September, 28 2017, 02:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Chris Fleming,Email:,chris@redhorsestrategies.com
Worst Features Of The Trump-Ryan Tax Plan
WASHINGTON
This analysis is based on the tax plan framework released by Republican leaders Sept. 27, 2017. The plan is very similar to earlier ones by President Trump and House Speaker Ryan, which were analyzed by the non-partisan Tax Policy Center and form the basis of this analysis.[1]
- The Trump-Ryan tax plan is not tax "reform," but massive tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations that will jeopardize Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and public education. Based on earlier Trump and Ryan plans cost estimates, the plan could cut taxes by a total of $6.7 to $8.3 trillion, of which $3 to $5 trillion may not be paid for by closing tax loopholes and limiting deductions.[2] The resulting jump in the deficit would increase the likelihood of deep cuts to Social Security, healthcare, education and other services. Such cuts are in Trump's 2018 budget, which slashes $4.3 trillion from Social Security, Medicaid, education and other services. Ryan's House budget slashes $5.8 trillion from Medicare, Medicaid education, and other services.[3]
- The wealthy and corporations will get most of the tax cuts at the expense of working families who rely on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and public education. Under Trump's previous tax plan, the richest 1% would get half of the tax cuts, or $175,000 each year, on average.[4] His plan required one-quarter of middle-class families to pay more in taxes.[5] Under Ryan's earlier plan, the richest 1% would get more than 99% of the tax cuts once fully enacted, with a $240,000 tax cut each year, on average.[6]
CORPORATE TAX CUTS
- Corporate tax rates are slashed by more than 40%--from 35% to 20%--losing $1.8 trillion over 10 years.[7] Corporations need to pay their fair share not get a tax cut. Corporate profits are at near record highs, while corporate tax revenues are at record lows.[8] Profitable corporations are paying a U.S. tax rate of just 14%, according to the non-partisan Government Accountability Office.[9] Many pay nothing for years.[10] Only $1 out of $9 of federal revenue now comes from corporate taxes; in the mid-20th century it was $1 out of $3.[11] Moreover, 80% of corporate tax cuts benefit wealthier Americans.[12]
- Trump-Ryan slashes the top tax rate on business income from hedge funds, law firms, real estate firms like Trump's, and other "pass-through" businesses from 39.6% to 25%, losing $390 to $660 billion.[13] Many of these big-money outfits organize as partnerships or other business entities that allow them to pay business taxes at individual rates. Claims that this is a small business tax cut is a hoax: Just 4% of pass-through business owners will get a tax cut from the new top 25% rate, as everyone else already pays that rate or less. The top one-tenth of 1% will get a tax cut of $270,000, on average.[14] As the sole or principal owner of 500 pass-through entities,[15] Trump will benefit handsomely,[16] from what's been aptly dubbed the "Trump Loophole."[17]
- Trump-Ryan temporarily (for at least five years) allows corporations to immediately write off big purchases, which could lose $900 billion to $2.2 trillion.[18] Businesses would be allowed to immediately write off--or fully "expense"--the total cost of big-ticket purchases such as vehicles, equipment, and buildings. Currently, they may deduct (or depreciate) only a portion of the expense each year over a multi-year period to reflect the progressive decline in the property's value. The wide cost range comes from uncertainty as to the tax cut's economic effect. Though this is a 10-year estimate, the bulk of the revenue loss occurs in the first five years.[19] The Tax Policy Center has questioned claims about the supposed economic boost from full expensing, suggesting expensing could retard growth.[20]
- Trump-Ryan potentially allows American corporations to dodge all U.S. taxes on foreign profits through a territorial tax system. Under such a system, U.S. corporations would no longer pay taxes on profits booked offshore (although Trump's plan suggests there may be a minimum tax on profits in tax havens). A territorial system will encourage multinationals to shift even more profits and jobs offshore than they do now.[21] Analysis of a similar plan found a territorial tax system would lose $205 billion over 10 years.[22]
- Multinational corporations with profits stashed offshore could get a $600 billion tax cut. Big American corporations hold $2.6 trillion in profits offshore on which they owe about $750 billion in U.S. taxes.[23] The new plan promises a big tax break on these profits, but it does not indicate the tax rate. Trump previously proposed cutting the rate from 35% to just 10% on cash and only 4% on non-cash assets, raising about $150 billion.[24] So, tax-dodging multinationals could get an undeserved tax break of about $600 billion. They should instead pay what they owe, just like working families and small businesses do.
