brutal Fact Check

President Donald Trump recently touted himself as the “AFFORDABILITY PRESIDENT” and suggested this branding would help his fellow Republicans win in next year’s midterm elections. His comments clearly seem borrowed from the playbook of New York City Mayor-Elect Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist whose upstart campaign was laser focused on addressing the affordability crisis in the Big Apple. 

Continue reading “Bernie Sanders Definitely Doesn’t Think Trump Is the ‘Affordability President’”

‘The Order Was to Kill Everybody’: A Savage Incident at Sea

The Implications Are Vast and Serious

The explosive holiday story from the WaPo — that on orders from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the U.S. military deliberately killed survivors of one of the Trump administration’s lawless high seas attacks on alleged drug smugglers — may have finally stirred Republicans in Congress to at least pantomime as Article I legislators.

From a legal standpoint, it’s important to reiterate the baseline: There is no basis in law for the maritime attacks. Period. Full stop.

The Trump administration has come up with a pretextual justification for the campaign of attacks that remains mostly secret, but what has been reported shows it to be weak, unconvincing, ahistorical, and self-justifying.

While the scene depicted in the WaPo report is grim and disturbing, the primary legal significance of the Sept. 2 incident is that it would be a violation of the laws of war even under the administration’s own self-justifying description of its campaign as an armed conflict with “narcoterrorists.”

Hegseth’s reported order “to kill everybody” was issued before the SEAL Team 6 attack, and the survivors were killed when a Special Operations commander ordered a second strike on the disabled vessel, according to the WaPo report.

In a remarkable rhetorical retreat — at least for now — President Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One last evening that he would not have wanted the second strike: “I wouldn’t have wanted that. Not a second strike. The first strike was very lethal. It was fine.”

Trump also said he had “great confidence” Hegseth did not give a spoken order to kill all crew members aboard the vessel, saying that Hegseth told him “he did not say that, and I believe him, 100%.”

In short, the president and defense secretary are denying that they’re responsible for the kill order as described by the WaPo. Assuming the WaPo story to be accurate, the implication of their position is that service members on the ground exceeded their orders or otherwise failed to follow the rules of engagement. The fact that that’s the best the White House and Pentagon can come up with at this stage of the unfolding scandal is a good indicator of how bad the actual facts are.

In a significant move that it is wildly out of character so far this term, key Hill Republicans gave public, on-the-record voice to their concerns about the WaPo story. “Obviously if that occurred, that would be very serious, and I agree that would be an illegal act,” former House Intelligence Committee chair Mike Turner (R-OH) told CBS News.

The armed services committees in both chambers launched bipartisan investigations into the reported attack.

When we adjourned for the Thanksgiving holiday, the Trump White House and the Pentagon were leading a retaliatory campaign against Hill Democrats — accusing them of treason and raising the prospect of executing them — for posting a video urging service members to do their duty and abide by the law by refusing to follow illegal orders. By the time we returned from the holiday, the script had completely flipped, and Hill Republicans were struggling to defend the administration’s lawless conduct in the strikes.

In Other Venezuela News …

  • In most cases, the Trump administration does not know the identities of the more than 80 people killed in its high sea strikes on allege drug-smuggling boats, the NYT reports.
  • In a social media post Saturday, President Trump unilaterally declared that Venezuelan airspace should be considered closed: “To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.”
  • President Trump spoke by phone with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro the week before last.

Boasberg Wants Noem on the Record

In the contempt of court inquiry in the original Alien Enemies Act case, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg set a Dec. 5 deadline for the Trump administration to submit declarations “from all individuals involved in the decision not to halt the transfer of class members out of U.S. physical custody on March 15 and 16, 2025.”

In ordering the declarations, Boasberg highlighted the administration’s filing earlier in the week claiming to identify the most senior official involved in defying Boasberg’s order to halt the AEA deportations of Venezuelan nationals: “The Government, now for the first time, has identified who purportedly made the decision not to recall planes containing Alien Enemies Act detainees on March 15, 2025: Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.”

Note Boasberg’s use of “purportedly.”

As Morning Memo observed last week: “The AEA deportations were one of the White House’s first major moves in its mass deportation scheme, the signature initiative of President Trump’s second term. But we’re supposed to believe that the buck stopped with … Kristi Noem.”

Must Read

Sarah Stillman investigates the Trump administration’s brutal third country removals:

One Saturday morning in early September, I got a WhatsApp video call from eleven strangers locked inside a secretive detention camp in a forest in Ghana. Their faces looked glazed with sweat and stricken with fear. In the background, I could hear birdsong and the drone of insects. An armed guard watched over the group as they huddled around a shared cellphone.

