Admiral Bradley’s Testimony Delivers Devastating Blow to Dem Narrative of Drug Boat Story
AP Photo/Alex Brandon
Posted For: Rotorblade
Democrats and much of the media have attempted to manufacture controversy around the Trump administration’s counter-narcotics operations, claiming U.S. forces improperly targeted drug boats at sea. The narrative gained traction after a Washington Post report alleged that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth ordered a second strike on a vessel even while survivors were still in the water.
Prior to congressional testimony on the matter, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) made remarks that raised eyebrows, suggesting the military “may help save us from this president and his lame people like Hegseth,” because its loyalty was “to the Constitution and obviously not to Trump.” The comments were made in reference to the anticipated testimony of Adm. Mitch Bradley before Congress, with Warner adding, “I expect Bradley to adhere to that.” The implication was clear: Democrats expected Bradley’s testimony to reinforce their narrative.
That expectation was not met.
When Adm. Bradley testified on Thursday, he directly contradicted the initial reporting. The Washington Post had claimed that Hegseth instructed commanders to “kill them all,” which Bradley allegedly interpreted as an order to kill surviving individuals in the water. Bradley flatly denied this characterization.
“The admiral confirmed that there had not been a ‘kill them all’ order and that there was not an order to grant no quarter,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, acknowledged after a briefing.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, reinforced the point, stating, “Adm. Bradley was very clear that he was given no such order, not to give no quarter or to kill them all.”
That alone dismantled the claim that Hegseth ordered unlawful action. But the testimony went further.
According to officials familiar with the operation, Bradley approved additional strikes after determining that other suspected drug boats were nearby and that individuals in the water appeared to be attempting to communicate by radio with their associates. In other words, those individuals were not disengaged from hostile activity.
Lawmakers were shown video footage of the operation. Sen. Cotton said the strikes were completely justified, noting that the individuals involved continued to participate in coordinated actions even after entering the water.
Despite this, some Democrats exited the briefing claiming they were still “troubled” by what they saw.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) pushed back forcefully on those assertions.
“Those who appear ‘troubled’ by videos of military strikes on designated terrorists have clearly never seen the Obama-ordered strikes, or, for that matter, those of any other administration over recent decades,” Crawford said in a statement.
“I am deeply concerned by the public statements made by others that seek to ignore the realities of targeting terrorists to score political points. I call upon them to remember their own silence as our forces conducted identical strikes for years.”
Crawford’s remarks highlighted the selective outrage at play. Strikes carried out under previous administrations — including operations on land in foreign countries — rarely received the same scrutiny from Democrats. Under President Trump, similar actions are routinely framed as scandals, regardless of the facts.
This time, however, the testimony and evidence did not support the narrative, and Republican lawmakers made clear they would not allow it to stand unchallenged.
About Post Author
