Hegseth Is Right To Hold Military Men And Women To The Same Fitness Standards
The entire point of a standard is that it should be, well, standard.The entire point of a standard is that it should be, well, standard.Senators grill aviation leaders over 15,000 close calls at DC airport before deadly collision
Senators on Thursday grilled several aviation leaders during a hearing concerning the January midair collision between an America Airlines commercial jet and an Army Black Hawk helicopter that resulted in the deaths of 67 people.
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation, Space, and Innovation, cited a preliminary report from the National Transportation Safety Board in his opening statements, noting that the agency’s investigation found thousands of close-call incidents near the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport over a three-year period.
'Specifically, even since the crash, certain safety measures that could have been simply implemented still have not been.'
“Sixty-seven lives that were lost on January 29 were taken prematurely in an accident that by all indications should have been avoided,” Moran stated.
He called the statistics in the NTSB’s preliminary report “alarming.”
“In a 13-year period, not a single month went by without at least one ‘close call’ between a helicopter and a commercial jet operating at DCA,” Moran continued. “Between October ’21 and December ’24, there were 85 incidents where the lateral separation between a commercial jet and helicopter was less than 1,500 feet and the vertical separation was less than 200 feet.”
The NTSB’s report stated that during the same period, of the 944,179 operations, 15,214 were considered “near midair collision events” between commercial planes and helicopters. The report defined those close calls as instances where two aircraft were “less than 1 [nautical mile],” or roughly 6,000 feet, of lateral separation and “less than 400 ft” of vertical separation.
The NTSB also found that “a helicopter operating over the eastern shoreline of the Potomac River would have about 75 ft of vertical separation from an airplane approaching runway 33, and this distance decreases if the helicopter is operated farther from the shoreline.”
Jennifer Homendy, the chair of the NTSB, told senators, “There’s virtually no margin of error.”
Chris Rocheleau, the Federal Aviation Administration’s acting administrator, was pressed about how the agency failed to address the safety concerns.
“How did we get to this point?” Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) asked Rocheleau. “It’s like it’s a series of errors here.”
“What office said this is a safe pathway in agreement when the NTSB is telling us today it never really was safe? It was an intolerable risk,” she stated.
Rocheleau explained that the airspace was redesigned several times in the past.
“When you talk about how did we get there, I think we’re going to learn more of that through the investigation,” he replied.
Rocheleau stated that the FAA’s air traffic system requires “modernization as soon as possible.”
“I can assure to the flying public: to fly is safe. We have the safest, most complex system in the world, and it is safe to fly. I would also say the air traffic system is in dire need of upgrade,” he said.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) questioned Brigadier General Matthew Braman, the U.S. Army aviation director, about a controversial policy that allows flights to operate with the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast, a key safety system, turned off.
“I find that shocking and deeply unacceptable. And I want to encourage the Army right now to revisit that policy and to revisit that policy today,” Cruz told Braman. “I can tell you, if the Army chooses not to, I have a high level of confidence that Congress will pass legislation mandating that you revisit the policy.”
Family members of the victims also attended the Senate hearing.
Dailey Crafton, the brother of 40-year-old Casey, a husband and father of three who died in the collision, told the Daily Caller that he was “surprised” by the safety lapses.
“Specifically, even since the crash, certain safety measures that could have been simply implemented still have not been. Accountability is still not being taken by parties who should be held responsible,” he said.
Tracy Brammeier, a partner at Clifford Law Offices, which is representing the families, stated, “The failure to share details about near-midair collisions, or to perform trend analysis on the history of such incidents, or otherwise take action to address the high number of occurrences is completely unacceptable.”
“All entities who failed to take action must be held accountable to the victims’ families and to the flying public,” Brammeier added.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Tariffs aren’t just taxes — they’re national defense
It’s easy to mock Europe for relying on the United States for its defense, but we face the same predicament: outsourcing critical components of our military arsenal overseas — and often not to friendly allies. Trump’s tariffs could help bring them back home.
