PoliticusUSA is ad-free and 100% supported by readers like you. To support our work, become a subscriber.
On Friday, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and former President Donald Trump convened in the Oval Office, launching a vehement critique of The New York Times for its report suggesting that Elon Musk was set to receive a clandestine briefing from Hegseth regarding U.S. military strategies in the event of a conflict with China.
Trump remarked, “It’s all the news that’s not fit to print. They have fake sources, or they don’t have sources; I think they make most of it up. This was a fabricated story by The New York Times. I refer to it as the failing; it’s a failing newspaper, and they really are the enemy of the people, among other things.”
Given the administration’s historical penchant for falsehoods, one might be inclined to view their vehement denials as unintentional endorsements of the Times’ story.
In fact, the administration’s subsequent actions appear to lend further credence to the allegations.
The Pentagon has launched an investigation involving polygraph examinations to identify leakers following Musk’s call for the prosecution of Defense Department officials disseminating “maliciously false information” about his military interactions.
In light of the controversy surrounding Musk’s recent Pentagon visit, Joe Kasper, chief of staff to Secretary Hegseth, urged an investigation into “unauthorized disclosures” of national security information, recommending that those responsible be referred for criminal prosecution.
This raises a rather intriguing question: how can there be a leaker if the story is fabricated?
