Tag: dod

Pete Hegseth’s Defense Department Blew $22M On Steak and Lobster in a Single Month, Watchdog Claims

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department allegedly blew through $22 million on lobsters and ribeye steak as part of a wild September 2025 end-of-year spree.

According to an analysis by nonprofit watchdog Open the Books, Hegseth’s DoD spent $93.4 billion on grants and contracts in Sept. 2025 alone — nearly 50 percent of which was expended in the last five business days of the month.

Open the Books, run by the American Transparency charity founded in 2011, collects and publishes government spending data, including expenditures down to the lobster tail.

Per the analysis by Open the Books, in September, the Pentagon spent $2 million on Alaskan king crab, $6.9 million on lobster tail, $15.1 million on ribeye steak, and $1 million on salmon. Dessert included 272 orders of doughnuts for $139,224 and ice cream machines for $124,000.

While the Pentagon does not technically have to spend all its congressionally allocated funds, “use-it-or-lose-it” policies often push it to do so. Any leftover funds could be removed from the budget the following year. So, extravagant sprees are not unusual at the end of a fiscal year.

For example, the group noted in its report, “Furniture is near the top of the military’s wish list at the end of every fiscal year. Since 2008, the DoD has spent an average of $257.6 million on furniture every September — a 564% increase above the norm. In months besides September, furniture costs the military only $38.8 million on average.”

Speaking to Open the Books, the CEO of Govly, an AI company that assists government contractors, compared Sept. 30 to “Amazon Prime Day” for the federal government.

Extravagant spending sprees are also not unusual for Hegseth’s DoD. The report noted that the department also spent more than $7.4 million on lobster throughout four months in 2025: March, May, June, and October.

Keep reading

Defense Department Records Reveal U.S. Funding of Anthrax Laboratory Activities in Ukraine

Judicial Watch announced today it received 345 pages of records from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a component of the U.S. Department of Defense, revealing that the United States funded anthrax laboratory activities in a Ukrainian biolab in 2018. Dozens of pages are completely redacted, and many others are heavily redacted. The records show over $11 million in funding for the Ukraine biolabs program in 2019.

The records were obtained in response to a February 28, 2022, Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency for records regarding the funding of Black & Veatch involving work of any manner with biosafety laboratories in the country of Ukraine.

Three phases of work are discussed in the records, several of which are indicated to have occurred “on site” at the Ukrainian labs.

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency provided a report titled “PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] at the [redacted (b)(3), which exempts information from disclosure when a foreign government or international organization requests the withholding, or the national security official concerned has specified in regulations that the information’s release would have an adverse effect on the U.S. government’s ability to obtain similar information in the future] Phase 2 On-the-Job Training Report, December 11-13/December 26, 2018” The Executive Summary includes information regarding “on-site” activities, likely referring to a Ukrainian biolab:

  • PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] on-the-job training was conducted for users of the [redacted (b)(3)] on December 11-13, under Phase 2 implementation activities, Anthrax Laboratory activities were conducted on December 28, 2018.
  • PACS existing configuration and customization were checked jointly with the on-site PACS Working Group
  • Phase 1 implementation activities including progress and current status were reviewed; issues and problems discussed and resolved;
  • Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for PACS use at [redacted (b)(3)] was updated to include Subculturing Operation process – the updated SOP submitted to the on-site Working Group.

The report provides a list of titles of “OJT [on-the-job training] Participants” with all participants names from Black & Veatch redacted, citing exemptions (b)(6) for personal privacy and (b)(3).

Keep reading

Trump Reportedly Gives ‘Green Light’ to New UAP Investigations

President Trump has allegedly instructed the Department of Defense to allow outside access to several of the nation’s most secretive military sites. Missouri Congressman Eric Burlison, a member of the House Oversight Committee, is seeking physical evidence of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) following whistleblower testimony regarding non-human craft.

During an interview on the Aliens Last Night podcast, Burlison claimed the White House has backed his request to visit Area 51, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, and AUTEC in the Bahamas. He also mentioned a massive and classified object located outside the US that is allegedly housed within a large structure. Burlison stated that he intends to verify claims of archived records, unusual materials, and biological remains.

While the Pentagon officially denies possessing extraterrestrial technology, Burlison asserts that the administration is now prioritizing transparency. This push for access follows accounts from whistleblowers such as David Grusch, which Burlison cites as the catalyst for his investigation. Though rumors circulate regarding a formal disclosure announcement on July 8, 2026—around the anniversary of the Roswell incident—official confirmation is pending.