Tariffs are not merely a way to repatriate and rebuild America’s industrial strength; they are also a tool to rebuild America’s military self-sufficiency. A harrowing amount of our critical military components aren’t produced domestically, making the United States dangerously reliant on foreign countries, including adversaries like China. It’s almost comical how some war hawks would go to war with the Chinese to defend Taiwan, while we still rely on them for the material that fuels our war machine.
Let’s bring home America’s military supply chain and let’s use tariffs to help get it done.
“Principled free traders” argue that “tariffs are a tax on consumers,” favoring offshore manufacturing because it lowers consumer costs. But the cracks in their “free trade” argument become evident as American taxpayers foot a higher bill from their hawkish policies than from Trump’s tariffs.
Here are some other “taxes on consumers.”
Defense spending
Every cent that goes toward America’s national defense is part of the taxpayer’s burden. The U.S. annual defense budget is about $850 billion, which costs each U.S. resident about $2,500 — although this number is, in practice, much higher, given that not all residents pay taxes. Eliminating defense spending would provide consumers with a huge tax break.
If “free traders” are consistent in their argument, shouldn’t they advocate eliminating defense spending? Though extreme, this example demonstrates the inconsistency in the “no taxes without qualification” argument against tariffs.
If tariffs are a tax on consumers, they are a tax that also supports our national defense and self-reliance. Opposing tariffs necessary for America to have the industrial self-sufficiency to source our war machine domestically is akin to opposing a permanent standing army.
Funding foreign wars
Every cent spent sending munitions to Ukraine is a tax on U.S. consumers. Ask the typical American whether he’d rather see more of his money go toward rebuilding American manufacturing via tariffs or have it go to the Ukrainian war effort that is killing off a generation of men. The typical American would prefer the former, yet we engage in the latter.
Deficit spending
Consumers pay for the massive federal budget deficit through inflation — a cruel and direct tax on consumers. Whether it be foreign aid, domestic waste, or any other gratuitous government project, every penny of deficit spending is a tax paid for consumers in the form of inflation. Most Americans would likely prefer tariffs that produce American manufacturing jobs over wasteful, ideologically charged deficit spending, such as funding transgender operas in Colombia.
Foreign sanctions
Sanctions that block a country from exporting to the U.S. serve the same purpose as high tariffs. Ironically, free traders don’t get worked up over sanctions like they do with tariffs. Current sanctions imposed on Russia are technically a “tax on consumers,” driving up prices on goods that Russia would otherwise export.
If China is just as much — if not more — of a threat to U.S. national security as Russia, why aren’t “free traders” in favor of blocking Chinese exports in the same manner?
A recent report on military spending revealed that the Army and Navy are reducing their reliance on China for critical technology. At the same time, the Air Force has increased its use of Chinese suppliers.
While the Army and Navy’s efforts to distance themselves from China are a positive step, any reliance on a foreign adversary for critical military infrastructure poses a serious risk. The U.S. must prioritize returning military supply chains to American soil to ensure national security and self-sufficiency.
Even the most passionate “free traders” will sometimes acknowledge that some products critical to national defense should be manufactured stateside. But rather than giving so-called “experts” and “technocrats” the power to determine which components of the military-industrial supply chain are “most essential,” we shouldn’t leave any part of our national security apparatus on foreign soil — and certainly not that of foreign adversaries like China.
Vice President JD Vance understands the issue, recently posting on X that “the bitter irony of America’s present predicament is that the very people who cheer for permanent arms shipments to Ukraine also supported the de-industrialization of America. The very things you want us to send are things we don’t make enough of.”
The vice president is correct. Let’s bring home America’s military supply chain, and let’s use tariffs to help get it done.
Report: U.S. Army Special Operations Issues Threat Advisory Over Leftist Attacks On Tesla Owners, Vehicles
The U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) reportedly issued a “threat advisory” on Thursday warning of “possible threats” from radical left-wing activists against the command’s Tesla owners. In screenshots of the alert obtained by Federalist contributor and retired Army ranger John A. Lucas, the USASOC informed service members of increased “concerns” regarding recent attacks against […]7 Trump Orders Congress Should Codify To Keep Wokeness Out Of The Military
The Trump administration’s bold executive actions will not be permanent unless Congress codifies them in law.The Pentagon’s $850B Nightmare Will Be DOGE’s Biggest Challenge Yet
The Pentagon doesn’t appear to have a battle plan to turn around seven straight years of audit failures.Pentagon finally giving 'transgender' troops the boot
The Pentagon indicated in a Wednesday court filing that unless granted a waiver, troops who identify as members of the opposite sex will be removed from the military.
