Trump Transition Pentagon

WASHINGTON -- President-elect Donald Trump's[1] choice for defense secretary is still up in the air, but it is a sure bet he will look to reshape the Pentagon and pick a loyalist following his tumultuous first term. Five men held the job as Pentagon chief only to resign, be fired or serve briefly as a stopgap.

While he has yet to announce a decision, the names of potential Pentagon chiefs stretch from the well-known -- such as Rep. Mike Waltz of Florida -- to an array of former administration loyalists, including retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, who held national security posts during Trump's first term.

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had been floated, but Trump said on social media Saturday that Pompeo would not be joining the new administration.

Some decisions may linger for days as candidates jostle for attention and officials wait for the final results from House races[2], weighing whether Republican lawmakers can be tapped or if others are a safer pick to avoid a new election for an empty congressional seat.

"The choice is going to tell us a lot about how he will deal with the Pentagon," said Mark Cancian, senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a retired Marine colonel.

He said someone like Waltz -- a former Army[3] officer and Green Beret -- with a deep military background may not be as dramatic of a change as others who may be viewed as stronger Trump loyalists.

With a number of top jobs at the State Department, National Security Council and Defense Department up for grabs, Trump is expected to lean toward those who back his desire to end U.S. involvement in any wars[4], use the military to control the U.S.-Mexico border[5] and take a hard line on Iran[6].

The key test, however, will be loyalty and a willingness to do whatever Trump wants, as he seeks to avoid the pushback he got from the Pentagon the first time around.

Trump's relationship with his civilian and military leaders during those years was fraught with tension, confusion and frustration, as they struggled to temper or even simply interpret presidential tweets and pronouncements that blindsided them with abrupt policy decisions they weren't prepared to explain or defend.

Time after time, senior Pentagon officials -- both in and out of uniform -- worked to dissuade, delay or derail Trump, on issues ranging from his early demand to prohibit transgender troops from serving in the military and his announcements that he was pulling troops out of Syria[7], Iraq and Afghanistan[8] to his push to use troops to police the border[9] and stem civil unrest on the streets of Washington[10].

In his first administration, Trump hewed toward what he considered strong military men and defense industry executives. Initially enamored with generals, Trump over time found them to be not loyal enough.

"He soured on them," Cancian said. "They were not as pliable as he had thought. ... I've heard people speculate that maybe the chairman would be fired. So that's something to watch."

Air Force[11] Gen. CQ Brown, took over as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in October 2023 for a four-year term, but military leaders serve at the pleasure of the president. Brown, a combat pilot and just the second Black officer to serve as chairman, spoke out after the police killing of George Floyd, describing the bias he faced in his life and career.

Trump also is expected to choose someone as defense secretary with disdain for equity and diversity programs[12] and less likely to counter his plans based on limits laid out in the Constitution and rule of law. But he also may well push for increased defense spending, at least initially, including on U.S. missile defense.

A key overriding concern is that Trump will select someone who won't push back against potentially unlawful or dangerous orders or protect the military's longstanding apolitical status[13].

On Thursday, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin raised that red flag. In a message to the force, he said the U.S. military stands ready to "obey all lawful orders[14] from its civilian chain of command," adding that troops swear an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States."

He echoed retired Army Gen. Mark Milley's pronouncement during a speech as he closed out four years as chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

"We don't take an oath to a king or a queen or to a tyrant or a dictator. And we don't take an oath to a wannabe dictator," Milley said. "We don't take an oath to an individual. We take an oath to the Constitution, and we take an oath to the idea that is America, and we're willing to die to protect it."

Trump's first defense chief, retired Marine Gen. Jim Mattis, learned quickly to stay off his boss' radar by largely eliminating press conferences that Trump could see.

Mattis and Milley, along with Trump's chief of staff John Kelly, a retired Marine general, and retired Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford, who also served as Joint Chiefs chairman, all worked quietly behind the scenes to temper some of Trump's decisions.

They stalled his demands that troops be quickly and completely withdrawn from Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan and managed to prevent the use of active-duty troops to quell civil unrest in Washington.

Two years in, Mattis abruptly resigned[15] in December 2018 in frustration over Trump's national security policies, including a perceived disdain for allies and his demands to pull all troops out of Syria. Patrick Shanahan, the deputy defense secretary, took over as acting Pentagon chief but withdrew as the nominee six months later due to personal family problems that were made public.

