Tag: pentagon

Pentagon Plans AI Data Centers at Military Bases Across Multiple Branches

One site is near the military’s main chemical and biological weapons testing range. Another parcel is a half-mile from civilian housing.

At Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, on ground the Army’s own contracting documents describe as previously used for grazing, a company owned by two of the largest investment firms in the world is preparing to build a data center.

That site sits about an hour’s drive from the nearest community, on the installation where the U.S. military conducts its primary chemical and biological weapons testing. Three parcels there total roughly 3,466 acres. One of them, about 1,201 acres, is already spoken for.

It is one of at least a dozen military installations the Army and the Department of the Air Force have opened to commercial data center developers over the past year and a half. Two of those deals are real; the rest are still proposals.

Keep reading

Revised Overseas Voter Form FPCA Eliminates Checkbox “I Never Lived In U.S.” – A Blow to Birth Tourism Voters and Non-Citizens

For years, Americans living overseas could use the federal government’s Federal Post Card Application (FPCA) to register to vote and request an absentee ballot.

The old form contained an odd checkbox option that said, “I am a U.S. citizen living outside the country; I have never lived in the United States.”

The new form removes this line and does more.

On August 13th, the Department of War issued an Emergency Revision Request letter to eliminate this line.

It also restructures ID questions. It now asks detailed questions, if they’ve ever been issued a valid Driver’s License or State ID, then prove it? Ever been issued a Social Security card, prove it. And so on.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the changes on Aug. 28th, and the new form became official on September 1st, 2026. The checkboxes now list only overseas citizens who intend to return to the United States, or whose intent to return is uncertain.

The “never lived in the U.S.” checkbox didn’t accurately reflect the laws governing overseas voting. In the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), a civilian living overseas generally votes through the last place they “domiciled” in the U.S before leaving the country.

The DoW (DoD) called the old provision an “inaccurate eligibility checkbox for citizens who have never lived in the U.S.” and said it needed to be removed so the form would comply with UOCAVA.

Non-military individuals, like birth tourists, who have never resided in the United States are not a class of voters specifically defined by UOCAVA. Therefore, they “may not be able” to use the FPCA/FWAB form.

There have been numerous controversies in States like MI, NC, and PA where FPCA applications had little verification. In a 2022 Pennsylvania hearing, Deputy Secretary for Elections Jonathan Marks said: “There’s no systemic verification.”

Eliminating the checkbox is meant to reduce confusion and prevent people outside UOCAVA’s scope from believing they are eligible to vote.

The distinction between U.S. citizenship and a U.S. voting residence is important. They are not the same thing. A citizen living in another country may have every right of citizenship but still needs a state or voting jurisdiction through which to cast a ballot.

The old form appeared to recognize “never lived in the United States” as a separate category of overseas voter. The new form no longer does. It requires an applicant to provide the U.S. address in the state or territory where the person claims the right to register and vote.

The change does not mean that every citizen who never lived in the United States is barred from voting. States retain some authority over voter qualifications. Some states have laws allowing certain citizens who were born or raised abroad to use a parent’s former voting residence.

Keep reading

WHO’S LEAKING AMERICA’S MILITARY SECRETS? Top Pentagon Officials Forced to Take Polygraphs After Classified Weapons Stockpile Information Reaches Media

Some of America’s highest-ranking military officials were subjected to polygraph examinations during a sweeping Pentagon investigation into the leaking of highly classified information about the nation’s weapons stockpiles.

President Donald Trump was reportedly furious after sensitive details concerning America’s supply of sophisticated weapons appeared in media reports.

According to leftist CBS News, several dozen officials were questioned earlier this summer, including officials assigned to U.S. Central Command and other combatant commands.

The scale of the polygraph operation was described as extraordinarily rare.

Although high-ranking military and civilian officials with access to top-secret information routinely undergo periodic polygraph examinations, sources told CBS that the large number of officials summoned at once indicated that investigators were conducting a targeted leak probe.

The questioning reportedly covered a range of national-security matters, including whether officials had provided sensitive military information to members of the media.

Two sources claimed that none of the officials failed the questions specifically designed to identify the leaker.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine was reportedly not among those polygraphed.

The New York Times first reported the broader hunt, saying investigators put roughly 50 members of the Joint Staff through polygraphs in August after a wave of stories about depleted stocks of long-range missiles, Patriot interceptors, and other finite munitions as the United States fights Iran.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told CBS Friday night the Department “does not comment on internal personnel or investigative matters but takes all leaks of classified national security information extremely seriously and investigates accordingly.”

“Securing classified information is critical to ensuring the security of the United States and of our troops deployed around the world,” Parnell said.

