Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley has delivered the most serious blow yet to Pete Hegseth’s defense of the now infamous September boat strike, telling lawmakers that the two men killed in the follow up blast did not appear to have any way to call for help as they clung to the wreckage of their capsized vessel.
According to three people who were briefed on Bradley’s closed door testimony, the admiral made it clear that the survivors floating in the water did not seem to have radios or any other communications gear on them.
Since September, Pentagon officials have pushed a very different narrative. In private briefings and public comments, they have suggested the men were still considered active threats because they looked like they were trying to radio for backup. The idea was that if reinforcements showed up, the drug operation could continue, even after the boat had been blown apart.
That talking point kept making the rounds and It showed up in at least one early briefing for congressional staff, and resurfaced again in news reports this past week as officials repeated the same defense. The idea that the survivors were trying to radio for help became a central claim, used to argue they were still “in the fight” and could legally be targeted.
Sec. Hegseth and Admiral Bradley should be placed on suspension pending a full investigation. pic.twitter.com/4n6KKEKIQb
— Douglas Macgregor (@DougAMacgregor) December 4, 2025
But Bradley’s account to lawmakers throws that entire idea into doubt. If the men never had radios to begin with, then the rationale behind the second strike collapses and what remains is a far more troubling image, two survivors in the water, holding onto a flipped boat, killed minutes later by another missile.
Bradley was the senior officer overseeing Joint Special Operations Command at the time of the strike, meaning he had direct responsibility for the mission. His briefing is the first time someone at his level has broken from the narrative pushed by senior Pentagon and administration officials.
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
Lawmakers who have been uneasy about the operation now have confirmation from the mission commander himself that one of the Pentagon’s central talking points is simply not supported by what he saw. And for critics who have been warning from the start that the second strike might amount to a war crime, Bradley’s remarks will only sharpen those concerns.
Pete Hegseth, who has vigorously defended the strike, has argued that the mission was handled properly and that commanders made the right call. He has pointed to the broader anti cartel campaign, insisting that everyone involved in the September operation was part of a criminal network and therefore fair game.
But Bradley’s comments hit at the foundation of that argument. If the survivors were unarmed, injured, and unable to communicate, the case for treating them as active threats gets much harder to sustain.