Keep reading

Six and a Half Years Later, the DoD’s Reply to Harry Reid’s AATIP Memo Remains Missing

In June 2009, then–Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid sent a letter to the Department of Defense requesting heightened protection for what he described as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). The four-page letter, addressed to then–Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn III, argued that portions of the program warranted Restricted Special Access Program (SAP) status due to sensitivity involving “unconventional aerospace-related findings,” advanced technologies, and national security implications.

The letter itself is no longer in dispute. After years of denials, confusion, and contradictory statements, the Department of Defense ultimately acknowledged its authenticity, and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) released the document publicly. What remains unresolved, even after more than six and a half years after a Freedom of Information Act request first sought it, is the Department of Defense’s response to Reid’s request.

A final FOIA response issued by the Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff on December 15, 2025, under case number 19-F-0948, again produced only Reid’s original letter, directing The Black Vault to the same DIA-hosted copy previously released years earlier. The response asserted that this constituted a “full grant” of the request and stated that no additional responsive records were found.

Keep reading

Former Israeli spies now overseeing US government cybersecurity

A company with deep ties to Israeli intelligence oversees cyber security across more than seventy US government agencies, including the Department of Defense and Homeland Security.

Axonius was founded by former spies in Israel’s Unit 8200 and its software, which allows an operator ‘visibility and control over all types and number of devices,’ collects and analyses the digital data of millions of US federal employees.

The stated aim of the Axonius platform is to centralize IT tools to identity and fix security breaches. As a product of Israeli intelligence, however, the scale of Axonius’s use across the US government raises serious questions.

Axonius was founded and is currently run by Israelis Dean Sysman, Ofri Shur and Avidor Bartov, who met in the 2010s while working on the same team within Israel’s Unit 8200 spy service. On his LinkedIn profile, Sysman offers few details of their work for the IDF, describing it simply as having ‘far-reaching implications.’

Keep reading

Trump’s Pentagon name change could cost up to $2 billion

President Donald Trump’s directive to change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War could cost as much as $2 billion, according to six people with knowledge of the potential cost.

The name change, which must be approved by Congress, would require replacing thousands of signs, placards, letterheads and badges, as well as any other items at U.S. military sites around the world that feature the Department of Defense name, according to two senior Republican congressional staffers, two senior Democratic congressional staffers and two other people briefed on the potential cost.

New department letterhead and signage alone could cost about $1 billion, according to the four senior congressional staffers and one of the people briefed on the potential cost.

One of the biggest contributors to the cost of changing the name would be rewriting digital code for all of the department’s internal and external facing websites, as well as other computer software on classified and unclassified systems, the four senior congressional staffers said.

The government could decide not to make every change to the Department of Defense branding, which could bring down the cost.

Keep reading

The Department of Defense Cannot Claim Ignorance Regarding Their Legal Violations During the COVID Era

Laws were clearly broken through the oppressive enforcement and administration of the military’s COVID-19 shot, yet to this day, no one is willing to acknowledge which specific laws were transgressed.

Last month, The Gateway Pundit brought attention to the fact that the Department of War continues to ignore multiple inquiries and FOIA requests.

They refuse to acknowledge that 10 U.S. Code § 1107a acts as a legal basis showing that the implementation of the COVID-19 shot mandate was illegal, even in light of the War Secretary’s public declaration deeming it “unlawful.” If something is considered unlawful, then a law or laws must have been violated? So, why do they refuse to name the law(s) that were broken?

10 U.S. Code § 1107a “[codifies] that individuals are informed of an option to accept or refuse administration of a product.” Regarding the administration of a product authorized for emergency use, such as the previously required COVID-19 shot, only the President has the authority to waive this federal code. Former President Joe Biden did not to waive it.

So, who violated the law? And, perhaps more crucially, who in this world is allowed to break the law and escape without consequences? Where is the accountability? That’s the question on the minds of service members and veterans.

The author conducted a survey involving more than five dozen members of the military who are currently serving, representing all branches of the military. They were asked about their references to 10 U.S. Code § 1107a in their objections to receiving the 2021 COVID-19 shot.

