Newsmax Legal Analyst Andrew Napolitano Destroys Pete Hegseth in Stunning Commentary: ‘Should Be Prosecuted for a War Crime!’

Newsmax’s senior judicial analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano, argued on Tuesday that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth should be prosecuted for a war crime over his order to kill everyone aboard an alleged drug smuggling boat in early September.

Anchor Shaun Kraisman introduced Napolitano on the Trump-friendly network and added, “Again, the White House is very clear that they were acting within the scope of the law. The orders were given to take out these boats, and this continues on to their effort to stop drug trafficking here in the States. It does get a little murky of what happened in terms of the orders, who carried what, who said what. Talk to us about that.”

Napolitano replied, “Well, I wish the White House would reveal to us the laws on which the president is relying. He says he has an opinion from the Justice Department, but neither the Justice Department nor the White House will offer it for public scrutiny.”

“And it gives me no pleasure to say what I’m about to say because I worked with Pete Hegseth for seven or eight years at Fox News. This is an act of a war crime, ordering survivors who the law requires be rescued instead to be murdered. There’s absolutely no legal basis for it,” Napolitano continued, adding:

Everybody along the line who did it, from the Secretary of Defense to the admiral to the people who actually pulled the trigger should be prosecuted for a war crime for killing these two people.

“And who would bring that prosecution forward?” Kraisman pressed.

“Military would bring it because they’re all active duty military, not the Secretary of Defense, but everybody else would be subject to a court-martial. I don’t know where this is going to go. Republicans in the Congress seem to be as exasperated by it as the Democrats do. I think it’s getting beyond politics now. The killing is out of hand. And this last one, in which Pete Hegseth first denied that he gave the order, and then the White House said he did give the order, and then the White House said it was in self-defense. Self-defense! You got two people in the ocean clinging to a burning boat to stay alive, and they’re gonna be killed for self-defense? That doesn’t make any sense,” Napolitano fumed.

Kraisman added, “For the viewers that may not know about that part, I have it for them. This is the White House press secretary talking about this being conducted in self-defense. Watch.”

A clip then showed Karoline Leavitt saying, “The strike conducted on September 2nd was conducted in self-defense to protect Americans and vital United States interests. The strike was conducted in international waters and in accordance with the law of armed conflict.”

Napolitano reacted, “Well, the law of armed conflict says survivors have to be rescued. They can’t be killed. That’s very clear. It’s in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and it’s in federal law. So we’ll see where this goes. I think that both houses of Congress are going to investigate it.”

“The press secretary, she goes on to say this. I just wanted to read this quote, ‘The president has made it quite clear that if narco terrorists are again trafficking illegal drugs towards the United States, he, meaning the president, has the authority to kill them. That is what this administration is doing,’ end quote. So you’re saying that’s not a good defense. This is a war crime, that from you,” Kraisman added.

Napolitano replied, “Correct. Correct. Even Congress–”

“They are heavy words,” interjected Kraisman.

“Very heavy words, which is why I prefaced it by saying it gives me no pleasure to do it. I’m accusing them of crimes that could incarcerate them or even execute them if this stuff was enforced to the hilt. I wish it hadn’t happened and I wish I didn’t have to say it, but I have to be intellectually honest about what I’m observing here,” Napolitano replied.

Kraisman pushed, “You don’t see any other side to that because you’re very well versed in the law, we know that. You don’t see any other side of argument for the administration other than a war crime is committed, there is no other avenue to look at this?”

Napolitano hit back, “Look, narco terrorist is not a legal term. It’s a political term and using that political term does not justify–”

“But if they’re labeled terrorists by the administration, doesn’t that indeed indicate that they are?” Kraisman pushed back.

Napolitano replied, “No, no, only if they’re engaged in violence can the military kill them. The military can’t—”

Kraisman pressed, “But it seems violent if they’re coming here with drugs that could kill Americans. Is that not so?”

Napolitano replied, “Well, they’re fifteen hundred miles from the United States on a speed boat with a fifty-mile distance. It’s inconceivable it could reach the United States.”

Kraisman concluded, “I’ll leave that one there, Judge Andrew Napolitano. Again, heavy words from you. I do appreciate the honesty about it, which we can continue to follow.”

Watch the clip above via Newsmax.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!