Then-Army Secretary Mark Esper took over in an acting role, but he had to step aside briefly when nominated, so Navy[16] Secretary Richard Spencer served as the acting chief until Esper was confirmed.

Esper was fired days after Trump lost the 2020 election[17], largely because the president did not believe him to be loyal enough. Trump was especially angry over Esper's public opposition to invoking the two-centuries-old Insurrection Act to deploy active-duty troops in the District of Columbia during unrest following the police killing of George Floyd.

Trump named Christopher Miller, a retired Army officer who has been director of the National Counterterrorism Center, to serve as acting secretary and surrounded him with staunch loyalists.

That is the Pentagon that officials quietly say they expect to see in Trump's new administration.

© Copyright 2024 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more

U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin speaks at Diplomatic Academy of Ukraine in Kyiv, Ukraine.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Defense Department will appeal a military judge's ruling[1] that plea agreements struck by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, and two of his co-defendants are valid, a defense official said Saturday.

The ruling this past week voided Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's order to throw out the deals[2] and concluded that the plea agreements were valid. The judge granted the three motions to enter guilty pleas and said he would schedule them for a future date to be determined by the military commission.

The department will also seek a postponement of any hearing on the pleas, according to the official, who was not authorized to publicly discuss legal matters and spoke on condition of anonymity. Rear Adm. Aaron Rugh, the chief prosecutor, sent a letter Friday to the families of 9/11 victims informing them of the decision.

The ruling by the judge, Air Force Col. Matthew McCall, allowed the three 9/11 defendants to enter guilty pleas in the U.S. military courtroom at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and would spare them the risk of the death penalty. The pleas by Mohammed, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi would be a key step toward closing out the long-running and legally troubled government prosecution in the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people.

Government prosecutors had negotiated the deals with defense lawyers under government auspices, and the top official for the military commission at Guantanamo had approved the agreements. But the deals were immediately slammed by Republican lawmakers and others when they were made public this summer.

Within days, Austin issued an order saying he was nullifying them. He said plea bargains in possible death penalty cases tied to one of the gravest crimes ever carried out on U.S. soil were a momentous step that should only be decided by the defense secretary.

The judge had ruled that Austin lacked the legal authority to toss out the plea deals.

The agreements, and Austin’s attempt to reverse them, have made for one of the most fraught episodes in a U.S. prosecution marked by delays and legal difficulties. That includes years of ongoing pretrial hearings to determine the admissibility of statements by the defendants, given their torture in CIA custody.

While families of some of the victims and others are adamant that the 9/11 prosecutions continue until trial and possible death sentences, legal experts say it is not clear that could ever happen. If the 9/11 cases ever clear the hurdles of trial, verdicts and sentencings, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit would likely hear many of the issues in the course of any death penalty appeals.

The issues include the CIA destruction of videos of interrogations, whether Austin’s plea deal reversal constituted unlawful interference and whether the torture of the men tainted subsequent interrogations by “clean teams” of FBI agents that did not involve violence.

© Copyright 2024 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and U.S. Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey in 2014

When Military.com started in 1999, it wasn't clear whether it would survive the rough and tumble dot-com boom in which technology magnates were striving to stake their claim in the new digital frontier.

The website went live in March 2000, and a Wall Street Journal report at that time[1] noted that five military-focused websites were all starting around the same time and "will begin fighting it out for the military audience."

Christopher Michel, Military.com's founder, saw it a little differently.

Read Next: Canceled Appointments, Unexplained Mixups -- Veterans Facing Challenges Getting VA Mental Health Care[2]

In an era before widespread social media, Michel, himself a Navy[3] Reserve officer and a Harvard Business School graduate, saw how the military was a small community and one in which people sought connection, advice on how to navigate the bureaucracy, knowledge on how to secure their benefits, and guidance on their careers in the service.

"One weekend, it really hit me like a ton of bricks that the internet would be the perfect way to sort of connect and empower military people," Michel told Military.com in an interview. "The idea would be, there would be lots of social connections. So, all the military units would be groups on the website, we would do news, we would help people get access to their benefits."

As Military.com celebrates its 25th anniversary, the site has survived the burst of the dot-com bubble and outlasted many of its early competitors, producing award-winning watchdog journalism[4] for millions of readers and becoming a go-to resource for detailed information on service member benefits for the community.

In the past few years, the publication has won the Gerald R. Ford Journalism Award for Reporting on National Defense, as well as the Joseph L. Galloway Award and the James Crawley Award from Military Reporters and Editors, collectively the most significant awards for military reporting bestowed annually, along with a slew of other accolades.

It's a reflection of the leading role Military.com has taken in providing news to those in uniform, veterans, and their families. It is the most-read publication focused on the U.S. military and has the largest newsroom.

From the Pentagon to the Front Lines

Bradley Peniston, the executive editor of Defense One and Military.com's first-ever managing editor, told Military.com that those early days were innovative, such as generating a newsletter of stories from all sorts of outlets while still writing original stories for readers.

Peniston said Military.com was the first exclusively online publication ever to receive Pentagon press credentials.

"We just kept showing up to the Pentagon and asked to be let in," he said. "So, finally, they granted us press passes."

But on Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and America was soon at war.

Sarah Blansett, a retired Navy commander and Military.com's publisher who has been with the website for 15 years, said those years following the terrorist attacks really defined the voice of the news organization. The website had purchased numerous other homepages and blogs, some of which had been documenting the experiences of troops on the ground in the Middle East.

"The majority of the life of Military.com has been while our nation was at war," Blansett said. "We were really a good host for a lot of military bloggers very early on in the war. ... That all gelled together to create this personality of Military.com that provided news and benefits information. It spoke directly to the reader through those documenting their experience going to war."

One major moment of that era, Michel recalls, was Military.com breaking the story of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's capture in late 2003. An image of the deposed politician was posted by a user on Military.com[5], and the site's founder woke up to calls from ABC News asking about the unreleased image.

"They said, 'Is that picture on your homepage of Saddam being captured real?' ... We were the first people to tell that story," Michel recalled. "We were very disruptive to the Department of Defense, in a way. I think that they mostly liked us because they trusted us and they knew that we cared about service members."

Watchdogs at Home

In 2004, Military.com was purchased by Monster Worldwide -- in 2016, Randstad Holding acquired Monster -- and the site continued to grow, helping veterans and service members connect with resources and find jobs, as well as secure their benefits.

As the blogging era of journalism and information began to wane, Military.com worked to consolidate all the various homepages and blogs and bolster its news resources into one website.

Much of that work was done under Amy Bushatz, a military spouse[6] who started working with Military.com in 2010 and became the executive editor from 2018 until 2023 -- a position she "still very proudly” tells people about, she said in an interview.

Bushatz noted that, when she joined the website in 2010, the internet had transitioned from being a novelty to a critical part of life, and the website needed to try and reach readers in constantly evolving terrain.

But she noted that part of what has made Military.com strong throughout all the changes in journalism and the digital world has been its consistency in bringing news and information to service members and veterans, wherever they may be.

"I never questioned that it would have staying power, because it's filling such a need that would not otherwise be filled," Bushatz said. "It really is taking care of something that doesn't exist anywhere else. There is literally nowhere else that you can find the breadth of information that is on Military.com when it comes to these explainers about benefits and how this stuff works. And pair that with the Military.com news coverage and this watchdog journalism."

As service members and veterans began to return home from deployments[7] and tours in the Middle East, Military.com started to provide news coverage and vital resources to those most affected. The website's staff has always included a large number of veterans and military spouses, ensuring that it highlights issues that really matter to the community.

Part of Military.com's focus under current Managing Editor for News Zachary Fryer-Biggs has been a relentless approach to watchdog journalism centered on accountability and original investigative reporting.

"Military.com's mission has always been to serve the military community; that never changed," Fryer-Biggs said. "But as many media outlets have faced relentless cuts leading to fewer questions being asked of military officials, and government agencies have become increasingly hesitant to provide information, we've seen that, to get our readers real answers, we have to dig deeper and work harder. I can't tell you how proud I am of the tireless reporting our journalists do to reveal important issues facing the community."

The website is also evolving to create new ways for readers to engage with its original reporting. Military.com started its "Fire Watch" podcast in 2022, which was recognized as the top podcast in 2023 by the Military Reporters and Editors organization.

Blansett said throughout all of Military.com's history and for the next 25 years and beyond, the site's focus has and will remain the same.

"We will always provide the highest-quality news and benefits information," she said. "That's going to happen no matter what form this website takes, no matter what changes technologically. Those two things will always remain true."

Related: They Stood Sentry over America's Nuclear Missile Arsenal. Many Worry It Gave Them Cancer.[8]

© Copyright 2024 Military.com. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished, rebroadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without written permission. To reprint or license this article or any content from Military.com, please submit your request here[9].

Read more

More Articles …