The False Claim That Hegseth Has Been Exonerated

Why Washington Is Celebrating a Victory That Doesn’t Exist: And What They’re Hoping You Don’t Notice Yet

The False Claim That Hegseth Has Been Exonerated

Why Washington Is Celebrating a Victory That Doesn’t Exist: And What They’re Hoping You Don’t Notice Yet

The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #678: Friday, December 5th, 2025.

Let’s Not Get Stupid Here

Washington wants you to believe the scandal is over.

The White House wants you to believe the scandal is over.

Twitter clones…political operatives…and a handful of very confused pundits want you to believe the scandal is over.

They’re running around the country waving today’s talking point like a drunk guy waving jumper cables at a gas fire:

“Bradley said Hegseth didn’t give a ‘kill them all’ order.
Therefore…Hegseth has been exonerated!”

Oh really?

Let me tell you something as plainly as an exceptional therapist I knew would’ve said it:

Just because one part of a story is disputed doesn’t mean the damn story has disappeared.

In fact…and this is the part you’re supposed to miss…things actually got worse for Pete Hegseth today.

Not better.
Not cleaner.
Not safer.

Worse.

You know how a good detective would say, “If they’re trying to rush you past the details, that’s where the bodies are buried”?

Well…Washington is sprinting.

So let’s slow it down…separate the bullshit from the truth…and walk through the pieces they’re hoping fall down the storm drain before anyone notices.

The Magic Trick They’re Trying To Pull

First, understand the sleight of hand:

STEP 1: Take one disputed detail (“kill them all”).

STEP 2: Focus the entire public argument around that one detail.

STEP 3: Deny the detail.

STEP 4: Announce victory.

It’s the oldest political con in the book.

It’s the “Look Ma, no hands!” routine performed by the same clowns who run your local county GOP office like a drunk poker game.

Because here’s the truth:

Even if Hegseth didn’t use the exact phrase “kill them all”…
the operation STILL killed survivors.

That’s the part they’re terrified you’ll remember.

That’s the part Congress is shaken by.

That’s the part lawmakers described as “deeply troubling,” “horrific,” and “one of the worst things I’ve ever seen.”

That’s the part that may violate the laws of war.

That’s the part legal scholars are calling “prima facie evidence of a war crime.”

And the truth?

The phrase isn’t the scandal.
The DEAD PEOPLE are the scandal.

But the political machine knows that if you argue about words…
you might forget about corpses.

THE “NO ORDER” THAT MAKES EVERYTHING LOOK WORSE

Let’s walk this out like adults:

Admiral Frank Bradley testifies:
“No, Hegseth didn’t give me a direct ‘kill them all’ order.”

Everyone breathes a sigh of relief.

Except… that’s not how adult analysis works.

Because if Hegseth didn’t give that order…

Then who the hell made the operational decision to fire on survivors clinging to debris?

Who gave the green light?

Whose judgment was it?

Under what authorization?

Under what legal framework?

Under what rules of engagement?

I will tell you this:

“When an answer creates MORE questions…the problem is bigger than before.”

And we now have more questions than before.

Because now the central legal question shifts from:

“Did Hegseth give an illegal order?”

to:

“Did the United States commit an illegal act under his watch?”

See the difference?
It’s massive.

One is personal.
One is systemic.

One is a scandal.
The other is a catastrophe.

The Very Inconvenient Fact Of The Second Strike

This is the piece that terrifies the administration.

The second strike…the one that hit survivors…forcing them underwater…killing people who were no longer combatants…is now on video.

Lawmakers saw it.

And they came out…looking like they’d aged three presidential administrations…in a single afternoon.

Multiple sources described:

• Survivors clearly visible

• No weapons in hand

• No active threat

• No hostile action

• No justification under the Geneva or Hague conventions

And the deeper truth?

Even if Hegseth didn’t bark the four-word phrase…

The strike still happened.
And it happened under his authority.
And it happened on his watch.
And the world knows it.

Legally?
Morally?
Operationally?

That dog won’t hunt.

Not in Germany.
Not in Japan.
Not in the UK.
Not at The Hague.
Not in the Pentagon’s own rulebooks.

You can’t hide a corpse…behind a missing quotation mark.

Why This Is NOT Exoneration But Escalation

If Washington had any political adults left…they would know this rule:

When the facts look worse WITHOUT the disputed allegation…
you’ve just walked into a trap.

Because now the narrative becomes:

• If Hegseth didn’t order the kill…

• Then someone under him DID…

• And why didn’t he prevent it?

• Why didn’t his ROE structure prevent it?

• Why were survivors treated as legitimate targets?

• Why were international obligations ignored?

• Why was the chain-of-command breakdown so severe that a catastrophic OVERT act of illegality occurred?

This is not exoneration.

This is exposure.

This is the curtain being yanked back and showing the Wizard of Oz is actually three raccoons in a trench coat…juggling lit matches.

The Pentagon’s Problem With Panic

You know what the Pentagon is actually furious about?

Not the phrase.

Not the denial.

Not even the politics.

