Tag: DOD

Our First Amendment Freedom of Speech

President Trump seems to disregard our constitution generally but his attack on its guarantee of our freedom of speech is particularly dangerous. Its importance to our freedoms and democratic governance is so well-known and obvious that I will not bother to defend it. Trump has increasingly utilized his executive power and the administrative apparatus to target, penalize, or attempt to silence his critics, political opponents, and media organizations.

Through executive orders, directives, and appointees, the administration has ordered investigations into political adversaries and former officials who publicly criticized him. This includes directive-backed investigations targeting former government security officials like Chris Krebs (who contradicted election fraud claims) and first-term Trump official Miles Taylor.

Trump has repeatedly stripped high-ranking former officials and critics—such as former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey—of their security clearances, access to classified briefings, or government protection details after they issued public criticism. The Department of Justice is pursuing criminal prosecutions against former FBI Director James Comey on trumped up (no pun intended, maybe) charges.

Executive actions have targeted non-profit think tanks, advocacy groups, and legal firms that represented positions adverse to the administration or published critical reports, including threats to target their tax-exempt statuses or initiate government reviews.

In an excellent and damning critique of Trump’s use of executive power to silence his critics Walter Olsen reported that “Donald Trump says he’s going to sue a private think tank over a report criticizing his policies. The report, from the left-leaning Center for American Progress, enraged him by arguing that his decision to deploy the National Guard in Washington, D.C. doesn’t really deserve credit for the city’s drop in violent crime rates since then because rates had been falling steeply before he acted.”  https://www.facebook.com/share/p/191KXwjiEJ/

Executive agencies have been leveraged to exert pressure on disfavored press. Measures have included revoking White House press credentials for journalists and news outlets covering the administration critically, threatening the regulatory status or FCC licenses of major broadcast networks, and directing federal agencies to limit media access.

Secretary of Defense Hegseth (after some thought and a glass of wine I have decided not to use any of the adjectives that I think apply to him) has largely shut down a free press in his department.  When he issued directives requiring journalists to obtain official approval before publishing military information—even unclassified details—and prohibiting unapproved gathering of information, most journalists walked out and took legal action. Dozens of major news outlets across the political spectrum—including The New York Times, Associated Press, Reuters, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, and Fox News—refused to sign the pledge. Media organizations issued joint statements condemning the directive as an unconstitutional attempt at prior restraint and an assault on First Amendment press freedoms.

Media organizations challenged the policy in court (New York Times v. Department of Defense). In March 2026, a federal district judge ruled that the DOD rules amounted to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and censorship, ordering the restoration of press credentials for journalists who refused to sign.

More recently “the longtime publisher of Stars and Stripes announced he’s stepping down weeks after the Pentagon installed an active-duty Navy captain at the military newspaper, an atypical appointment that staffers, board members and Democratic lawmakers say risks further eroding the publication’s independence from the government.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2026/08/20/democrats-sound-alarm-about-new-leader-uniform-stars-stripes/

Step by step the direction Trump is taking the country remains clear.

Sec Hegseth

Several residents in my condo work in the Pentagon or are in the Navy. They have complained to me that Sec Hegseth has fired some of the most outstanding Generals in our military. I asked Walter Slocombe, who was the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy during the Clinton Administration, what he thought about that. Here is his reply.

“Re firings.  The military like other huge complex organizations is shaped by its top leadership and civilian control includes choosing top level promotions.  And it’s legitimate for the Secretary of Defense to pick officers partly on the basis of whether he believes candidate shares his policy views.

“That said it is dangerous to make these choices largely on that factor.  The risk is great of incubating political cliques in the associated with parties or individual politicians.  (I had the impression the Bundeswehr had some of this.)

“Moreover its important the top leadership feel free to be candid with the civilians (while being equally committed to execute decisions once made.)  Hegseth goes way over the line in prioritizing loyalty.

“In addition he apparently believes virtually any woman or minority in a senior job is a “DEI hire.”  That means the senior officers will be even more heavily white than is now the case.  It seems clear that Hegseth systematically rejects recommendation for promotions of non-white males.

“Principles aside going in that direction that ignores the very real facts about the demography of the military–30% of enlisted are Black and 18% are Hispanic.  But only 25% of officers are black or Hispanic.  And only 11% of generals and admirals are minorities or Hispanic.  That disparity inevitably affects perspectives in the force.  It’s not that officers % must exactly match enlisted but that explicit discrimination is very bad for morale.”