Keep reading

MASSIVE SECURITY NIGHTMARE: FBI Investigates Dark-Web Service Selling 153+ MILLION Driver’s License Scans — Including Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Information for $100

The FBI is investigating what could be one of the most devastating identity-data breaches ever uncovered in North America.

A newly launched dark-web service called “Nexus” claims to be selling actual digital scans of more than 153 million driver’s licenses belonging to people across the United States and Canada, according to cybersecurity journalist Brian Krebs, who first reported the incident.

This is not merely another database containing stolen names, email addresses, and passwords.

The criminals reportedly obtained digital images of government-issued identification documents, including front-and-back scans and, in some cases, the infrared and ultraviolet images used to authenticate them.

According to cybersecurity journalist Brian Krebs, the massive collection allegedly includes:

  • More than 153 million driver’s licenses
  • More than 10 million identification cards
  • More than 3 million travel documents and international IDs
  • At least 579,000 medical cards

The database reportedly contains the driver’s license of Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, along with identification documents belonging to other high-ranking federal officials, including an assistant director of the FBI. According to the report, the hacker offered Hegseth’s driver’s license for $100.

Krebs discovered that his own Virginia driver’s license was also in the database after the criminals behind Nexus displayed it as a free sample while advertising their service on the Russian-language cybercrime forum Exploit.

Keep reading

Pete Hegseth: Militarism’s Ideologue

Reality doesn’t always line up with our wishes. For Pete Hegseth, this lesson has been learned the hard way. Six months into his war with Iran, top military officials are warning the Secretary of Defense that prolonged fighting would be “unsustainable,” according to new reporting from The Washington Post.

These officials are echoing sentiments that have been repeated for months within the administration. Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had advised the White House before the conflict that a large-scale military confrontation with Iran posed serious risks, particularly because of the U.S.’ depleted munitions stockpiles and a lack of support from regional partners.

Rather than heed these warnings, Washington foreign policy elites chose to proceed with a reckless disregard for the facts, guided by an ideological drive to reshape the world in our image – or, perhaps more accurately, Israel’s. Pete Hegseth is one such ideologue, as demonstrated by his rhetorical record throughout the conflict.

The administration’s entire approach to this war has been stylistically Hegsethian. The tirades against the press, the administration’s unceasing – and undue – confidence, and the rigorous enforcement of a strict narrative are all hallmarks of Pete Hegseth’s brutish approach, rather than the calculated strategy one may expect to see from Marco Rubio or JD Vance.

Hegseth’s style plays to the instincts of an older generation of Republican voters, one which believes that to even question the military is to commit a grave offense. Older cohorts of conservatives – which tend to be the Republican Party’s most consistent base –  are fervently supportive of the war.

As soon as the first bombs were dropped, the narrative was enforced. The case for war was not an intellectually rigorous one, but this is a common feature of government propaganda. It primarily exists not to convince the American public to support a policy, but to emotionally manipulate them. To this end, the war’s initiators must act with a level of bravado and confidence capable of convincing the average person that “this person knows what he’s doing.” It doesn’t mean he does, however. This distortion has been perfectly embodied by the rocky past six months at Hegseth’s Pentagon.

Hegseth has built a reputation for his aggressive style. During press conferences in the Iran war’s early stage, he made a habit out of using emotionally charged language to evoke an “us vs. them” mentality within Americans. On March 2, Hegseth called this war “our retribution,” saying “the regime who chanted ‘death to America’ and ‘death to Israel’ was gifted death from America, and death from Israel.” In a press conference a few days later, Hegseth seemed to fetishize violence, describing the U.S. operation as “death and destruction from the sky, all day long.”

In a display of his grotesque lust for power, Hegseth also said “we are punching them while they’re down, which is exactly how it should be.”

There has been a severe shortage of seriousness from this administration in its messaging on this conflict. In a 60 Minutes appearance just days after the war was launched, Hegseth shrugged off concerns about the risks of this engagement, saying “nobody’s putting us in danger.” He followed this dismissive statement with an even more unsettling one, threatening that “the only ones that need to be worried right now are Iranians that think they’re going to live.”

Keep reading

Bezos-Owned Washington Post Publishes CLASSIFIED Pentagon Orders Book During Active Combat With Iran — Pentagon Calls It a Crime and a “Betrayal of the Force”

The far-left Washington Post just did what the legacy media always does when American troops are in harm’s way and a Republican is running the Pentagon.

They published material from a classified Secretary of Defense Orders Book, the document that maps warships, aircraft, weapons systems, and personnel worldwide, and dressed it up as a hit piece on Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

The Washington Post reported Sunday that several senior military leaders warned War Secretary Pete Hegseth that maintaining a force of more than 50,000 American troops in the Middle East is unsustainable and could weaken the United States’ ability to respond to threats elsewhere.