President Donald Trump — who vowed to "restore the Trump ban on transgenders in the military" in August 2023 — issued an executive order on Jan. 27 titled "Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness," effectively banning transvestites from the military.
In the order, Trump stressed that the military's policy to establish "high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity" is incompatible with the accommodations sought and health constraints faced by gender-dysphoric individuals.
Trump noted further that those "expressing a false 'gender identity'" at odds with their actual sex "cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service" and cannot satisfy the soldier's "commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle."
'Service by these individuals is not in the best interests of the Military Services and is not clearly consistent with the interests of national security.'
The president directed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to update military policy accordingly.
Despite the federal lawsuit filed on Jan. 28 by GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders and the National Center for Lesbian Rights challenging Trump's order — Talbott v. Trump — Hegseth announced earlier this month that the Pentagon was pausing "all new accessions for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria" along with all sex-change procedures for service members.
The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense revealed the Pentagon's new guidance in a Wednesday court filing in Talbott.
The guidance, delineated in a 13-page memo, states:
Military service by Service members and applicants for military service who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria is incompatible with military service. Service by these individuals is not in the best interests of the Military Services and is not clearly consistent with the interests of national security. Individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are no longer eligible for military service.
The guidance noted further that current service members afflicted with gender dysphoria "will be processed for separation from military service." Unless the transvestic service members' military records otherwise warrant a lower characterization, their discharges will be honorable.
According to the memo, exceptions could be made for gender-dysphoric service members if they are willing to abide by Pentagon guidelines and there is a "compelling Government interest in accessing the applicant that directly supports warfighting capabilities."
The memo directed the secretaries of each military branch to identify gender-dysphoric service members within 30 days and to proceed with "separation actions" over the following 30 days.
SPARTA Pride, an activist group that supports transvestites in the military, said in a statement, "Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve. No policy will ever erase transgender Americans’ contribution to history, warfighting, or military excellence."
Jennifer Levi of GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders bemoaned the Pentagon's new guidance, stating, "This is a purge of unprecedented magnitude."
A recent Pentagon estimate indicates the magnitude of the removals is actually quite small. Of the roughly 2 million Americans in uniform, roughly 4,240 individuals have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, reported the New York Times. Activists frequently suggest that the number of troops who are chronically confused about their sex serving in the military is somewhere in the neighborhood of 15,000.
The planned removal of transvestites from the military appears to be a case of history repeating itself.
Trump announced in July 2017 that "the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military." Two years later, the Trump Pentagon established a policy permitting "transgender" troops to serve so long as they didn't attempt to masquerade as members of the opposite sex or invade their spaces.
Former President Joe Biden reversed the Trump policy after taking office, stating, "America's strength is found in its diversity."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Marine Corps ‘On Track’ To Hit 2025 Recruiting Targets, Official Says
Signaling another prospective win for the new Trump administration, the U.S. Marine Corps is on pace to hit its fiscal year 2025 recruiting goals, The Federalist has learned. Speaking with The Federalist, Marine Corps Recruiting Command spokesman Jim Edwards revealed that the branch is “on track” to meet its total force accession mission for this […]Trump surge: Army recruitment at 15-year high as ads promise warfighting, not woke agenda
Woke Army recruitment advertisements featuring LGBT parades are out. Army recruitment ads featuring gun-toting warriors rejecting the limits suffered by other mortal men are in.
The shift in messaging was swift and dramatic — and may prove to be part of a winning combination that will continue to drive up recruitment.
When Gen. Lloyd Austin, Biden's secretary of defense, was running the show, the Army released a recruitment ad on May 4, 2021, about a female University of California, Berkeley, graduate's decision to find herself in the Army. The controversial ad featured an LGBT activist parade, a lesbian "wedding," and the suggestion that supporting non-straight couples was somehow comparable to defending the nation.