INDIVIDUAL TAX CHANGES
- The top tax rate on individuals would be lowered from 39.6% to 35%, and six other tax brackets would shrink to just two, losing $2 trillion.[25] The new brackets are 12%--an increase on lower income Americans from the current 10% rate--25%, and 35%. The reduction in the top rate will help give a $270,000 average tax cut to the Top 1%, which was estimated under Trump's earlier tax plan.[26] The top 0.1% would get a $1.4 million tax cut, on average.
- The alternative minimum tax (AMT) would be repealed allowing wealthy taxpayers like Trump to use excessive deductions and other loopholes to sharply reduce or eliminate their tax bill, losing $445 billion.[27] Trump could benefit massively: In 2005, the one year for which his tax returns have been made public, he made $153 million and paid $38 million in federal income taxes for a tax rate of 25%.[28] Without the AMT, he would have paid just $5 million in federal income taxes, a tax rate of less than 4%.[29] That rate is less than the lowest-income Americans often pay.[30]
- Trump-Ryan eliminates estate and gift taxes, losing $239 billion and boosting the inheritances of millionaires and billionaires.[31] The federal estate tax is paid only by estates worth at least $5.5 million, just 1 in 500 estates,[32] or only 5,500 estates in all of 2017.[33] Assuming Trump is worth the $10 billion he claims, his heirs could gain billions if his plan is adopted.[34]
- Trump-Ryan repeals the deduction for state and local taxes (SALT), raising taxes on the middle class and undermining local public services. Taxpayers can deduct state and local property taxes, and either income or sales taxes, from their federal taxable income. Over a third of taxpayers making $50-75,000 use the SALT deduction, and over half of those making $75-100,000.[35] An average family in this last group would see their federal taxes jump by $1,800 if SALT is repealed.[36] Repealing SALT would increase federal revenue by $1.3 trillion over 10 years.[37] In addition to boosting taxes on the middle class, repeal of the SALT deduction will make local taxation more expensive, putting pressure on localities to cut budgets for services like roads and schools.
- Trump-Ryan pulls a bait-and-switch with tax provisions working families rely on, increasing the standard deduction while eliminating the personal exemption, ultimately leaving many families worse off. Taxpayers who don't itemize their deductions (which under this plan may be limited to charitable contributions and mortgage interest) this year can deduct from their reportable income $6,350 for an individual and $12,700 for a married couple.[38] The plan would roughly double those amounts to $12,000 and $24,000, losing $708 billion.[39] At the same time, the plan repeals the personal exemption, which reduces reportable income by $4,050 this year for each member of a household. Even with the increased standard deduction, without the personal exemption many large families, and especially those headed by a single parent, would pay more.[40] A Tax Policy Center analysis found that Trump's earlier tax plan would increase taxes for about 8.7 million families--20% of households and more than half of all single-parents.[41] That analysis assumed a much higher standard deduction, which means even more families will experience a tax increase under the Trump-Ryan plan.
ENDNOTES
[1] Tax Policy Center (TPC), "The Implications of What We Know and Don't Know About President Trump's Tax Plan" (July 12, 2017). https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/publication/142616/implications_of_what_we_know_and_dont_know_about_president_trumps_plan_1.pdf. TPC, "Dynamic Analysis of the House GOP Tax Plan: An Update" (June 30, 2017). https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/publication/142556/2001397-dynamic-scoring-of-tax-plans-and-analysis-of-the-house-gop-plan.pdf
[2] Americans for Tax Fairness, "Updated Analysis: Trump's Unpaid-For Tax Cuts May Total $5 Trillion in New Tax Plan" (Sept. 27, 2017). https://americansfortaxfairness.org/new-analysis-trumps-unpaid-tax-cuts-may-total-5-trillion-new-tax-plan/
[3] Center on Budget & Policy Priorities (CBPP), "Trump Budget Gets Three-Fifths of Its Cuts from Programs for Low- and Moderate-Income People" (May 30, 2017). https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/trump-budget-gets-three-fifths-of-its-cuts-from-programs-for-low-and#_ftn1. CBPP, "House GOP Budget Cuts Programs Aiding Low- and Moderate-Income People by $2.9 Trillion Over Decade" (Sept. 5, 2017). https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/house-gop-budget-cuts-programs-aiding-low-and-moderate-income-people-by-29
[4] TPC, "The Implications of...Trump's Tax Plan," Table 4 and p. 9.
