Just to spell it out, the implication here is that someone in SOUTHCOM - presumably Holsey - countermanded Hegseth's unlawful orders to kill survivors and was fired for it.

He did not. He said that this was fake news. And then specifically DID NOT deny the allegations. Go back and read his statement. The White House said the 'narrative' was wrong, but didn't deny the facts either.

This is almost 100% because of his tarriff policy. He deserves this.

Note two things about GOP Rep. Mike Turner's solid remarks on Hegseth's reported order: 1) Turner: "I agree that that would be an illegal act." 2) Implicitly confirms the Washington Post's reporting that this information has been kept from Congress

“It was a Biden setup!” Meanwhile, in the first Trump administration:

The kids might be alright after all. Billy Strings covers Dylan. youtu.be/LR-T2qTLF6o?si…

Really cool that the head of the US Agency for Global Media is now completely indistinguishable from the head of Russia Today.

What's a narco-terrorist? And who adjudicates whether the label fits a particular person? For a lawyer, this senator's takes are relentlessly lawless.

We already have a no-fly zone over Venezuela enforced by U.S. military power and Trump sent a letter to Congress saying we’re in an armed conflict with (unnamed) cartels. I think we’re pretty much one foot already into the war if not fully.

Does anyone seriously think that online entertainment today lacks competition, dynamism and diversity?

This insanely corrupt administration is going to use antitrust law as a pretext to generate a sweetheart deal for the president’s cronies the Ellisons, depressing scandalous stuff.

As was also true during Putin’s rise to dictatorship, everything people say Trump does "despite" this or that law or norm makes sense when you change it to "because". Sacks and the rest are there *because* of their corruption and connections with Russia and China.

Now Hassett had been fully vetted to be Fed Chair: He found the missing $2 Trump gasoline.

We need to amend the Constitution to remove or sharply curtail the president’s pardon power. The best time to have done it would be a quarter century ago. The second best time would be now. But it almost certainly won’t happen under Trump. So when I say this again under the next

This year, accurate The Washington Post scoops include, but are not limited to: 1) Detailed military planning to send troops to Chicago and other cities 2) Planning to create what are now called national defense areas at the border 3) The arrangement of the high-profile Quantico

“Funding Ukraine’s war effort over four years will cost European governments between $606 and $972 billion, but it would cost them almost double, between $1.4 and $1.8 trillion, to reinforce its eastern flank if Moscow gets its way.”

And what do you know.  You wonder why the entire economy and power grid are being bet on hypothesis creep?  Similar issue with regard to crypto: * Mr. Sacks has offered astonishing White House access to his tech industry compatriots and pushed to eliminate government obstacles

I haven’t heard a definition of “narco-terrorist” yet that doesn’t describe Jack Daniels. But then again, all of the people using the term heard it for the first time three weeks ago and are pretending it’s an issue they care deeply enough about to discard all law and morality.

I don’t speak for any party, but what I can say is that demanding that the United States adhere to the rule of law, which includes following the pretty ancient rule of the sea not to kill shipwrecked people in cold blood, is not “defending narco-terrorists.”

I see people tweeting "C'mon, all we've got here are some anonymous sources." No, you've also got Hegseth doing a classic shout-real-loud-while-tiptoeing-around-the-key-allegation routine. That should shift your priors. x.com/SecWar/status/…