On December 3, 2025, the political temperature in Washington soared as U.S. Senator Eric Schmitt, a Republican from Missouri, delivered a scathing rebuke against Congressional Democrats—and, in his words, even some complicit Republicans—for what he described as a coordinated campaign to smear Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. The controversy centers on Hegseth’s authorization of lethal airstrikes against narco-terrorist drug boats in the Caribbean, actions that have drawn both fierce criticism and robust defense across the political spectrum.
Schmitt, a former Missouri attorney general with a reputation for unvarnished commentary, took to X (formerly Twitter) early Tuesday morning to lay out his grievances. “And for their next act? — They want him tried for war crimes,” Schmitt wrote. “Yep — war crimes. They intend to prosecute another political opponent. They have lost it. Congressional Democrats are fueled by a radicalized Leftist base and are hellbent on power. The rules don’t matter to them. At all.” According to Newsmax, Schmitt’s post quickly garnered support from Vice President JD Vance, who replied, “Well said,” just ahead of a lengthy Cabinet meeting where Hegseth himself would address the accusations head-on.
At the heart of the dispute are allegations that Hegseth ordered so-called “second-tap” strikes—military parlance for a follow-up attack—on drug boats after survivors had already surrendered. Critics, including some military law experts and media figures, have suggested such actions could constitute war crimes. Judge Andrew Napolitano, speaking on Newsmax, was among those raising concerns about the legality of targeting apparent survivors.
Hegseth, however, has consistently pushed back. During the 2.5-hour Cabinet meeting, he characterized the reports as a “fog of war” issue, insisting that the strikes were both authorized and legal, with the explicit mission to neutralize narco-terrorist threats. “The reports of survivors are being used as a weapon against the authorized, legal, lethal strikes ordered to put narco-terrorists at the bottom of the ocean,” Hegseth maintained, according to Newsmax. Military law experts have also weighed in, noting that the doctrine of “proportionate destruction of property that is relevant to the mission” and standing orders to ensure threats are eliminated provide legal cover for such actions under the law of war.
Schmitt’s defense of Hegseth and the Trump administration’s broader anti-narco-terrorism campaign has been unwavering. In an interview on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle, Schmitt offered a more detailed rationale. “There’s always going to be oversight [by Congress]. But let’s be clear: President Trump was acting within his core Article II [Constitutional] powers. [Secretary] Pete Hegseth is doing a good job. These narco-terrorists are poisoning 100,000 Americans every year. There was nothing wrong here. The [Trump administration] is clearly justified in the action,” he said. Schmitt further argued that the controversy was less about genuine oversight and more about partisan animus. “What’s really happening here, though, is the Democrats never wanted Pete Hegseth [to be Secretary] in the first place. President Trump won. He got his cabinet in. They’ve been trying to undermine him ever since. It’s some bogus story, after bogus story, and here we are now.”
Schmitt didn’t stop there. He accused Democrats of encouraging servicemembers to break the chain of command, calling such rhetoric “the language of a color revolution.” In his words, “Effectively, not just some online troll, but a sitting United States Senator, basically said to service men and women, ‘you could be prosecuted too’. This is not the language of political debate. This is not like ‘we’ll win the next election’. The rules? They don’t think apply to them at all. So, Pete Hegseth is totally in the clear here. It’s obvious President Trump is within his core Article II powers. The Democrats are the ones right now that are fomenting this, and it’s just fake outrage. It’s another B.S. line, because they don’t like Pete Hegseth.”
Schmitt also expressed confidence that no formal investigation into Hegseth’s actions would materialize, dismissing the prospect as a “fantasy from the Democrats and their legacy media allies.” He added, “We have oversight. But nobody is, I don’t think, saying right now that what Pete Hegseth did was wrong. The media is peddling this lie. The Democrats want to convince the American people this is a new scandal. It’s ridiculous, so I don’t think this is going to go any further. I’m pretty confident in that. But we’ll see what happens. Republicans need to understand what time it is. The Democrats are hell bent on power. We shouldn’t bend the knee to this at all.”
On the other side, Democrats have argued that robust oversight of military action is essential, especially when civilian casualties or violations of the laws of war are alleged. Some have pointed to the need for transparency and accountability, insisting that no official should be above the law—regardless of political affiliation. While few have outright called for prosecution, the calls for inquiry and debate have been loud enough to spark significant backlash from the right.
Schmitt’s high-profile defense of Hegseth comes amid a period of heightened partisanship, with both sides accusing each other of weaponizing legal and governmental processes for political gain. Schmitt himself has not shied away from such rhetoric, stating, “Congressional Democrats are fueled by a radicalized Leftist base and are hellbent on power. The rules don’t matter to them. At all.” He has also cautioned fellow Republicans against yielding to what he calls “bogus story after bogus story,” urging, “TO MY FELLOW REPUBLICANS: Understand this reality and never bend the knee to this [expletive deleted]. Fight back. The liberal media will never love you.”
Beyond the controversy, Schmitt’s own political fortunes appear robust. According to Quiver Quantitative, his Q3 fundraising disclosure showed $494,700 raised—93.9% from individual donors—and $1.1 million in cash on hand as of October 15, 2025. His net worth is estimated at $1 million, with significant investments in publicly traded assets. Schmitt has also been active on the legislative front, recently proposing several bills, including the DETECT Nitazenes Act of 2025 and the Gateway Partnership Act, signaling his continued engagement on both security and domestic policy issues.
As the debate simmers, the fate of Secretary Hegseth—and the broader approach to combating narco-terrorism—remains a flashpoint in Washington. For now, Schmitt and his allies are standing their ground, casting the controversy as yet another chapter in a long-running political battle over the limits of executive power, the role of oversight, and the boundaries of partisan warfare.
It’s clear that, in today’s political climate, the lines between oversight and opposition, legality and politics, are as blurred as ever—leaving Americans to sift through the fog of war, both literal and rhetorical, in search of answers.