[5] Ibid. Table 4 showing that 23.8% of tax units in the middle quintile would experience increased taxes.
[6] TPC "An Analysis of the House GOP Tax Plan" (Sept. 16, 2016), Table 5. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000923-An-Analysis-of-the-House-GOP-Tax-Plan.pdf
[7] TPC, "Dynamic Analysis of the House GOP Tax Plan," Table 5. Amount includes repealing the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT).
[8] Estimates are measured as a share of the economy/GDP. Americans for Tax Fairness andEconomic Policy Institute, "Corporate Tax Chartbook: How Corporations Rig the Rules to Dodge the Taxes They Owe" (Sept. 2016), Figure 2. https://www.epi.org/publication/corporate-tax-chartbook-how-corporations-rig-the-rules-to-dodge-the-taxes-they-owe/
[9] Government Accountability Office, "Corporate Income Tax" (March 2016). Https://Www.Gao.Gov/Products/Gao-16-363
[10] Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), "The 35 Percent Corporate Tax Myth" (March 2017), p. 4. https://itep.org/wp-content/uploads/35percentfullreport.pdf
[11] Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Historical Tables, "Table 2.2: Percentage Composition of Receipts by Source." https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals
[12] TPC, "Would Workers Benefit from A Corporate Tax Cut? Not Much" (Sept. 8, 2017). https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/would-workers-benefit-corporate-tax-cut-not-much
[13] TPC, "Options to Reduce the Taxation of Pass-through Income" (May 15, 2017), p. 6. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/publication/141541/options-to-reduce-the-taxation-of-pass-through-income.pdf
[14] TPC, "Options to Reduce the Taxation of Pass-through Income," p. 8.
[15] Letter toDonald Trump from tax attorneys Morgan, Lewis & Bockius (Mar. 7, 2016). https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Tax_Doc.pdf
[16] The Washington Post, "Donald Trump's New Tax Plan Could Have a Big Winner: Donald Trump's Companies" (Aug. 10, 2016). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/10/donald-trumps-new-tax-plan-could-have-a-big-winner-donald-trumps-companies/
[17] CNN, "Hillary Clinton Slams 'Trump Loophole'" (Aug. 11, 2016). https://money.cnn.com/2016/08/11/pf/taxes/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-loophole/
[18] The Tax Foundation, "Full Expensing Costs Less than You'd Think" (June 13, 2017). https://taxfoundation.org/full-expensing-costs-less-than-youd-think/ These cost estimates are based on current tax rates. If corporate tax rates are reduced, the cost of this tax break would decline.
[19] Ibid.
[20] TPC, "A Business Cash Flow Tax Could Reduce Investment, Contrary to What Some Economists Think" (Jan. 24, 2017). https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/business-cash-flow-tax-could-reduce-investment-contrary-what-some-economists-think
[21] ITEP, "Turning Loopholes into Black Holes: Trump's Territorial Tax Proposal Would Increase Corporate Tax Avoidance" (Sept. 6, 2016). https://itep.org/turning-loopholes-into-black-holes-trumps-territorial-tax-proposal-would-increase-corporate-tax-avoidance/
[22] TPC, "An Analysis of Marco Rubio's Tax Plan" (Feb. 11, 2016), p. 10. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000606-an-analysis-of-marco-rubios-tax-plan.pdf
[23] ITEP, "Fortune 500 Companies Hold a Record $2.6 Trillion Offshore" (March 2017), p. 1. https://www.itep.org/pdf/pre0327.pdf
[24] TPC, ""The Implications of...Trump's Tax Plan," Table 2. See "Deemed repatriation rate on accumulated offshore earnings."
[25] Ibid. See "Individual income tax rates of 10, 25, and 35%."
[26] Ibid., Table 3.
[27] TPC, "The Implications of...Trump's Tax Plan," Table 2.
[28] The New York Times (NYT), "Trump Wrote Off $100 Million in Losses in 2005, Leaked Form Shows" (March 14, 2017). https://nyti.ms/2pmUkEH
[29] NYT, "A.M.T., Which Hit Trump in 2005, Is No One's Favorite" (March 15, 2017). https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/business/economy/trump-alternative-minimum-tax.html
[30] TPC, "Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households." https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-average-federal-tax-rates-all-households
[31] TPC, "The Implications of...Trump's Tax Plan," Table 2. See "Repeal the estate, gift and GST taxes."