What they’re furious about is the implication that:

Somebody panicked.

Somebody lost judgment.
Somebody abandoned operational discipline.
Somebody broke the pattern of professional decision-making.
Somebody made a call that military adults would never have made.

And the military knows exactly who was at the top.

When a political appointee creates an environment where illegal decisions occur…

When command pressure is applied that signals “no survivors” even if it’s not explicitly said…

When legal, strategic, and moral guardrails collapse…

The system doesn’t call that exoneration.

The system calls that:

“Unacceptable civilian leadership failure.”

And the Pentagon has no appetite…for being dragged into The Hague because someone upstairs wanted to look tough for cable news.

Why The Public Misunderstands Exoneration

To understand what’s happening, you have to understand how Washington manipulates the word “exonerated.”

In political spin-world:

“Exonerated” means
— “We found a thing we can deny.”

In the real world:

“Exonerated” means
— “We have ruled out wrongdoing entirely.”

Guess which world Washington operates in?

Guess which one the law operates in?

Guess which one foreign governments operate in?

Guess which one human rights courts operate in?

Guess which one history will operate in?

Here’s the Hopkins version:

If your defense is “I didn’t say the illegal order out loud,”
you do NOT get to use the word exonerated.

The Structure Of Collapse

My dear friend, a former FBI man, said:

“When they start redefining the problem, the problem is bigger than they want you to see.”

Let’s apply that here:

Original Problem:

Hegseth gave an illegal explicit order.

New Problem:

The United States carried out an illegal act regardless of explicit wording
…and now no one knows who authorized it
…and the chain of command is contradicting itself
…and the Pentagon is pointing fingers
…and Congress is spooked
…and video evidence exists.

This is not shrinkage.
This is expansion.

This is the moment the scaffolding starts to sway.

Because now it’s not about:

What Hegseth said.

It’s about:

What Hegseth’s leadership caused.
What his culture allowed.
What his oversight failed to prevent.
What his chain of command did anyway.

Congratulations, Washington.

You turned one scandal into a systemic failure investigation.

This was a stupid move…even by their standards.

The Real Reason They Rushed The “EXONERATION” Headline

Let’s talk strategy.

Why would the White House rush out the “exoneration” narrative when Bradley’s testimony very obviously didn’t exonerate anyone?

Here’s why:

Because political operatives know that most Americans won’t read past the headline.

They know most people won’t watch the congressional briefing.

They know most people won’t analyze the second strike.

They know most people won’t understand international law.

They know most people will see:

“No kill-them-all order given”

and assume:

“Oh… that means the whole thing was exaggerated.”

This is not truth.
This is audience management.

This is “move the conversation past the most dangerous framing before the next shoe drops.”

This is political crisis PR101:

Control the first story…and hope the public never sees the second one coming.

But paid subscribers?
People who actually follow the details?
People who understand systems?
People who study pressure dynamics?

You’re impossible to fool.

What’s Coming Next

Here’s the dangerous part:

The real investigations haven’t even started yet.

These are the ones that will matter:

• The JAG review

• The internal DoD after-action assessments

• The intelligence community damage analyses

• The House Armed Services deep dive

• The Senate Intelligence cross-committee analysis

• The international law reviews

Those bodies are NOT going to care about whether Pete Hegseth said a four-word phrase.

They WILL care about:

• Whether survivors were hors de combat

• Whether the ROE was followed

• Whether a second strike on incapacitated persons is illegal

• Whether the chain of command was corrupted

• Whether civilian leadership pressured the military into illegality

• Whether this incident constitutes a war crime under international law

And let me tell you a little secret:

Today’s denial…will not hold up well against tomorrow’s investigations.

Washington declared exoneration before the adults even arrived.

That’s not strategy.
That’s fear.

Final Verdict: Hegseth Is Anything But Exonerated

Let’s strip it down to iron truths:

Truth #1:

Hegseth no longer faces only the allegation of a specific order.
He faces the broader allegation of catastrophic leadership failure.

Truth #2:

Survivors were killed.
Video exists.
Congress is disturbed.
This does not go away.

Truth #3:

“No explicit order” is NOT equal to “no wrongdoing.”

Truth #4:

The Pentagon and Congress now have more questions than before Bradley spoke… not fewer.

Truth #5:

If you think this denial ends the investigation,
you haven’t been paying attention to how real investigations work.

Truth #6:

When history writes this chapter…
it will not ask…
“What exact words did he use?”
It will ask…
“What the hell happened?”
And the answer will not be flattering.

Washington Is Lying To Itself

This is not exoneration.

This is desperation.
This is scaffolding cracking.
This is a dam with a fresh hole in it.
This is a narrative collapsing under its own contradictions.

And the real danger for Hegseth isn’t the phrase.

It’s the truth.

Because truth doesn’t care what you deny.
Truth doesn’t care what you didn’t say.
Truth cares what happened.

And what happened…is still a scandal of historic proportions.

This is not over.
This is not contained.
This is not resolved.

This is the beginning of the next stage.

Hold Fast.
More fire coming.

#HoldFast

Back soon,

-Jack