Lawmakers will hear from Navy admiral who ordered attack that killed boat strike survivors

Lawmakers are seeking a full accounting of the strikes after The Washington Post reported that Bradley on Sept. 2 ordered an attack on two survivors to comply with Hegseth's directive to “kill everybody.” Legal experts say the incident amounts to a crime if the survivors were targeted, and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are demanding accountability.

Bradley will speak to a handful of top congressional leaders, including the Republican chairs and ranking Democrats of the House and Senate committees on Armed Services, and separately to the GOP chairman and Democratic vice chairman on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“This is an incredibly serious matter. This is about the safety of our troops. This is an incident that could expose members of our armed services to legal consequences,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said in a floor speech Wednesday. “And yet the American public and the Congress are still not hearing basic facts.”

As Bradley appears for questions in the classified setting, lawmakers will be seeking answers to key questions: What orders did Hegseth give regarding the operations? And what was the reasoning for the second strike?

Democratic lawmakers are also demanding that the Trump administration release the full video of the Sept. 2 attack, as well as written records of the orders and any directives from Hegseth. While Republicans, who control the national security committees, have not publicly called for those documents, they have pledged a thorough review.

“The investigation is going to be done by the numbers,” said Sen. Roger Wicker, the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “We’ll find out the ground truth.”

Pressure builds on Hegseth

President Donald Trump has stood behind Hegseth as he defends his handling of the attack, but pressure is mounting on the defense secretary.

Hegseth has said the aftermath of an initial strike on the boat was clouded in the “fog of war.” He has also said he “didn’t stick around” for the second strike, but said Bradley “made the right call” and “had complete authority” to do it.

Also on Thursday, the Defense Department inspector general was expected to release a partially redacted report into Hegseth's use of the Signal messaging app in March to share information about a military strike against Yemen’s Houthi militants.

The report found that Hegseth put U.S. personnel and their mission at risk by using Signal, according to two people familiar with the findings. The Pentagon, however, has cast the report as an exoneration of Hegseth.

Who is Adm. Bradley?

At the time of the attack, Bradley was the commander of Joint Special Operations Command, overseeing coordinated operations between the military's elite special operations units out of Fort Bragg in North Carolina. About a month after the strike, he was promoted to commander of U.S. Special Operations Command.

His military career, spanning over three decades, was mostly spent serving in the elite Navy SEALs and commanding joint operations. He was among the first special forces officers to deploy to Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks. His latest promotion to admiral was approved by unanimous voice vote in the Senate earlier this year, and Democratic and Republican senators praised his record.

“I’m expecting Bradley to tell the truth and shed some light on what actually happened,” said Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, adding that he had “great respect for his record.”

Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, described Bradley as among those who are “rock solid” and “the most extraordinary people that have ever served in the military.”

But lawmakers like Tillis have also made it clear they expect a reckoning if it is found that survivors were targeted. “Anybody in the chain of command that was responsible for it, that had vision of it, needs to be held accountable,” he said.

What else are lawmakers seeking?

The scope of the investigation is not yet clear, but there is other documentation of the strike that could fill in what happened. But obtaining that information will largely depend on action from Republican lawmakers — a potentially painful prospect for them if it puts them at odds with the president.

Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Armed Services committee, said he and Wicker have formally requested the executive orders authorizing the operations and the complete videos from the strikes. They are also seeking the intelligence that identified the vessels as legitimate targets, the rules of engagement for the attacks and any criteria used to determine who was a combatant and who was a civilian.

Military officials were aware that there were survivors in the water after the initial strike but carried out the follow-on strike under the rationale that it needed to sink the vessel, according to two people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity. What remains unclear — and what lawmakers hope to clarify in their briefing with Bradley — was who ordered the strikes and whether Hegseth was involved, one of the people said.

Republican lawmakers who are close to Trump have sought to defend Hegseth this week, standing behind the military campaign against drug cartels that the president deems “narco-terrorists.”

“I see nothing wrong with what took place,” said Sen. Markwayne Mullin, an Oklahoma Republican, as he argued that the Trump administration was justified in using war powers against drug cartels.

More than 80 people have been killed in the series of strikes that started in September. And for critics of the campaign like Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., the pressing questions about the legality of killing survivors are a natural outgrowth of military action that was always on shaky legal ground. He said it was clear that Hegseth is responsible, even if he didn't explicitly order a second attack.

“He may not have been in the room, but he was in the loop,” Blumenthal said. “And it was his order that was instrumental and foreseeably resulted in the deaths of these survivors.”