As the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, U.S. Rep. Jim Himes was one of only a handful of lawmakers authorized to view the classified video of deadly boat strikes in the Caribbean.
Now, he wants the footage of the strikes from early September released so the public can judge for itself.
In an interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” the southwestern Connecticut congressman described parts of the video, which he says showed two survivors “clinging to a piece of wood and about to go under” after the first strike by U.S. forces on an alleged drug boat near Venezuela. A second strike was carried out and killed the remaining survivors.
The so-called “double tap” strikes on Sept. 2 have come under intense scrutiny on Capitol Hill, as well as whether the strikes were carried out legally. But Democratic and Republican lawmakers have different interpretations of what they saw on the video — a reason why Himes hopes it can be made available for everyone to see.
“I’ve spent years looking at videos of lethal action taken, often in the terrorism context, and this video was profoundly shaken, and I think it’s important for Americans to see it,” Himes said in the Sunday interview. “It’s not lost on anyone, of course, that the interpretation of the video, which six or seven of us had an opportunity to see last week, broke down precisely on party lines. And so this is an instance in which I think the American public needs to judge for itself.”
Himes said the people on the boat were “almost certainly running drugs,” but that it was unclear if they were headed to the U.S. or elsewhere. He disputed characterizations that all 11 people on the boat were high-level targets or that they knew the identifies of everyone on board.
“Under the law, if someone has been struck and continues to engage in hostilities, points a gun at you, has a gun, they may be a legitimate target. But if they are outside of combat, they are not, and attacking them is a violation of the laws of war,” he said. “This is why the American people need to see this video. These guys were barely alive, much less engaging in hostilities.”
President Donald Trump said last week he supports the public release of the video. During an appearance over the weekend at the Reagan National Defense Forum, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said they’re reviewing sources and methods first since it’s an ongoing operation.
Himes and other Democrats who viewed the classified video offered different accounts of what they watched compared to Republican lawmakers who were also privy to it.
U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has defended the strikes and said they were valid targets. He also doesn’t oppose the public release of the video but echoed Hegseth’s remarks about how to go about carefully declassifying it.
“They were not floating in the ocean on a wooden plank, or in life jackets. They were on the capsized vessel. They were not incapacitated in any way,” Cotton said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “It was entirely appropriate to strike the boat again to make sure that its cargo was destroyed. It is in no way a violation of the war of law.”
As key members on their respective intelligence committees, both Himes and Cotton had private briefings with Navy Admiral Frank M. Bradley, who commanded the operation, and Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Similarly, U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District, and other Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee have also requested that Hegseth release all audio and video footage of the strikes. They cited reporting from The Washington Post that Hegseth issued a “kill everybody” order. Hegseth has disputed that and said he left the room after the first strike. But in an interview over the weekend, he said, “I would have made the same call myself” about the follow-up strike.
Himes said lawmakers received different explanations about the strikes, which is why he lacks trust in Hegseth. The congressman told CBS they were initially told that a second strike was ordered to clear the wreckage to help with navigation. Himes said he was then told that they might have a radio and were potentially trying to recover the drugs. Once he watched the video, Himes said, “You realize they don’t have a radio.”
“There was a lot of lack of clarity over exactly what Pete Hegseth’s role here was, but Pete Hegseth has no credibility on this matter,” Himes said. “So what we’ve had is a series of shifting explanations.”
When asked if he retains confidence in Bradley, Himes had a different take on the admiral’s role and capabilities.
“What it raises is what happens when an apparently good man like Admiral Bradley is placed in a context where he knows that if he countermands an order that he is perhaps uncomfortable with, it is very likely that he will be fired,” Himes said.
As the Pentagon grapples with the strikes, the inspector general of the department released a report last week about Hegseth’s use of the encrypted messaging app Signal to discuss an imminent attack on Houthi targets in Yemen earlier this year. The report found using a personal cell phone to conduct business and send nonpublic information over Signal could have put U.S. forces and mission objectives at risk.
It came to light after a journalist from The Atlantic was inadvertently added to a group chat where officials were discussing the plans of the pending attack back in March.
On Sunday, Himes told CBS that Republican lawmakers are privately expressing concerns about what has been referred to as Signalgate, despite the department calling the report a “total exoneration” and Hegseth maintaining he didn’t share classified information.
Members of Connecticut’s congressional delegation have recently called on Hegseth to resign in light of the boat strikes and his use of Signal to discuss attack plans.
“From leaking classified war plans in a group text to going around Congress and the President of the United States to halt weapons shipments to our ally Ukraine, Pete Hegseth has shown a repeated pattern of unbecoming conduct since the minute he was sworn in as Secretary of Defense,” U.S. Rep. John Larson, D-1st District, said in a statement. “He is clearly unfit to serve and needs evaluation.”
This story was originally published by the Connecticut Mirror.