[32] CBPP, "Ten Facts You Should Know About the Federal Estate Tax" (Sept. 8, 2016). https://www.cbpp.org/research/ten-facts-you-should-know-about-the-federal-estate-tax
[33] TPC, "Briefing Book: Who pays the estate tax?" https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/who-pays-estate-tax
[34] The Detroit News, "Clinton: Trump Plan to Ax Estate Tax Saves His Family $4B" (Aug. 11, 2016). https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/08/10/clinton-warren-economy/88546136/
[35] Government Finance Officers Association, "The Impact of Eliminating the State and Local Tax Deduction" (Using 2015 IRS data), p. 6. https://www.gfoa.org/sites/default/files/GFOA_SALT_09202017.pdf
[36] Ibid., p. 8.
[37] TPC, "Revisiting The State and Local Tax Deduction" (Mar. 31, 2016), p. 2. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000693-Revisiting-the-State-and-Local-Tax-Deduction.pdf
[38] IRS.gov, "In 2017, Some Tax Benefits Increase Slightly Due to Inflation Adjustments, Others Are Unchanged." https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/in-2017-some-tax-benefits-increase-slightly-due-to-inflation-adjustments-others-are-unchanged
[39] TPC, "The Implications of...Trump's Tax Plan," Table 2. See "Double standard deduction."
[40] Center for American Progress, "How Middle-Class and Working Families Could Lose Under the Trump Tax Plan" (June 13, 2017). https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2017/06/13/434054/middle-class-working-families-lose-trump-tax-plan/
[41] TPC, "Families Facing Tax Increases Under Trump's Tax Plan" (Oct. 28, 2016). https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/publication/135696/2000983-Families-Facing-Tax-Increases-Under-Trumps-Plan.pdf
Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) is a diverse campaign of more than 420 national, state and local endorsing organizations united in support of a fair tax system that works for all Americans. It has come together based on the belief that the country needs comprehensive, progressive tax reform that results in greater revenue to meet our growing needs. This requires big corporations and the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes, not to live by their own set of rules.
(202) 506-3264LATEST NEWS
'Time Is Ticking': GOP Lawmakers Urged to Back Healthcare Tax Credit Extension
"Anything less is a choice to raise healthcare costs, strip millions of people of their coverage, and deepen America’s ongoing healthcare crisis," said one campaigner.
Dec 02, 2025
With less than a month remaining before Affordable Care Act healthcare tax credits are set to expire—which would cause monthly premiums to soar for an estimated 20 million Americans and potentially leave millions without coverage—Democratic lawmakers and progressive advocacy groups on Tuesday implored congressional Republicans to back a three-year extension on the vital subsidies.
While President Donald Trump and Republican legislators have promised lower healthcare costs, prices are soaring and millions of families are facing major premium hikes if the Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies end as scheduled on December 31. That leaves lawmakers with just 12 legislative days to act.
Trump has expressed openness to extending the ACA subsidies, even teasing a policy framework featuring a two-year extension with income caps and minimum premium payments for enrollees in the program also known as Obamacare.
However, the president has put the brakes on his proposal under pressure from House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other congressional Republicans, many of whom are seeking a guarantee that the Hyde Amendment—which prohibits federal Medicaid funding for most abortion services—will be expanded to further restrict reproductive healthcare.
Calling Republicans "a total mess" who "don’t know what to do," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said Tuesday: "One day, Trump floats a so-called 'healthcare plan.' The next day, Speaker Johnson forces him to shoot it down. Some Republicans say they want to dismantle the ACA, probably a majority of them in the House and a large number in the Senate want to just dismantle it altogether."
"Other Republicans seem to be more focused on eradicating reproductive care in every state than helping people afford healthcare," Schumer continued. "The bottom line is that Republicans are in total disarray on healthcare."
"And while Republicans continue the infighting, who is paying the price? The American people," he added. "The people whose premiums are going up by $500 to $1,000 a month. These people know that Trump and Republicans are to blame."
Democratic lawmakers are pushing more lawmakers to sign a discharge petition, which would require Johnson to hold a vote on legislation to extend the ACA subsidies for three years. Such a bill is backed by numerous healthcare and economic advocacy groups.
