‘Very possible’ a war crime was committed: Van Hollen on boat strike report

Key Concepts

• Vetting Processes: Procedures for screening individuals, particularly in the context of immigration and national security, to identify potential threats.
• Radicalization: The process by which an individual or group comes to adopt extremist political or religious ideals.
• Collective Punishment: The punishment of a group of people for the actions of an individual or a subset of the group.
• War Crime: A violation of the laws or customs of war.
• Armed Conflict: A state of hostilities between states or between a state and a non-state actor.
• Abuse of Power: The misuse of authority by a person or organization in order to act wrongly or unfairly.
• Lawful Orders: Directives issued by a superior officer that are consistent with the law and regulations.

Vetting and Accountability for the National Guard Shooting

Senator Chris Van Hollen addresses the shooting incident involving National Guard members, asserting that the Trump administration is attempting to deflect blame rather than accept accountability. He highlights that the Trump administration was the last to vet individuals, and despite assurances of improved vetting processes from Homeland Security and the FBI, the current administration is being blamed. Van Hollen questions the effectiveness of vetting if radicalization occurs within the United States, as suggested by the Secretary. He emphasizes that the individual in question had a history with the CIA, making it difficult to ascertain the exact motivations for the act through vetting alone.

Concerns Regarding Afghan Evacuees

Van Hollen acknowledges the advocacy for bringing Afghan citizens who aided the U.S. during the war on terror to the United States. He states that while vetting procedures should always be reviewed, there is no evidence that anything was missed in this specific case, especially if radicalization occurred domestically. He strongly criticizes the idea of punishing an entire group for the actions of one individual, labeling it as "collective punishment." He points out that these individuals collaborated with the U.S. against the Taliban and face potential execution if returned to Afghanistan. Maryland is noted as a state with a significant population of these Afghan citizens.

Trump's Mindset Towards the Military

Referencing a Washington Post report, Van Hollen recalls General John Kelly's statement that President Trump considered members of the military to be "suckers and losers." Van Hollen perceives this as a reflection of the President's view of the National Guard and military as his "political pawns" with allegiance to him rather than the Constitution.

Allegations of War Crimes and Murder in Venezuela

The discussion shifts to a Washington Post report concerning an attack on an alleged Venezuelan drug boat. Van Hollen suggests that a war crime may have been committed, but this hinges on the Trump administration's assertion of being in "armed conflict" with drug gangs, a claim for which public information has not been presented. He argues that if this theory is incorrect, the initial strike would constitute "plain murder." He believes the legal opinion leans towards this being a "ridiculous legal theory" concocted by the administration. Van Hollen holds that the Secretary of Defense should be held accountable for issuing such orders.

Senator Mark Kelly and Abuse of Power

Van Hollen connects this to the Secretary of Defense's desire to bring Senator Mark Kelly back to active duty for a court-martial for advising military members not to follow illegal orders. Van Hollen asserts that such an action would cause "uproar" in the Senate, deeming it a "blatantly illegal act" and another instance of the President's "abuse of power." He contrasts the six individuals facing potential repercussions with the President's own decision to avoid military service due to a "bone spur." He emphasizes that these individuals are dedicated to their country and were simply citing the law that military personnel must follow lawful orders, a principle he deems increasingly important given the disclosure about the Secretary of Defense's alleged directive to "kill them all."

The "Fight Club" of Democratic Senators

The conversation turns to a New York Times report about a group of Democratic senators, dubbed the "fight club," who are urging leadership, including Chuck Schumer, to confront Donald Trump and his policies more aggressively. The report frames this as a "preemptive challenge" to Schumer ahead of the 2026 midterm races. Van Hollen, named as a member of this group, clarifies that Democrats are more united than divided and are focused on issues like lowering healthcare costs. He acknowledges the desire for Schumer to "fight harder" but stresses that this is a collective effort of the entire caucus. He reiterates the shared goal of opposing a "lawless Trump administration" and reducing costs, while admitting that differences in approach are natural.

Conclusion and Future Focus

Van Hollen dismisses speculation about his potential future role as Senate Democratic leader, stating his current focus is on working with the caucus to achieve their stated objectives. The interview concludes with Senator Van Hollen thanking the host.