Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is facing a storm of criticism and mounting investigations after a series of controversies have shaken the Pentagon and the broader national security community. Over the past months, Hegseth has been at the center of multiple scandals, from the mishandling of classified information to the fallout over a deadly military strike and accusations of hypocrisy in the face of political dissent. The situation has drawn in not just military leaders, but also lawmakers and even President Donald Trump, escalating tensions at the highest levels of government.
The most recent flashpoint began in late November 2025 when six Democratic lawmakers, including Senators Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, posted a video reminding members of the U.S. military that they have a legal obligation to refuse unlawful orders. Their message was clear: “We want to speak directly to members of the Military and the Intelligence Community. The American people need you to stand up for our laws and our Constitution.” According to reporting from Time and The Atlantic, this move came amid growing concerns about the legality of certain military orders and the conduct of top officials.
The response from the Trump administration was swift and severe. President Trump himself reposted a Truth Social post calling to “HANG THEM,” and he wrote, “This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP???” Defense Secretary Hegseth echoed the president’s outrage, branding the group the “Seditious Six” and launching an investigation into Senator Kelly for potentially breaching military code. The Pentagon even suggested that Kelly, a retired Navy captain, could be recalled to active duty to face a court-martial.
But the controversy soon took an unexpected turn. A video clip from 2016 resurfaced showing Hegseth himself, then a Fox News contributor and military veteran, making statements strikingly similar to those for which he was now attacking the Democrats. “I do think there have to be consequences for abject war crimes,” Hegseth said at a conservative forum. “If you’re doing something that is just completely unlawful and ruthless, then there is a consequence for that. That’s why the military said it won’t follow unlawful orders from their commander-in-chief. There’s a standard, there’s an ethos, there’s a belief that we are above what so many things that our enemies or others would do.”
Senator Mark Kelly, speaking to CNN and sharing the video on social media, pointed out the apparent double standard. “Pete Hegseth says he’s going to court-martial me for saying the same exact thing he said 9 years ago,” Kelly remarked. He added, “What changed for Pete? Well to start, he spends all day thinking about how he can suck up to Trump. When Trump says jump, he says how high.” Other Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, Rep. Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, and Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, echoed Kelly’s criticism, reposting the 2016 clip and questioning Hegseth’s motives and qualifications.
The Pentagon, however, sought to draw a distinction between Hegseth’s past remarks and the Democrats’ recent video. Pentagon spokesperson Kingsley Wilson told CNN, “As Secretary Hegseth said last week and prior to holding office, the military already has clear procedures for handling unlawful orders. The orders being given to our military under President Trump are lawful, and the despicable video of the ‘Seditious Six’ urging our troops to defy their chain-of-command was a politically motivated influence operation by elected officials aimed at sowing distrust and chaos in our Armed Forces.” White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly further condemned the lawmakers, stating, “These lawmakers sowed doubt in a clear chain of command, which is reckless, dangerous, and deeply irresponsible for an elected official.”
This political firestorm unfolded as Hegseth was already under scrutiny for his handling of classified information. For nearly nine months, Trump administration officials had defended Hegseth and other top national-security leaders after it was revealed they shared sensitive details about U.S. strikes in Yemen over a Signal chat—a commercial messaging app not approved for classified communications. The Pentagon’s inspector general recently concluded that Hegseth had indeed violated department policies by sharing information such as the precise times of fighter pilot attacks on an unapproved platform. While the mission itself was not compromised, the inspector general noted that if adversaries had gained access to the chat, it could have put U.S. personnel and national security at risk. Senator Kelly confirmed, “They very clearly stated he should not be using his cellphone and putting this kind of information on an unclassified system.”
Despite the findings, Hegseth declared “total exoneration” and “case closed” in a post on X, failing to address the substance of the report. The White House, meanwhile, maintained that no classified information was leaked and that operational security was not compromised. Yet, many current and former government officials have pointed out that lower-level employees would likely have faced termination or prosecution for similar conduct. The inspector general’s report, scheduled for public release on December 4, 2025, also highlighted broader issues, including the casual handling of classified information among senior officials and the perception of double standards at the highest levels of the Pentagon.
Complicating matters further, Hegseth is under investigation for his role in a September 2025 military strike on an alleged drug boat off the coast of Venezuela. After a first strike, a follow-up attack killed two survivors clinging to the wreckage. Some lawmakers and legal experts have called the second strike illegal, raising the specter of a potential war crime. Hegseth has denied any wrongdoing, saying during a December 2 Cabinet meeting, “I did not personally see survivors” and citing the “fog of war.” The White House has stated that the attack was lawful, but two congressional committees have announced investigations. The controversy has only intensified criticism of Hegseth’s leadership, which has already been marked by allegations of chaotic management, summary firings of senior officers, and a focus on personnel issues at the expense of military operations.
All of this has played out against a backdrop of growing unease among America’s allies, who have expressed reluctance to share sensitive intelligence with the United States given the administration’s handling of classified information. The so-called “Signalgate” scandal, as it has become known, has even become fodder for late-night comedy, with Saturday Night Live lampooning the administration’s blunders. Yet for those within the military and intelligence communities, the stakes are far from humorous.
As the investigations proceed and the political battles intensify, the Pentagon faces a crisis of confidence in its leadership and its ability to maintain the strict standards required for national security. The outcome may reshape not just the careers of those involved, but also the norms governing the highest echelons of the U.S. government.