The newspaper acknowledged that its reporting was based on information contained in the classified Aug. 14 edition of the Secretary of Defense Orders Book, or SDOB.

The classified orders book reportedly details the worldwide availability and allocation of American warships, aircraft, weapons systems, and military personnel. It also contains sensitive assessments submitted by America’s senior commanders.

According to the Post, some troops deployed to the Middle East were ordered to remain through September, while others could remain into 2027.

Four senior commanders reportedly submitted formal “non-concurs” expressing disagreement with the proposed extensions:

  • Adm. Daryl Caudle, Chief of Naval Operations
  • Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, Commander of U.S. European Command
  • Gen. Francis L. Donovan, Commander of U.S. Southern Command
  • Adm. Samuel Paparo, Commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

A “non-concur” does not mean that a commander is refusing to follow an order. It records a commander’s professional disagreement while acknowledging that the order will still be executed.

Washington Post military affairs reporter Dan Lamothe eagerly amplified the purported contents of the classified document.

“Four-stars all non-concurring with prolonging operations against Iran as they are into 2027, per this Washington Post exclusive,” Lamothe wrote, before listing the four commanders.

But DataRepublican, whose real name is Jennica Pounds and who began serving as a Special Government Employee at the Department of War in July, fired back with a brutal response.

DataRepublican argued that the commanders’ assessments were not the most alarming part of the story. The real scandal, she said, was that someone apparently handed information from one of the Pentagon’s most sensitive force-allocation documents to the Washington Post.

Keep reading

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth Responds to Reports He’s Considering a 2028 Presidential Run

On Friday, NBC News reported Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is considering running for President in 2028.

In the report, NBC News, while using anonymous sources, claimed Hegseth has told close friends and family members that he’s considering running in 2028.

On Friday night, the Secretary of War responded to the report in a post on X and wrote, “100% false.”

He added, “We told NBC that, but they just lie w/ anonymous “sources.”

“My only job: Make the Department of War Great Again. Carry on Patriots, and enjoy your Friday night,” concluded Hegseth.

Here’s the NBC News report Hegseth was responding to:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has told close friends and associates that he is considering a run for president in 2028, according to two people familiar with the conversations.

Hegseth and his wife, Jennifer, have floated the idea of a presidential run for the past few months, believing he has some of the same attributes that have made Donald Trump popular with the MAGA movement, the people said. Trump’s core voters appreciate Hegseth’s toughness, defiance and conservative stance on social issues, they said.

Hegseth’s appearance at the Iowa State Fair on behalf of a Republican congressman earlier this month kindled both surprise and speculation about his possible presidential ambitions.

Iowa has long been a springboard for presidential campaigns. The state’s caucuses have traditionally come first in the nominating calendar, making Iowa a magnet for presidential hopefuls.

Keep reading

Hidden In Safes: Pentagon Uncovers Classified Documents On 5th Anniversary Of Abbey Gate Massacre

Five years ago today, 13 American service members were killed at Abbey Gate in Kabul, Afghanistan. Now, the investigation into what really happened — and who tried to bury the truth — may finally be blowing open.

Sean Parnell, Chairman of the Afghanistan Withdrawal Special Review Panel and Senior Advisor to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, dropped a bombshell on the fifth anniversary of the August 26, 2021 attack. His team has uncovered classified documents that had been deliberately hidden — “stashed and hidden away in safes where they would not be found.” After reviewing them, Parnell said it “became clear why someone tried to hide them” — but he declined to release the contents publicly until the investigation is complete.

The 13 Americans killed at Abbey Gate gave everything. Sgt. Johanny Rosario Pichardo. Sgt. Nicole L. Gee. Staff Sgt. Darin T. Hoover. Cpl. Hunter Lopez. Cpl. Daegan W. Page. Lance Cpl. Humberto A. Sanchez. Lance Cpl. David L. Espinoza. Lance Cpl. Jared M. Schmitz. Lance Cpl. Rylee J. McCollum. Lance Cpl. Dylan R. Merola. Lance Cpl. Kareem M. Nikoui. Hospital Corpsman Maxton Soviak. Staff Sgt. Ryan C. Knauss. Their families have waited five years for answers.

Parnell made clear his panel is not interested in giving Americans a “convenient version of the truth.” The panel has already reviewed more than nine million documents — compared to roughly 3,000 documents examined under the Biden-era review. This administration is not looking the other way.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth participated in a Pentagon ceremony today to upgrade valor awards for service members who defended Abbey Gate, correcting what Parnell described as the “inappropriate downgrading” of those honors under the previous administration. These were Americans who ran toward the bomb and saved lives. They deserved better recognition then, and they are getting it now.