"If Republicans in Congress truly cared about lowering costs for their constituents, they would swallow their pride and sign on to the discharge petition to force a vote on extending healthcare tax credits,” Unrig Our Economy campaign director Leor Tal said in a statement Tuesday.
“Republicans in Congress have spent months attacking Americans' access to healthcare while giving tax breaks to billionaires," Tal added. "Now, it is time that they finally put their constituents first, sign on to the discharge petition to extend these healthcare tax credits, and stop voting to undermine access to healthcare for millions of Americans.”
Michelle Sternthal, director of government affairs at Community Catalyst, a national health justice organization, said Tuesday that "Congress should pass a clean extension of the tax credits, repeal the dangerous healthcare provisions of the ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ and protect the communities who rely on them the most."
"Because affordable, accessible care isn’t just good policy—it’s the foundation of a stronger, more resilient nation," she added.
Reproductive rights defenders sounded the alarm over Republican efforts to further restrict abortion care—which has been eviscerated by Trump-appointed Supreme Court justices and GOP-led state legislatures with sometimes deadly results—in any ACA tax credit extension.
Noting previous GOP efforts to strip abortion care from the ACA, Planned Parenthood Action Fund and Reproductive Freedom for All said in a joint statement on Monday:
Anti-abortion members of Congress want to create an additional abortion coverage ban on the ACA marketplace by making plans that include abortion coverage prohibitively expensive and unworkable. They want to restrict coverage for more than 20 million enrollees and prohibit people using tax credits from buying plans that cover abortion. This restriction conflicts with decisions some states have made to require coverage of abortion. In states that allow plans to cover abortion, since plans would be significantly more expensive without the availability of tax credits, insurers would likely drop abortion coverage because these plans would be unattractive and onerous to consumers.
The ACA already prohibits federal funding from being used to pay for abortion coverage under marketplace plans except in the very limited circumstances of rape, incest, and life-endangerment. What anti-abortion politicians are calling for would be an expansion of abortion restrictions into the private insurance market. This would only cause more chaos and confusion for those seeking their health insurance through the marketplace. The ACA was passed with the intent of providing affordable coverage, but anti-abortion politicians want to place new and expanded barriers to abortion coverage and push healthcare out of reach for people who rely on the marketplace.
Congressional Democrats echoed the advocacy groups' calls for their Republican colleagues to support the discharge petition.
"Democrats have an active discharge petition, and all we need are a handful of House Republicans to join us and we can trigger an up-or-down vote on a three-year extension of the Affordable Care Act tax credits to save the healthcare of the American people in every single state in this country, and protect the healthcare of people who these so-called Republican members allegedly represent, but who have failed to do a single thing to make their life better," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said Monday.
Congresswoman Nikki Budzkinski (D-Ill.) wrote on the social media platform Bluesky, "At the end of this month, the ACA tax credits will expire—plunging millions of Americans even deeper into the affordability crisis as their healthcare costs skyrocket."
"It’s time for President Trump and Republicans in Congress to get serious about saving healthcare," she added.
The healthcare crisis continues to loom and it’s time we extend the healthcare tax credits NOW to ensure folks are able to afford quality healthcare.TIME IS TICKING AND WE CANNOT WAIT ANY LONGER!
— Rep. Frederica Wilson (@repwilson.bsky.social) December 1, 2025 at 7:04 AM
Noting that the GOP spending bill signed by Trump in July "made the biggest Medicaid cuts in history to fund trillions in tax breaks for billionaires," Congresswoman Summer Lee (D-Pa.) warned Tuesday that "when these cuts go into effect, over 17,000 people in my district will lose healthcare."
Other lawmakers argued that Congress should go even further and pass Medicare for All legislation led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.).
"We must stop tinkering around the edges of a broken healthcare system," Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a cosponsor of the bill, said Monday. "Yes, let's extend the ACA tax credits to prevent a huge spike in healthcare costs for millions. Then, let's finally create a system that puts your health over corporate profits. We need Medicare for All."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Critics Condemn 'Murder, Plain and Simple,' Hegseth Backs Admiral Order to Kill Boat Attack Survivors
"Making Adm. Bradley the fall guy in the administration's 'Protect Pete' campaign is disgraceful and destructive," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal. "Hegseth must go—resign or be fired."
