Top Military Lawyers Issue Statement on Trump War Crimes

Speaker 1 Get closer to the music you love with MasterCard. MasterCard card holders have special access to pre-sale and preferred tickets at August Hall in San Francisco.

Speaker 1 Get tickets to see the early November and Hello Goodbye on April 1st and Hannibal on April 10th. See all of what's coming now at priceless.com/slash music.

Speaker 1 Singing along with the ones that you love, Priceless.

Speaker 2 A group of former top military lawyers just put out a powerful statement stating that Pete Hegseth's orders to kill any survivors in connection with the military strikes of the fishing vessels off the coast of Venezuela constitute war crimes.

Speaker 2 Specifically, this group of former top military lawyers state that the former JAG Working Group, that's what they're called, unanimously considers considers both the giving and the execution of these orders, if true, to constitute war crimes, murder, or both.

Speaker 2 They put out what's called a statement of the former JAGS working group on media reports of Pentagon no-quarter orders in Caribbean boat strikes.

Speaker 2 Just so you know, JAG refers to Judge Advocates General, and that's the name given to military lawyers.

Speaker 2 And this group of former top military lawyers that calls itself this working group of former JAG military lawyers.

Speaker 2 They were formed after the Secretary of Defense Hegseth fired the top JAG officers from other branches in the military, from the Air Force, and from the Army.

Speaker 2 Let me read for you what this letter, this statement states. 29th November 2025.

Speaker 2 Yesterday, the Washington Post and CNN reported that the Secretary of Defense personally issued orders to, quote, kill everybody aboard a civilian vessel suspected of narco-trafficking.

Speaker 2 The attack on the 2nd of September 2025 that targeted a vessel carrying 11 civilians and allegedly an unknown quantity of drugs. The first strike resulted in near-total destruction of the vessel.

Speaker 2 However, two survivors were apparently observed via surveillance video clinging to wreckage, whereupon the commander directing the operation ordered a second strike.

Speaker 2 The second strike killed both of the survivors.

Speaker 2 The former JAGS working group unanimously consider both the giving and the execution of these orders, if true, to constitute war crimes, murder, or both.

Speaker 2 Our group was established in February 2025 in response to the Secretary of Defense's firing of the Army and Air Force Judge Advocates General and his systemic dismantling of the military's legal guardrails.

Speaker 2 Had those guardrails been in place, we are confident they would have prevented these crimes. If the U.S.

Speaker 2 military operation to interdict and destroy suspected narco-trafficking vessels is a non-international armed conflict, as the Trump administration suggests, orders to kill everybody, which can reasonably be regarded as an order to give quote no quarter and to quote double tap a target target in order to kill survivors are clearly illegal under international law.

Speaker 2 In short, they are war crimes. If the U.S.

Speaker 2 military operation is not an armed conflict of any kind, these orders to kill helpless civilians clinging to the wreckage of a vessel our military destroyed would subject everybody from the Secretary of Defense down to the individual who pulled the trigger to prosecution under the U.S.

Speaker 2 law for murder. We call upon Congress to investigate and the American people to oppose any use of the U.S.

Speaker 2 military that involves the intentional targeting of anyone, enemy combatants, non-combatants, or civilians rendered hors des combat out of the fight as a result of their wounds or the destruction of the ship or aircraft carrying them.

Speaker 2 We also advise our fellow citizens that orders like those described above are the kinds of patently illegal orders all military members have a duty to disobey.

Speaker 2 Since orders to kill survivors of an attack at sea are patently illegal, anybody who issues or follows such orders can and should be prosecuted for war crimes, murder, or both.

Speaker 2 Then they go into a summary of what went down. Regardless of whether the U.S.

Speaker 2 is involved in an armed conflict, law enforcement operation, or any other application of military force, international and domestic U.S. law prohibit the intentional targeting of defenseless persons.

Speaker 2 If the Washington Post and CNN reports are true, the two survivors of the September 2nd, 2025, U.S.

Speaker 2 attack against the vessel carrying 11 persons were rendered unable to continue their mission when the U.S. military forces significantly damaged the vessel carrying them.

Speaker 2 Under such circumstances, not only does international law prohibit targeting these survivors, but it also requires the attacking force to protect, rescue, and, if applicable, treat them as prisoners of war.

Speaker 2 Violations of these obligations are war crimes, murder, or both. There are no other options.
An operational law primer.

Speaker 2 Applicable international humanitarian law.

Speaker 2 The United States has publicly described the narco-trafficking attacks as, quote, non-international armed conflict, because our enemy is an international terrorist organization rather than a sovereign state.

Speaker 2 As such, the full scope of international law, generally applicable to armed conflict, does not necessarily apply to this conflict. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

Speaker 2 The main body of IHL applicable to non-international armed conflicts is a subset of the Geneva Conventions that is applicable to all international armed conflicts.

Speaker 2 The relevant provision of CA3 states in relevant part.