Things did not improve a great deal in messaging in the years that followed.
For instance, the Army published a makeup tutorial on its YouTube page, showing the world how a soldier moisturizes her face; applies concealer, blush, and bronzer; how she properly sets her ponytail; and how she completes her warrior look with mascara and lip liner.
The Army failed to hit its recruitment targets in fiscal years 2023 and 2022. While it hit its lowered goal of 57,500 for the Regular Army in 2021, it hit only 73.6% of its target for the Army Reserve.
Things have evidently changed, not just for messaging but for recruitment numbers.
Rather than try to appeal to LGBT activists or to those prospects anxious about how they might manage their skin-care routine behind enemy lines, the Army has recently shared a number of promotional posts to social media emphasizing lethality, the "warrior ethos," and strength.
A Feb. 5 Army video captioned, "We fight to WIN," shows men firing different kinds of guns while rock and roll blares in the background. The ad appears devoid of ideological message — just the suggestion that recruits will be transformed into warriors capable of hitting soft and hard targets at range.
— (@)
'Hear what FREEDOM sounds like.'
Other ads released in the days since are similarly clean-cut and to the point.
A post with a graphic that depicts one soldier taking aim at a potential threat off-screen while another progresses with gun at the ready was shared to X on Feb. 7 with the caption, "The Warrior Ethos is a set of principals [sic] by which every Soldier lives, it shapes our character, and is a way of life. The Warrior Ethos defines how a Soldier trains, lives, and fights."
An Army video shared to X on Feb. 8 and captioned, "Strong Soldiers = Effective Warfighters," features a hulking soldier handily dead-lifting 450 pounds before telling the camera, "Stronger people are harder to kill."
— (@)
Another video shared the same day showed a soldier firing what appears to be an M240 machine gun in a desert setting, with no mention of race, sexual preference, or political activism. The caption reads, "Sound on to hear what FREEDOM sounds like."
A Feb. 9 post emphasizing the need for persistence and the warrior ethos shows a soldier firing above text that reads, "I WILL NEVER ACCEPT DEFEAT."
— (@)
While this simplified and unwoke style of Army ad may do a better job of moving the needle on recruitment than LGBT agitprop and makeup tutorials, the big catalyst so far appears to have been President Donald Trump's re-election.
Army recruiters recently revealed that during the month of December, they were enlisting 346 soldiers a day. This recruitment surge led into a month that saw what Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth indicated was the Army's best recruiting number in 15 years.
The defense secretary, who suggested during his confirmation hearing that Trump's re-election got the ball rolling on a renewed interest in the military, stated on Feb. 4 that "America's youth want to serve under the bold & strong 'America First' Leadership" of the 47th president.
After all, Trump promised to eliminate woke ideologues from the military; to take an axe to racist DEI initiatives in the federal government; to reinstate thousands of service members discharged for refusing COVID-19 vaccines; and to pick a defense secretary who prioritizes efficacy over diversity — promises he has largely made good on already.
Before hitting the bricks, former Army Secretary Christine Wormuth attempted to pour cold water on the notion that Trump's election and "concerns about the Army being, quote, woke," were significant factors when it came to recruitment in either direction.
Wormuth suggested instead to the Associated Press last month that the Future Soldier Preparatory Course at Fort Jackson, South Carolina — a remedial program launched in 2022 with the aim of helping recruits who previously failed to meet the Army's physical or academic requirements squeak by to basic training — has been a major driver of the Army's recruitment success and will account for roughly 30% of this year's recruits.
Time will tell to what extent this fiscal year's recruitment numbers eclipse those seen during Biden's tenure.
During a Pentagon town hall last week, Hegseth stated, "I think we've seen an enthusiasm and excitement from young men and women who want to join the military actively because they are interested in being a part of the finest fighting force the world has to offer."
He further underscored the attractiveness of the military as a meritocratic institution, noting, "Our strength is our shared purpose, regardless of our background, regardless of how we grew up, regardless of our gender, regardless of our race."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com