Both their original requests for accommodation or exemption, as well as their subsequent appeals, were blanketly denied. For many, their careers were ultimately preserved only due to a federal injunction or the later rescission of the mandate on January 10, 2023.

Keep reading

War Department Pushes To Double or Quadruple Missile Production To Prepare for Potential War With China

The US War Department is pushing US weapons makers to double or even quadruple the production of missiles to help the US military prepare for a potential future war with China, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

The report said that senior Pentagon officials expressed a desire for a significant increase in production during a series of meetings with representatives from several US missile manufacturers. Steve Feinberg, the deputy US Secretary of War, has taken a leading role in the effort, which has been dubbed the Munitions Acceleration Council, and regularly speaks with some executives.

The US military has been openly preparing for a war with China for years despite the obvious risk of nuclear war. The preparations have involved expanding the US military footprint in the Asia Pacific, building alliances in the region, and increasing weapons shipments to Taiwan.

The Journal report said that the effort at expanding missile production is focused on weapons the Pentagon believes it needs for a conflict with China, including Patriot interceptors, Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles, the Standard Missile-6, Precision Strike Missiles, and Joint Air-Surface Standoff Missiles.

Since 2022, the Pentagon has formally considered China the top “threat” facing the US, although that may soon change as reports say the War Department’s forthcoming National Defense Strategy (NDS) may prioritize missions in the homeland and the Western Hemisphere over countering Beijing.

In a statement back in May, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said he was directing the Pentagon’s policy chief, Elbridge Colby, to begin work on the new NDS, which he said will “prioritize defense of the US homeland, including America’s skies and borders, and deterring China in the Indo-Pacific.”

Colby is a well-known China hawk who has long pushed for the US to prioritize China and prepare for a war over Taiwan, though there are signs that he has started to doubt the US’s ability to defend the island. Either way, the US is expected to continue its military buildup in the region.

Keep reading

US Department of Defence played a key role in coordinating the global “covid crisis”

How To Pull Off A ‘Pandemic’: “Military-Military Coordination”… of a “Crisis”

In 2025, the strategic set-up behind the covid operation is much easier to see in retrospect.

The “manufactured covid crisis” in March 2020 was deployed after the fact – in order to justify the fast-tracked “medical countermeasures” which had been in the pipeline since the sharing of the “sequence” (if not before).

Read more: First came the “vaccine solution”…, Democracy Manifest, 22 January 2025

Terrorising the public with stories of supposedly catastrophic “spread” (that could be “slowed”) was the surest way to justify this rapid “vaccine solution.”

Part of the sales pitch (aka psyop) was the need for “non-pharmaceutical interventions” in the interim.

The origins of this whole-of-Washington-led “pandemic” plan – including lockdowns – had been in plain sight since the Pentagon’s ‘Dark Winter’simulation in June 2001, and repeatedly rehearsed in the lead up to ‘The Big One’.

In June 2019, a 3-minute video by the US Department of Defence – featuring images of a novel coronavirus! – presaged the main event.

Read more: Preview: Coming Soon…, Democracy Manifest, 5 January 2024

[We have embedded the video to begin at timestamp 27 seconds, watch the critical 15 seconds that follow. “Don’t miss the pandemic-preventing hazmat suit in the DoD biolab,” Democracy Manifest said.]

Keep reading

DoD Redacts Nearly All Records Explaining AARO’s Use of Law Enforcement Exemption for UAP Files

The Department of Defense (DoD) has released a set of heavily redacted emails in response to a FOIA request seeking records that would explain why AARO and UAP materials are now being largely withheld under FOIA Exemption (b)(7). This exemption is intended for “law enforcement” records, raising questions about how it applies to AARO, which is not a law enforcement body.

The release was supposed to show the internal decision-making behind this new practice. Instead, nearly all substance was withheld, and more than 95%+ of the content is either blacked out or withheld in full. The result is another chapter in a growing saga of secrecy surrounding AARO, FOIA, and UAP records.

This issue has now persisted for more than two years. The Pentagon’s Public Affairs office, through spokesperson Susan Gough, continues to refuse to answer The Black Vault’s roughly four dozen inquiries and follow-ups over the course of 27 months sent to her about how this exemption can be legally justified.

The September 18, 2025, release (case 24-F-0154) consisted of 23 pages. Three pages were withheld in their entirety under Exemption (b)(5), while the rest were redacted under (b)(5) and (b)(6).

Keep reading