I think it'd be hard to watch the series of videos and not be troubled by it.

But I have more policy questions than ever about the framing of the mission, the rules of engagement.

These incidents are happening a long way from the United States in the open ocean in the

eastern Caribbean.

I am not questioning how our armed forces are carrying out their orders.

I'm questioning why the administration is engaging in this campaign and whether this is justified and the best

use of these remarkable capabilities of the Navy and our special forces.

Hi again, everyone. It's up five o'clock in New York. So strip away the particulars for a second,

look past the granular details or the policies,

and you can reduce this controversy at the Pentagon to its two most basic questions.

The first one's pretty simple.

Does Defense Secretary Pete Heggseth make any one of us, the American people, the men and

women of the military, our friends and allies, more or less safe?

We know what his answer would be.

After all, he's defending a decision made under his leadership that may or may not,

according to Republicans and Democrats, constitute a war crime.

That depends, of course, on what we learn about that second strike on alleged drug

traffickers shipwrecked

after a first strike in the Caribbean. As we mentioned today, Admiral Frank Bradley briefed a number of

lawmakers in a classified setting on those strikes. But what have Hegssess haphazard use of the

signal messaging app deemed to have put military operations and service members at risk by the

Pentagon's own inspector general. Ask again, how does that make any American, especially the men and

...