Trump Lashes Out After Guardsmen Shot

President Trump reacted to the brutal shooting death in D.C. of one member of the West Virginia National Guard and the wounding of another by an Afghan refugee with a predictable scorched earth attack on migrants of color:

  • Trump vowed to halt migration from “third world countries.”
  • The Trump administration paused all asylum applications and stopped issuing visas to people from Afghanistan.
  • Trump targeted the Somali immigrant community in Minnesota for an especially virulent social media post.

For the Record …

Fani Willis’ self-appointed replacement as prosecutor of the sprawling Georgia RICO case against Donald Trump and others for their role in trying to subvert the state’s 2020 election dropped the case, and the judge dismissed it.

Tina Peters to Remain in Colorado Custody

Under pressure from the Trump administration, Colorado has declined to transfer convicted former Mesa County clerk Tina Peters to federal custody. Peters has become a darling of U.S. pardon attorney Ed Martin and the MAGA right after her conviction for tampering with voting machines to try to prove the 2020 Big Lie.

11th Circuit Upholds Sanctions Against Trump

A unanimous three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a $1 million sanction against President Trump and attorney Alina Habba for filing a frivolous lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and former FBI Director James Comey.

The Scale of Trump’s Retribution

  • In the most comprehensive accounting yet of Trump’s campaign of payback, Reuters finds: “At least 470 people, organizations and institutions have been targeted for retribution since Trump took office – an average of more than one a day. Some were singled out for punishment; others swept up in broader purges of perceived enemies.”
  • In conscripting the Pentagon for use in Trump’s retribution campaign, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has crossed a dangerous line that could lead to the politicization of the military. “The best way to stop a politicization death spiral is to never start it,” Peter Feaver, who studies civil-military relations at Duke University, told the WaPo.

The Corruption: Pardon Edition

  • President Trump said he plans to pardon former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who is serving a 45-year sentence after he was convicted last year of helping drug cartels ship hundreds of tons of cocaine into the United States in exchange for millions of dollars in bribes.
  • President Trump commuted the sentence of private equity executive David Gentile, who had served just two weeks of a seven-year sentence for his role in a $1.6 billion fraud scheme.

The Destruction: Higher Ed Edition

In another major capitulation, Northwestern University reached a $75 million deal with the Trump administrations to restore frozen federal research funding.

Quote of the Day, Part I

New Yorker writer Dhruv Khullar, a physician:

A reason that the U.S. became the world’s biomedical leader—indeed, a reason that it emerged from the Cold War victorious—is that democratic governance allows for a level of self-correction that authoritarianism does not. Bad ideas can be beaten back at the ballot box, in the public square, and through the halls of Congress. The country is under no obligation to tolerate institutionalized quackery or elected officials who, through feckless appeals and half measures, have become complicit in it. Truly making America healthy will involve more than removing an asterisk. It will require turning the page.

Quote of the Day, Part II

Paul Offit, a pediatrician and the director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, on how to restore civic trust in science: “I don’t think there is any way to regain that trust other than have the viruses do the education, and the bacteria do the education, and then people will realize they paid way too high a cost.”

Hot tips? Juicy scuttlebutt? Keen insights? Let me know. For sensitive information, use the encrypted methods here.

Texas’ New Abortion Ban Aims to Stop Doctors From Sending Abortion Pills to the State

This story was originally reported by Shefali Luthra of The 19th. Meet Shefali and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

Texas’ massive new abortion law taking effect this week could escalate the national fight over mailing abortion pills.

House Bill 7 represents abortion opponents’ most ambitious effort to halt telehealth abortions, which have helped patients get around strict bans in Texas and other states after Roe v. Wade was overturned. The law, which goes into effect December 4, creates civil penalties for health care providers who make abortion medications available in Texas, allowing any private citizen to sue medical providers for a minimum penalty of $100,000. The bill’s backers have said it would also allow suits against drug manufacturers. It would not enable suits against the people who get abortions.

Continue reading “Texas’ New Abortion Ban Aims to Stop Doctors From Sending Abortion Pills to the State”

Trump’s Immigration Forces Are Recklessly Deploying ‘Less Lethal’ Weapons. Protesters Are Getting Maimed.

This story is part of a collaboration between FRONTLINE and ProPublica that includes an upcoming documentary.

As the Trump administration’s immigration dragnet intensified in June, a nurse in Portland, Oregon, left work one midafternoon and drove to a nearby detention facility to voice his opposition. Federal agents had set off smoke grenades, driving away many protesters at the front of the facility, but Vincent Hawkins lifted his megaphone anyway.

“You should stop and think about what you’re doing!”

The shot came seconds later, a silver projectile launched through the small facility’s closed gate, hitting him in the face. The tear gas canister shattered his glasses, ripped apart his brow, crushed against his eye and concussed him. In video footage, the projectile can be seen bouncing off his face and arcing back toward the unknown Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who fired it.

Continue reading “Trump’s Immigration Forces Are Recklessly Deploying ‘Less Lethal’ Weapons. Protesters Are Getting Maimed.”