Speaker 2 In the case of armed conflict not of an international character, occurring in the territory of one of the high contracting parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply as a minimum the following provisions.

Speaker 2 One, persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed or de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion, or faith, sex, birth, or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

Speaker 2 To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons. A.

Speaker 2 Violence to life and persons, in particular, murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment, and torture. B.
Taking of hostages. C.

Speaker 2 Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment. D.

Speaker 2 The putting of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized people.

Speaker 3 You've heard of GLP-1 drugs, right? Unless you live under a rock, I'm guessing you have. They're everywhere, but sometimes you want an all-natural solution.

Speaker 3 Over the past couple of years, I started to hit that same cycle, gain weight in the winter, try to lose it in the spring. This year, I decided to slim down and keep it that way.

Speaker 3 I wanted a way to feel good and stay energized naturally. This podcast is sponsored by Veracity.
Welcome to an all-natural way to slim down, get energized, and sharpen your focus.

Speaker 3 Veracity is revolutionizing health by tackling the root cause of so many issues, metabolism.

Speaker 3 With Veracity's drug-free, clinically proven and doctor-formulated solutions, you can support your body's needs to live your healthiest life.

Speaker 3 If your goal is weight loss, you need to try Metabolism Ignite, the number one doctor-recommended GLP-1 booster and GLP-1 alternative. No side effects, no allergens.

Speaker 3 It's a natural, safe, plant-based aid that results in an 85% reduction in hunger and is clinically proven to lose on average 9 pounds in 90 days.

Speaker 3 I started Metabolism Ignite a couple weeks ago, just two capsules with breakfast, and I feel energized and focused all day. So what's in Veracity?

Speaker 3 It is a unique blend of lemon, verbena, and hibiscus extracts, green coffee bean extract, and magnesium.

Speaker 3 And it's even safe to take along with GLP-1 medications to boost your metabolism and appetite control.

Speaker 3 Veracity founder and CEO, Allie Egan, is a certified hormonal health coach whose personal experience with metabolic issues inspired her to create holistic solutions for optimal health.

Speaker 3 And yes, Metabolism Ignite is safe for everyone, including new moms. What I love about Veracity is that it's finally giving people natural options for improving their health.

Speaker 3 Just two capsules every morning, it couldn't be easier. So make the switch to GLP1s the natural way.
Head to veracityselfcare.com and use code MIDIS for up to 45% off your order.

Speaker 3 Once again, that's veracityselfcare.com for up to 45% off. And make sure to use my promo code MIDAS, M-E-I-D-A-S, so they know I sent you.

Speaker 2 Two, the wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

Speaker 2 It should also be noted that wounded, sick, or shipwrecked persons and members of crews of the Merchant Marine and are considered protected persons under Articles 12 and 13, respectively, of the Second Geneva Convention.

Speaker 2 In essence, the Geneva Convention and other long-standing international maritime laws prohibits U.S.

Speaker 2 forces from doing anything to survivors of a military attack that destroys the vessel or aircraft carrying them other than rescuing them. They certainly prohibit U.S.
forces from killing them.

Speaker 2 When violations of IHL rising to the level of war crimes could be prosecuted by an international tribunal, domestic U.S. law, 18 U.S.C.
Section 2441, War Crimes, subjects U.S.

Speaker 2 citizens to criminal prosecutions for war crimes. U.S.
courts have jurisdictions over such offenses, regardless of whether they are committed if the offender is a U.S. national or a member of the U.S.

Speaker 2 Armed Forces, and the crime constitutes, inter alia, a grave breach of Common Article 3.

Speaker 2 1907, Hague Convention. Even before the Geneva Convention of 1949, the laws were clearly prohibited orders that no quarter be given.

Speaker 2 The Hague Convention, Section 4, Regulations, Article 23, Sub-D, states specifically that, quote, it is especially forbidden to declare that no quarter will be given.

Speaker 2 Orders to give, quote, no quarter or to kill everyone, including survivors, wounded, ill, or anyone else who is no longer able to carry out their military mission, are not only unlawful orders, they subject those who give and execute such orders to prosecution as war criminals.

Speaker 2 The United States became a party to this treaty on the 27th of November 1909. Its prohibition against no-quarter orders has also become a principle of customary international law.

Speaker 2 Therefore, violations of this treaty and customary law are also violations of U.S. law.
Pending IHL, additional protocol to

Speaker 2 the Geneva Convention.

Speaker 2 In 1977, the parties to the Geneva Convention, including the United States, drafted a new protocol to address the challenges of non-international armed conflicts, to which no treaty-based IHL, with the exception of CA3, applies.

Speaker 2 Since to that point, about 80% of all armed conflicts were of a non-international nature, the parties drafted this protocol to fill in that legal void.

Speaker 2 The protocol, AP2, simply extends the principles enshrined in the original Four Geneva Convention to conflicts of a non-international nature.