Dec 02, 2025
As journalists on Tuesday continued to demand answers about the "double-tap" strike that started an illegal US bombing campaign against alleged drug-smuggling boats, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth kept pointing the finger at Adm. Frank M. "Mitch" Bradley while still claiming to support the Navy leader who the Trump administration says ordered the military to take out two survivors of the initial attack.
Sitting beside President Donald Trump during a Cabinet meeting, Hegseth—who has denied the Washington Post and CNN's reporting that he gave a spoken directive to kill everybody on the boat before the September 2 bombing—told reporters that he left the room after the first strike, and Bradley ordered the second strike.
"I watched that first strike live. As you can imagine, at the Department of War, we got a lot of things to do, so I didn't stick around for the hour, and two hours, whatever, where all the sensitive site exploitation digitally occurs," Hegseth said, using Trump's preferred term for his department.
"So I moved on to my next meeting," the Fox News host-turned-Pentagon chief said. "Couple of hours later, I learned that that commander had made the—which he had the complete authority to do, and by the way—Adm. Bradley made the correct decision, to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat... And it was the right call. We have his back."
Asked whether he saw the survivors after that first strike, Hegseth said: "I did not personally see survivors... The thing was on fire."
"This is called the fog of war," he added. "This is what you in the press don't understand. You sit in your air-conditioned offices or up on Capitol Hill, and you nitpick, and you plant fake stories in the Washington Post about 'kill everybody' phases on anonymous sources not based in anything, not based in any truth at all, and then you want to throw out really irresponsible terms about American heroes."
On Sunday, US Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said during an ABC News appearance that the second strike on September 2 was either "plain murder," or a war crime—if you accept the Trump administration's contested argument that the United States is "in armed conflict, at war... with the drug gangs," which many lawmakers and experts reject.
Responding to Hegseth's Tuesday remarks on the social media platform X, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee member said that "Secretary Talk Show Host may have been experiencing the 'fog of war,' but that doesn't change the fact that this was an extrajudicial killing amounting to murder or a war crime. One thing is clear: Pete Hegseth is unfit to serve. He must resign."
Calls for Hegseth's resignation or firing have mounted since Friday's reporting, exacerbated by his Monday X post in which the defense secretary said Bradley "has my 100% support" and "I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made—on the September 2 mission and all others since."
Replying to that post, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said that "making Adm. Bradley the fall guy in the administration's 'Protect Pete' campaign is disgraceful and destructive. It signals to military professionals down the ranks they'll be thrown under the bus for lawbreaking by Hegseth and other political leaders."
Despite recent bipartisan vows of "vigorous oversight" for the September 2 attack, Blumenthal said that "Republicans have shown no clear sign they'll buck the administration's blame gaming and begin a prompt investigation with subpoenas, witness depositions, hearings, and more. One immediate imperative: Demand that evidence be preserved—like all videos, emails, correspondence."
"Hegseth must go—resign or be fired," the senator added. "No question that murders or war crimes were committed on his watch. His criminal culpability may be contested, but no question that he's ultimately accountable. He directed the strikes be lethal and total. The buck stops with him."
Blumenthal is on the Senate Armed Services Committee, which, alongside the relevant House panel, is set to hold a classified briefing on Thursday with testimony from Bradley. Critics in Congress, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), have also called on Hegseth to testify under oath about the 22 boat bombings in the Caribbean and Pacific—which have killed at least 83 people—and potential US attacks within Venezuela, which the defense secretary and Trump teased again on Tuesday.
Ryan Goodman, a former Pentagon special counsel who’s now a New York University law professor and Just Security coeditor-in-chief, offered some potential questions lawmakers could ask based on Hegseth and Trump's Cabinet meeting comments.
The first: "Mr. Secretary, do you hereby testify—under penalty of perjury—that all your public statements about your involvement in the September 2 strike are true? We provided you a copy of all your statements before this hearing."
Noting Trump's claim that "Pete didn't know about [the] second attack having to do with two people," Goodman suggested that lawmakers inquire: "Oh. Well then, when did Pete know about it, and what did he do about it? When he found out about it, did he know the second attack was in order to kill the shipwrecked?"
