House Democrats accuse Trump administration of blaming an admiral

Leading House Democrats have criticized the Trump administration for allegedly using a Navy admiral as a scapegoat to avoid accountability for actions that could constitute war crimes. Lawmakers claim the administration is attempting to place sole responsibility on Adm. Frank Bradley for a so-called double-tap strike against suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean, framing it as part of a recurring pattern where top officials pursue legally questionable strategies and then deflect blame when controversies arise.

This administration has a history of endorsing reckless or illegal actions and then shifting responsibility onto others, said Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.). That appears to be precisely what is occurring in this case.

The White House confirmed that, as part of Trumps campaign against Latin American drug operations, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had authorized a September 2 strike on a suspected drug vessel in the Caribbean. When two survivors were observed clinging to the damaged boat, Adm. Bradley, directing the operation from Fort Bragg, N.C., ordered a second strike, resulting in their deaths. These details were initially reported by The Washington Post.

The incident has raised serious concerns in Congress, with Democrats and some Republicans questioning the legality of targeting incapacitated adversaries. Critics argue the operation violated the Defense Departments own rules of engagement, which explicitly label orders to attack shipwrecked individuals as illegal.

I served in active duty as a JAG for four years, and another 21 years in the reserves. Let me be clear: killing shipwrecked survivors constitutes a war crime, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) said.

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) highlighted a practical concern: Americans do not want U.S. troops exposed to similar dangers. This is not only a breach of military law and wartime conduct, but also violates principles that protect our own forces. If U.S. personnel were stranded in the water, we would expect them to be taken as prisoners, not killed, he said.

Defense Secretary Hegseth, after initially dismissing the reporting as fabricated, later defended the operation, noting he observed the first strike but was not present for the second. He supported Bradleys decision and pledged to shield him from any repercussions. Adm. Bradley acted appropriately in neutralizing the threat, Hegseth said.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed this defense, asserting that drug traffickers represent a national security threat and that Bradley was following Hegseths original directive. Adm. Bradley operated within his authority to neutralize the threat and destroy the vessel, she stated.

Despite this, Democrats maintain that Hegseths directive forced Bradley into an impossible situation: either break the law or disobey a direct order. This episode highlights the risks posed to service members by an administration willing to pursue reckless and unlawful actions, Crow said. Crow, alongside five other Democrats with military backgrounds, recently released a video advising Pentagon personnel to follow the law even when orders come from above, prompting backlash from Republicans and Trump himself.

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.), a former Air Force officer, emphasized that Bradley bears responsibility for carrying out the second strike but criticized Hegseth for deflecting accountability. Its clear the responsibility lies with Hegseth and the president, yet the blame is being shifted down the chain, she said. Houlahan expressed hope the situation could influence the appointment of a new Defense Secretary.

Author: Sophia Brooks