Speaker 2 One relevant provision in AP2 is Article 7, which states, all wounded and shipwrecked, whether or not they have taken part in the armed conflict, shall be respected and protected.

Speaker 2 This makes the second strike with survivors in the water particularly heinous.

Speaker 2 We characterize AP2 as, quote, pending because although the United States signed the treaty on the 12th of December 1977, the Senate has not yet provided its quote advice and consent, despite having received it for the purpose from President Ronald Reagan in 1987.

Speaker 2 Perhaps now is the time to remedy that. Notwithstanding the fact that AP2 has not yet achieved status in U.S.
law, the United States has for many years adhered to the principle that, quote, U.S.

Speaker 2 military practice is already consistent with additional protocols, its provisions subject to certain proposed reservations, understanding, and declarations.

Speaker 2 Furthermore, the United States has stated that, quote, as a matter of policy, it routinely imposes heightened standards and its forces that are more protective of civilians than required under international humanitarian laws.

Speaker 2 We believe that under all these circumstances, particularly the gross violations of international law reported yesterday, the Senate must immediately take up the matter of AP2 advice and consent.

Speaker 2 Applicable U.S. law.
Giving and executing no quarter order subjects individuals to either U.S. criminal statutes or the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
18 U.S.C. Section 1111.
Murder.

Speaker 2 Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Civilian personnel who issue and execute orders to kill any human being can be prosecuted for murder unless a defense applies.

Speaker 2 The Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunals establishes as a matter matter of customary international law that these superior orders are no defense to war crimes.

Speaker 2 In other words, everybody in the chain of command is responsible. 18 USC Section 2441, War Crimes.
See Discussion of Common Article 3 above. UCMJ Article 118, Murder.

Speaker 2 Substantively similar to the federal murder statute applicable to civilians, UCMJ Article 118 provides that anyone who unlawfully kills a human being is guilty of murder.

Speaker 2 A great deal has been written lately about the notion that superior orders may provide a defense to certain military offenses. Military law does provide a superior order's defense.

Speaker 2 It is a defense to any offense that the accused was acting pursuant to orders, unless the accused knew the orders to be unlawful, or a person of ordinary sense and understanding would have known the orders to be unlawful.

Speaker 2 That's rules of court martial section 916d. Another part of the manual for courts martial puts it in a slightly different but equally compelling way.

Speaker 2 An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate.

Speaker 2 The inference does not apply to patently illegal orders such as ones that direct the commission of a crime.

Speaker 2 Again, the bottom line is that since orders to kill survivors of an attack at sea are patently illegal, Anyone who issues or follows such orders can and should be prosecuted for war crimes, murder, or both.

Speaker 2 Now, I want to be clear. The people who make up this working group that was formed in February 2025 are some of the top former military lawyers.

Speaker 2 People like retired Major General Stephen Leper, who served as the Deputy Judge Advocate General for the U.S. Air Force.

Speaker 2 Patrick McLean, a retired Marine Corps judge and former federal prosecutor who's commented publicly on the group's position.

Speaker 2 Rob Butch Bracknell, a former Marine and military lawyer who has also provided expert commentary.

Speaker 2 Todd Huntley, a retired retired Navy captain and judge advocate general and director of Georgetown's National Security Law Program. That's where I went to law school, by the way.

Speaker 2 It should also be noted that Ann Bauer and others who are digging up Pete Hegseth's prior writings say the following. This is what Pete Hegseth wrote in his 2024 book.

Speaker 2 The subject was, should we follow the Geneva Conventions? Should we follow the Geneva Conventions, Hegseth writes, what if we treated the enemy the way they treated us?

Speaker 2 Would that not be an incentive for the other side to reconsider their barbarism? Hey, Al-Qaeda, if you surrender, we might spare your life.

Speaker 2 If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them two hogs.

Speaker 2 Makes me wonder, in 2024, if you want to win, how can anyone write universal rules about killing other people in open conflict, especially against enemies who fight like savages, disregarding human life in every single instance?

Speaker 2 Maybe instead we are just fighting with one hand behind our back and the enemy knows it. No, Mr.
Hegseth. No, Mr.
Hegseth.

Speaker 2 We are fighting the way civilized societies were supposed to fight by complying our conduct with the Geneva Convention.

Speaker 2 America is not supposed to behave with the quote barbarism that you impute on others. America is supposed to show an example of how the world should behave because without law and order, all is lost.

Speaker 2 And as we see right here, all is lost under the Trump regime.

Speaker 2 That letter I just showed you, that statement I just read for you, again, written by the former top military lawyers who put out that statement saying that the conduct by Hegseth and everybody in the chain of command constitutes war crimes.

Speaker 2 Tell me what you think in the comments below. Hit subscribe.
Let's get to 6 million subscribers. Thanks for watching.

Speaker 2 Be sure to add the Midas Touch podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast for new updates every single day.