Goodman and other experts argued in a Monday analysis for Just Security that "the United States is not in an armed conflict with any drug trafficking cartel or criminal gang anywhere in the Western Hemisphere," so "the individuals involved have not committed war crimes," but "the alleged Hegseth order and special forces' lethal operation amounted to unlawful 'extrajudicial killing' under human rights law," and "the federal murder statute would also apply."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Republicans Suddenly Care About US Airstrike Massacres—But Only Obama's
House Speaker Mike Johnson falsely claimed that "nobody ever questioned" Obama's hundreds of drone strikes, while defending the Trump administration's high seas murder spree.
Dec 02, 2025
Republicans on Tuesday invoked drone strikes during then-President Barack Obama's tenure in a dubious effort to justify what experts say is the Trump administration's illegal boat bombing campaign against alleged drug traffickers, while falsely claiming that Democrats and the media ignored airstrikes ordered by the former president.
US House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) was asked during a Tuesday press conference about a so-called "double-tap" airstrike—military parlance for follow-up strikes on survivors and first responders after initial bombings—that killed two men who survived a September 2 attack on a boat in the southern Caribbean Sea.
Although US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has denied it, he reportedly gave a spoken order to “kill everybody” in the boat, which was supposedly interpreted by Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley as a green light for launching a second strike after the discovery that two of the 11 men aboard the vessel were alive and clinging to its burning wreckage.
Responding to the question concerning the strike's legality, Johnson pointed to upcoming congressional consultations on the matter and said that such attacks are "not an unprecedented thing."
“Secondary strikes are not unusual,” he noted. “It has to happen if a mission is going to be completed.”
“It’s something Congress will look at, and we’ll do that in the regular process and order," Johnson continued, referring to a classified briefing with Bradley and some lawmakers scheduled for Thursday. "I think it’s very important for everybody to reserve judgment and not leap to conclusions until you have all the facts."
“One of the things I was reminded of this morning is that under Barack Obama... I think there were 550 drone strikes on people who were targeted as enemies of the country, and nobody ever questioned it," he said.
RAJU: If defenseless survivors were killed, would that constitute a violation of the laws of war?
MIKE JOHNSON: I'm not going to prejudge any of that. I was pretty busy yesterday. I didn't follow a lot of the news. pic.twitter.com/v38JWhNx0k
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 2, 2025
The lack of attention to Obama's strikes claimed by Johnson is belied by congressional hearings, lawsuits, and copious coverage—and condemnation—of such attacks in media outlets including Common Dreams.
Progressive lawmakers and Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky were among the numerous US officials who criticized Obama-era drone strikes.
Trump administration officials have reportedly cited the Obama administration's legal rationale for bombing Libya to justify the boat strikes to members of Congress.
Other Republican lawmakers and right-wing media figures noted on Tuesday that Obama—who bombed more countries than his predecessor, former President George W. Bush and was called the "drone warrior-in-chief"—ordered strikes that resulted in massacres of civilians at events including funerals and at least one wedding.
At least hundreds of civilians were killed in such strikes, including 16-year-old US citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who according to an Obama administration official was in the wrong place at the wrong time when he was slain in Yemen in 2011. This, after al-Awlaki's father—an accused terrorist who was also American—was assassinated by a drone strike ordered by Obama.
Asked by a reporter about the legality of assassinating US citizens without charge or trial, then-White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs infamously asserted in October 2012 that Abdulrahman al-Awlaki should have had "a far more responsible father."
Buried deep in a New York Times article published earlier that year was the revelation that Obama's secret "kill list" authorized the assassination of US citizens, and that his administration was counting all military-age males in a strike zone as "combatants" regardless of their actual status in an effort to artificially lower the reported number of civilian casualties.
“Turns out I’m really good at killing people,” Obama once boasted, according to the 2013 Mark Halperin and John Heilemann book Double Down. “Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.”
A third member of the al-Awlaki family, 8-year-old Nawar al-Awlaki—also an American citizen—was killed in a US commando raid in Yemen ordered by President Donald Trump in early 2017.
Tens of thousands of civilians were killed by US airstrikes in Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen during the Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations as part of the decadeslong so-called Global War on Terror, in which more than 900,000 people were slain, according to the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs.
At least thousands of civilians have been killed or wounded by US bombs and bullets in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen during Trump's first and second terms, during which rules of engagement aimed at protecting noncombatants have been loosened.
At least 83 people have been killed in 21 strikes on alleged drug-running boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean since early September, according to Trump administration figures. Officials in Venezuela and Colombia, as well as relatives of victims, claim that some of them were civilians uninvolved in narcotrafficking.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular