A new media narrative suddenly popped up this week claiming there was a “second strike” on one of the narcoterrorist boats targeted by the Trump administration.
The Washington Post — leaning heavily on unnamed “sources,” as usual — reported that a follow-up strike was supposedly ordered to kill two survivors who were clinging to the wreckage. According to the Post, this alleged order came from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth:
The Special Operations commander overseeing the Sept. 2 attack — the opening salvo in the Trump administration’s war on suspected drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere — ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions, two people familiar with the matter said.
Hegseth referred to the story as “fabricated.” As we previously stated, the White House Press Secretary clarified that Hegseth never issued any command to attack the boat again.
?@PressSec confirms that the Sec. War did NOT give the order to strike the narco boat a second time, Admiral Bradley did—and he had every right to.
"POTUS and Sec. Hegseth has made it clear that presidentially designated narco terrorist groups are subject to LETHAL targeting in… pic.twitter.com/YcImqBvAjI
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) December 1, 2025
Now, an article from the New York Times is further undermining this narrative by providing significant information that backs up the administration’s claim: although Hegseth issued the order for the first strike, he did not authorize a second strike.
Wait… https://t.co/FVy4oNbWEX pic.twitter.com/KeRmvFg0jx
— Byron York (@ByronYork) December 2, 2025
The NY Times notes:
According to five U.S. officials, who spoke separately and on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter that is under investigation, Mr. Hegseth, ahead of the Sept. 2 attack, ordered a strike that would kill the people on the boat and destroy the vessel and its purported cargo of drugs.
But, each official said, Mr. Hegseth’s directive did not specifically address what should happen if a first missile turned out not to fully accomplish all of those things. And, the officials said, his order was not a response to surveillance footage showing that at least two people on the boat survived the first blast.
Admiral Bradley ordered the initial missile strike and then several follow-up strikes that killed the initial survivors and sank the disabled boat. As that operation unfolded, they said, Mr. Hegseth did not give any further orders to him.
That version of events is a far cry from the dramatic picture Democrats and their media allies tried to paint — insinuating that Hegseth personally ordered the execution of shipwreck survivors floating helplessly in open water.
And even the New York Times has quietly acknowledged that the narrative has problems. The paper cited officials who pointed out key inconsistencies in the story, undermining the tidy moral outrage Democrats were hoping to manufacture:
The two officials questioned whether the surviving people were Admiral Bradley’s intended target in the second strike, as opposed to the purported drugs and the disabled vessel. They argued that the purported cargo remained a threat and a lawful military target because another cartel-associated boat might have come to retrieve it.
Translation? “Disabled” doesn’t mean “harmless” or “no longer a threat.” We’re watching yet another classic 48-hour rule media cycle unfold: Democrats and their press allies blast out an explosive accusation, the story spreads with maximum outrage, and then — once the facts start trickling in — it becomes clear the situation looks nothing like what they claimed.
But by then, the damage is done, and the narrative conveniently props up the Democrats’ latest talking point about “illegal orders.”
Hegseth, for his part, made it clear that Bradley had his full support — 100 percent:
Let’s make one thing crystal clear:
Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support. I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made — on the September 2 mission and all others since.
America is fortunate to have such men protecting us. When this @DeptofWar says we have the back of our warriors — we mean it.
Let’s make one thing crystal clear:
Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support. I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made — on the September 2 mission and all others since.
America is fortunate to have such men protecting…
— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) December 1, 2025
Looks like Democrats will have to now move onto some other BS narrative to peddle. Too bad they spend their time doing that instead of things to help our War Dept. defend the country against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