One of the most consequential and least-scrutinized decisions of the entire debacle was the U.S. military’s reliance on the Taliban — including the Haqqani Network — to provide perimeter security at the airport during the evacuation. The previous investigation concluded the attack “could not have been prevented at the tactical level.” The new panel is not accepting that answer on faith.

Washington made the decisions in Afghanistan. Americans carried the consequences. What is in those safes may finally tell the families — and the country — what their government chose to hide.

Keep reading

Undersecretary of War Says Whoever Wins AI Race Will Dominate Economically, Militarily

Undersecretary of War for Research and Engineering Emil Michael said Tuesday at Breitbart News’s latest policy event that whoever wins the AI Race, the United States or China, will dominate economically and militarily.

During Breitbart News’s “AI is Here: What to Fear, What to Embrace,” Breitbart News Washington Bureau Chief Matthew Boyle asked Michael what would happen if the United States loses the AI race to China, and what the stakes would be for Western civilization as a whole. Michael said that whoever emerges as the victor in the AI race will lead economically.

“If you think about the 20th century, the way I’ve described this is we had military power leading up through World War II, and that created sort of… peace besides the Cold War, and then that led to our technological dominance. The internet started here. The internet economy started here. The iPhone, the app economy started here, and… that led to our sort of economic dominance… military technology economy,” he said. “Now, in the 21st century, I think technological dominance will determine whether we are economically dominant and militarily dominant. It stems from the tech dominance.” 

“If AI is the central, newest, and most important new technology, if we’re not dominant in that, it threatens our military and economic dominance, and it’s just a different flow in the 21st century,” he added. “And whoever wins that technological race, I think, is going to be [sic] economically, and that means the dollar is the reserve currency. That means priceable are priced in dollars. That means American bonds are the kind of thing that people invest in for safety. That means we have much more control of the financial system and… can ensure that it’s used for good.”

“So I think,” Michael asked, “do you want the Chinese model or the American model in the 21st century? And that starts for who’s going to be dominant in technology.”

Taylor Budowich, the founder of Innovation Council Action Inc. and former White House deputy chief of staff, told Boyle in an earlier conversation at the event that allowing China to win the AI race is “not an option.”

Keep reading

Stars and Stripes, Perhaps Not Forever

In late 1861, Union soldiers in Bloomfield, Missouri, found the local newspaper’s office empty and decided to put it to good use. Stars and Stripes covered the activities of the three Illinois regiments. Their commander in chief, of course, was US president Abraham Lincoln.

Over time, the paper gained direct funding from the military, but with supposed “editorial independence,” and a mission “to provide first-hand reporting from bases around the world and unbiased, credible news to America’s military.” Those who worked in uniform abroad through two world wars and after, often not in a position to visit a newspaper stand or receive news via TV or radio, could read Stars and Stripes (I read it in Saudi Arabia during Desert Storm).

On August 21, US defense secretary Pete Hegseth fired the paper’s publisher, editor-in-chief, and a top reporter after they publicly commented on Department of Defense “interference” with the newspaper’s “independence.”

Once again, Abraham Lincoln — or at least the aircraft carrier named for him — played a central role as Hegseth whined over the paper’s coverage of complaints from deployed sailors’ families concerning the material and mental health situation aboard that vessel.

The firings aren’t really as sudden as they might seem to those not following closely over time.

The first Trump administration floated a plan to shutter Stars and Stripes, but backed down after a “bipartisan” backlash. With Hegseth at the helm in Trump’s second time around, DoD rages frequently against “woke distractions” in its reportage, firing its ombudsman in May for noticing that attempts to change it into a “morale booster” instead of a news outlet are “contrary to the news organization’s mission.”

So, here’s the thing: Who pays the piper, calls the tune.

Stars and Stripes is largely funded by, and its operations and distribution are almost completely enabled by, the US government. “Editorial independence” may sound like a wonderful idea, but there’s always been a leash. We’re just watching the leash get shorter.

Thankfully, the collar at the end of that leash only strangles Stars and Stripes.

These days, even troops aboard ships at sea and at remote firebases in hostile territory have far greater contact with the outside world, most of the time, than even civilians at home enjoyed 50, let alone 150, years ago.

Cell phones. Email. Web access. Zoom. It’s not 100% there, 100% of the time, but neither was Stars and Stripes.

Pete Hegseth can cry if he wants to. He can throw himself on the floor and threaten to hold his breath until he turns blue. The troops will get still their news, whether he likes it or not. They’ll get the kind of coverage they want to get, not just the kind he wants them to get.

And because all that technology runs two-way, they can also REPORT the news they want covered without consulting him first as he obviously expects Stars and Stripes to.

The military news coverage, and consumption, of the future will look a lot more like WikiLeaks than like Stars and Stripes.

Keep reading