‘Firing on survivours…’: Journo cites Navy's Law of war manual pressing Leavitt on drug boat Strikes

Key Concepts

• Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC): The body of international law that governs the conduct of armed hostilities.
• Self-Defense: The right of a state to use force to protect itself from an armed attack.
• Kinetic Strikes: Military actions involving the use of physical force, such as missiles or bombs.
• Narot Terrorist Groups: Groups designated by the administration as engaging in drug trafficking and terrorism.
• Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs): A designation by the U.S. Department of State of organizations that engage in terrorist activities.
• Law of War Manual: A U.S. Navy publication outlining the principles and rules of armed conflict.
• Commutation of Sentence: The reduction of a criminal sentence by the president.
• Weaponization of Justice: The alleged misuse of the justice system for political purposes.
• Ponzi Scheme: A fraudulent investment operation where investors are promised high rates of return with little risk.

September 2nd Strike and Law of Armed Conflict

The discussion centers on a strike conducted on September 2nd, which the administration asserts was lawful and conducted in self-defense. The strike occurred in international waters and was authorized by Secretary Hagerty, who delegated the authority to Admiral Bradley. Admiral Bradley acted within his authority to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States was eliminated.

Key Points:

• Justification for the Strike: The strike was conducted in self-defense to protect Americans and vital U.S. interests.
• Authorization: Secretary Hagerty authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct the kinetic strikes.
• Objective: Admiral Bradley's directive was to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat eliminated.
• Legal Basis: The administration maintains the strike was in full accordance with the law of armed conflict.
• Narot Terrorist Designation: The administration emphasizes that these groups are designated as foreign terrorist organizations, giving the president the authority to target them if they threaten the U.S. and traffic illegal narcotics.
• Fentanyl Threat: The administration highlights the significant threat posed by fentanyl trafficking, stating that under the previous administration, enough fentanyl was trafficked to kill every American multiple times over. This is presented as a reason for the current administration's different policy.

Controversy and Clarification:

• Survivors: A significant point of contention is the fate of potential survivors. The Navy's own Law of War Manual is cited as stating that firing on survivors from a wrecked vessel is a war crime.
• Denial of Second Strike: Initially, there was confusion regarding whether a second strike occurred. Secretary Hagerty's social media post stated that U.S. operations were lawful and media reports were fabricated.
• Administration's Position: The administration clarifies that the second strike did happen, but they deny that Secretary Hagerty gave an order for "everyone be killed." Instead, they assert that Admiral Bradley ordered the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat eliminated.
• Imminent Threat of Survivors: When questioned about the imminent threat posed by survivors clinging to wreckage, the administration reiterates that Admiral Bradley's directive was to eliminate the threat entirely.
• Policy on Survivors: The administration states there has been no change in policy regarding the handling of survivors, despite reports of two individuals being rescued in October after the September 2nd strike.

Supporting Evidence/Statements:

• "President Trump and Secretary Hagerty have made it clear that presidentially designated narot terrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war."
• "Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated."
• "The strike was conducted in international waters and in accordance with the law of armed conflict."

Presidential Pardon Power and David Gentile Case

The discussion shifts to presidential pardon power, specifically concerning the commutation of the sentence for David Gentile.

Key Points:

• Gentile's Case: David Gentile, former CEO and co-founder of GBP Capital Holdings, had his sentence commuted. He served 12 days out of a seven-year sentence.
• Prosecution's Claim: Prosecutors alleged Gentile defrauded investors of $1.6 billion, including veterans, farmers, and teachers.
• Administration's Justification for Commutation:
  • GBP Capital Holdings paid regular annualized distributions to investors.
  • In 2015, GBP disclosed to investors the possibility of using investor capital to pay distributions rather than funding them from current operations.
  • The Biden Department of Justice claimed it was a Ponzi scheme, but the administration argues this was "profoundly undercut" by the explicit disclosure to investors.
  • At trial, the government was allegedly unable to tie any fraudulent representations to Mr. Gentile.
• "Weaponization of Justice" Argument: The commutation is presented as another example of the "weaponization of justice from the previous administration."

Supporting Evidence/Statements:

• "Unlike similar companies, GBP paid regular annualized distributions to its investors."
• "Even though this was disclosed to investors, the Biden Department of Justice claimed it was a Ponzi scheme. This claim was profoundly undercut by the fact that GBP had explicitly told investors what would happen."
• "In short, again, this is another example that has been brought to the president's attention of a weaponization of justice from the previous administration, and therefore, he signed this commutation."

Briefings on Venezuelan Strikes

The administration has engaged with Congress regarding the Venezuelan strikes.

Key Points:

• Congressional Engagement: Secretary Hagerty spoke with members of Congress who expressed concerns.
• Bipartisan Briefings: 13 bipartisan briefings have been held on the Venezuelan strikes.
• Document Review: Members of Congress have been provided with classified DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinions and other related documents.
• Participation: 29 senators and 92 representatives have reviewed these documents, with approximately two-thirds being Democrats. Documents have been made available to all senators, all members of the House, and general counsels of relevant committees.

Conversation with Venezuelan Leader

The president confirmed speaking with the Venezuelan leader.

Key Points:

• President's Statement: The president stated, "I don't want to comment on that, but I did speak to him in the effort of transparency."
• Purpose of Conversation: The administration does not elaborate on the specifics of the conversation, but it is presented as being in the interest of transparency.

Synthesis/Conclusion

The transcript reveals a defense of the administration's actions regarding a September 2nd strike against a suspected drug-trafficking vessel. The administration asserts the strike was lawful, conducted in self-defense in international waters, and authorized under the law of armed conflict. Key to their argument is the designation of these groups as narot terrorists, posing a significant threat to the U.S. through drug trafficking. While acknowledging the Navy's Law of War Manual's prohibition on firing on survivors, the administration maintains that Admiral Bradley acted within his authority to eliminate the threat posed by the vessel. The discussion also touches upon the president's use of commutation power, exemplified by the David Gentile case, which the administration frames as correcting perceived injustices from the previous administration. Finally, the administration highlights its efforts to brief Congress on the Venezuelan strikes and confirms a conversation between the president and the Venezuelan leader.