US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the inquiry, targeting those critical of Charlie Kirk. Photo / Getty Images
The Pentagon has investigated nearly 300 Defence Department employees, including service members, civilian workers and contractors, for comments appearing online after last month’s shooting death of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, according to documents reviewed by the Washington Post.
The sweeping, ongoing inquiry, which has resulted in a smattering of disciplinary action so far, follows an extraordinary directive by the department’s political leadership to silence criticism of a prominent, polarising figure who was unabashed in his views and fervent support for United States President Donald Trump.
The order from Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth to target those critical of Kirk, former defence officials and congressional Democrats say, reflects a deepening alarm over the former Fox News personality’s stewardship of the military, whose personnel are expected to remain loyal to the Constitution, not any one party or president.
Since taking office, Hegseth has routinely subverted those norms – saying as recently as last week that the nation’s generals and admirals should quit if they don’t support the Trump Administration’s bid to impose what opponents say are regressive policies on the armed forces.
Troops faced similar choices – get in line or get out – under the Biden Administration’s coronavirus vaccine mandate, resulting in the dismissal of thousands.
Hegseth and his political staff have argued forcefully that speech celebrating or mocking the Turning Point USA founder’s death is itself an illicit partisan activity subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination.
“It’s a violation of the oath, it’s conduct unbecoming, it’s a betrayal of the Americans they’ve sworn to protect dangerously incompatible with military service,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell wrote on social media last month.
In a statement provided to the Post for this article, he emphasised the point, saying, “Those in our ranks who rejoice at an act of domestic terrorism are unfit to serve the American people”.
Kirk’s death at age 31 set off a nationwide debate on political violence that was seized on by the Trump Administration to villainise some left-leaning groups as terrorists – often while not acknowledging the violence that liberal public figures also have endured.
And even as he cracks down on commentary about Kirk’s death, Hegseth himself has appeared to condone similarly inappropriate remarks.
Last year, before he was defence secretary, Hegseth grinned and joked along with a guest on Fox News about the vicious hammer attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of former House speaker Nancy Pelosi. He later composed himself and said, “We wish him well”.
Critics of the Administration have decried what they say is its blatant hypocrisy, noting a refusal to condemn political violence on all sides.
Opponents point to the President’s public silence earlier this year after Melissa Hortman, a leading Democratic lawmaker in Minnesota – Hegseth’s home state – was gunned down with her husband in what authorities say was a targeted political assassination. Trump himself was twice targeted by would-be assassins during last year’s campaign.
Hegseth’s press office, when asked if the secretary regretted laughing about the attack on Paul Pelosi, vigorously defended him and denounced what Parnell, the spokesman, called “whataboutism” being promulgated by the news media.
“The situation is not the same,” Parnell’s statement to the Post says. “An American was assassinated. We will not tolerate military or civilian personnel who celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American.”
The Pentagon chief has also attracted attention for his vocal defence of service members terminated under the Biden Administration for making politically charged statements online.
In one high-profile example, Hegseth installed to his Pentagon staff a former Marine Corps officer, Stuart Scheller, who was court-martialled for a social media post in which he harshly criticised the United States’ disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. Scheller pleaded guilty to several charges in the case.
Peter Feaver, who studies civil-military relations at Duke University, said the Trump Administration’s investigations of government employees, particularly those within the Defence Department, are consistent with long-standing efforts to banish politics from the workplace.
“They have a valid point,” he said, noting, however, that “the challenge for the Administration is: Will they enforce it on both sides?”
In the days after Kirk’s killing on September 10, the Defence Department aggressively hunted for employees who had previously criticised his movement or commented on his death. Hegseth warned publicly that there would be consequences for anyone who spoke out against the slain activist, whom he considered a friend.
As of September 30, 128 service members have been investigated following Kirk’s death, and most of those cases are still under review, according to documents reviewed by the Post.
Of those, 26 have received administrative reprimands – an adverse mark that can hinder future assignments or promotions.
Three have received “nonjudicial punishment,” which can lead to a reduction in rank or other disciplinary action, and three others are in the process of either being kicked out or leaving the military, the documents show.
A total of 158 non-uniformed personnel have been investigated as of September 30, including 27 Defence Department civilians, according to the documents viewed by the Post. Two have been “removed from employment”. The status of the remaining civilians or contractors was not immediately clear.
In addition, five former Defence Department employees have been placed under investigation, the documents show.
There are a number of ways in which speech that’s normal for civilians can be barred for uniformed personnel, but “prosecutions are exceedingly rare”, said Charles Dunlap, a retired Air Force major general who served as the service’s deputy judge advocate general and is now a professor at Duke University.
Under Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, service members can be prosecuted for “contemptuous words” against their military or civilian leaders, or against elected officials – but not against unelected public figures.
However, military personnel can be prosecuted under different charges of the UCMJ, such as Article 133, for conduct unbecoming, or Article 134, for conduct prejudicial to good order, according to an Air Force memo sent to service members to remind them of their social media responsibilities following Kirk’s death.
Dunlap said he suspected that few who are targeted for disciplinary action would formally contest it.
“I can’t recall a parallel situation,” he added, “but that doesn’t mean that military law couldn’t criminalise this conduct.”
Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.