Senate Rebukes Pentagon Secrecy, Hands Trump Sweeping Defense Victory

Paul Riverbank, 12/18/2025The Senate advances a $901 billion defense bill amid fierce debate over military transparency, air safety, and lawful orders. While funding and oversight increase, lingering controversies signal ongoing clashes over secrecy, accountability, and the balance of power between Congress and the Pentagon.

What’s especially notable this year isn’t just the sum of money, but the footprints of months-long behind-the-scenes wrangling. In past years, transparency concerns swirled. This time, buried in the legislative text: a fresh requirement for the Pentagon to fork over raw videos of American military strikes. Pressure crescendoed after a spate of high-profile incidents—particularly a pair of deadly naval strikes near Venezuela. Critics from both parties suddenly found themselves uniting over a single demand: open the books, and show us exactly what happened.

Yet, if there was a moment when the process risked coming undone, it came with a debate over air safety in Washington, D.C.—a city no stranger to high-stakes risk. Memories of a grim tragedy linger: earlier this year, a Black Hawk helicopter and a civilian jet collided near Reagan National, killing 67 people. That crash reignited arguments over whether standards should be relaxed for certain flights above the capital. Senator Ted Cruz, chairing the Senate Commerce Committee, made a play for his ROTOR Act to toughen oversight. But amending the defense bill would have bounced it back to the House and threatened to derail everything. Cruz settled instead for a promise: “I’m seeking a vote on the ROTOR Act as part of any appropriations measure before the current continuing resolution expires at the end of next month.” The question hangs: will it stick, or slide off the Senate’s crowded slate?

Transparency, in theory, should clear up gray areas. But the debate only deepened. Senators from both camps, restless after a September incident in the Caribbean involving a suspected drug boat, pressed for uncut footage. The classified briefing that followed left little resolved. Senator Chuck Schumer, never one to sidestep a fight, emerged grumbling: “He refused,” Schumer said of War Secretary Pete Hegseth. “The administration came to this briefing empty-handed. That’s the major question we face, and if they can’t be transparent on this, how can you trust their transparency on all the other issues swirling about in the Caribbean?”

Inside that closed-door session, the tension was palpable. Senator Mark Kelly—ex-Navy pilot, now full-time lawmaker—wanted answers about the boat strikes. But Hegseth pivoted, zeroing in on a different controversy altogether. At issue: a video where Kelly and five Democratic colleagues told troops to reject illegal orders. Hegseth hinted at a Pentagon review ranging from a slap on the wrist to far more severe fallout.

Kelly, post-briefing, seemed both frustrated and bemused: “It seems like he came there with a little bit of a speech for me, which says, again, a lot about him. Even in this closed briefing with a bunch of senators, he’s focused on this thing about me and didn’t even want to get to my questions. I had some very specific questions for him about the boat strikes, and he feels the need to give a speech. I think it again shows how unserious this guy is.” For now, Kelly’s legal team is standing firm, while the FBI quietly reviews the affair and, as of now, sees little grounds for prosecution.

Not everyone in the GOP is clamoring for punishment. Senator Roger Wicker, pressed for his view, replied simply, “You asked me that question, and my answer is no.” Senator Lisa Murkowski, rarely one for theatrics, dismissed the Pentagon’s review as a distraction: “The Department of Defense and FBI surely have more important priorities than this frivolous investigation.”

Of course, the NDAA does more than air out internal disputes. It secures aid for Ukraine, and finally winds down old authorizations for military action in Iraq and the Gulf. Senate Majority Leader John Thune tried to put it in perspective: “This defense authorization act, although it doesn’t have as much in there for defense as a lot of us would like, is a step in the right direction… to ensure that in a dangerous world, we are prepared to defend America and American interests.” Legislative fatigue, perhaps, but no less conviction.

Now with the legislation all but locked in, Congress faces a familiar marathon—confirming nearly 100 of the president’s nominees and wrangling over spending bills before the next funding deadline hits. The dust-up over secrecy and lawful orders lingers—a subplot unlikely to fade soon.

For the moment, the military budget is secure. Lawmakers, restless as ever, now turn to the next round. Washington, after all, rarely sleeps.

The Washington buzz today revolves around a mammoth $901 billion defense bill, now awaiting President Trump’s pen. The National Defense Authorization Act—known on the Hill as the NDAA—glided through the Senate with a commanding 77-20 tally. It’s a number that speaks to a rare moment of unity, though it’s hard to call anything about the process smooth.What’s especially notable this year isn’t just the sum of money, but the footprints of months-long behind-the-scenes wrangling. In past years, transparency concerns swirled. This time, buried in the legislative text: a fresh requirement for the Pentagon to fork over raw videos of American military strikes. Pressure crescendoed after a spate of high-profile incidents—particularly a pair of deadly naval strikes near Venezuela. Critics from both parties suddenly found themselves uniting over a single demand: open the books, and show us exactly what happened.Yet, if there was a moment when the process risked coming undone, it came with a debate over air safety in Washington, D.C.—a city no stranger to high-stakes risk. Memories of a grim tragedy linger: earlier this year, a Black Hawk helicopter and a civilian jet collided near Reagan National, killing 67 people. That crash reignited arguments over whether standards should be relaxed for certain flights above the capital. Senator Ted Cruz, chairing the Senate Commerce Committee, made a play for his ROTOR Act to toughen oversight. But amending the defense bill would have bounced it back to the House and threatened to derail everything. Cruz settled instead for a promise: “I’m seeking a vote on the ROTOR Act as part of any appropriations measure before the current continuing resolution expires at the end of next month.” The question hangs: will it stick, or slide off the Senate’s crowded slate?Transparency, in theory, should clear up gray areas. But the debate only deepened. Senators from both camps, restless after a September incident in the Caribbean involving a suspected drug boat, pressed for uncut footage. The classified briefing that followed left little resolved. Senator Chuck Schumer, never one to sidestep a fight, emerged grumbling: “He refused,” Schumer said of War Secretary Pete Hegseth. “The administration came to this briefing empty-handed. That’s the major question we face, and if they can’t be transparent on this, how can you trust their transparency on all the other issues swirling about in the Caribbean?”Inside that closed-door session, the tension was palpable. Senator Mark Kelly—ex-Navy pilot, now full-time lawmaker—wanted answers about the boat strikes. But Hegseth pivoted, zeroing in on a different controversy altogether. At issue: a video where Kelly and five Democratic colleagues told troops to reject illegal orders. Hegseth hinted at a Pentagon review ranging from a slap on the wrist to far more severe fallout.Kelly, post-briefing, seemed both frustrated and bemused: “It seems like he came there with a little bit of a speech for me, which says, again, a lot about him. Even in this closed briefing with a bunch of senators, he’s focused on this thing about me and didn’t even want to get to my questions. I had some very specific questions for him about the boat strikes, and he feels the need to give a speech. I think it again shows how unserious this guy is.” For now, Kelly’s legal team is standing firm, while the FBI quietly reviews the affair and, as of now, sees little grounds for prosecution.Not everyone in the GOP is clamoring for punishment. Senator Roger Wicker, pressed for his view, replied simply, “You asked me that question, and my answer is no.” Senator Lisa Murkowski, rarely one for theatrics, dismissed the Pentagon’s review as a distraction: “The Department of Defense and FBI surely have more important priorities than this frivolous investigation.”Of course, the NDAA does more than air out internal disputes. It secures aid for Ukraine, and finally winds down old authorizations for military action in Iraq and the Gulf. Senate Majority Leader John Thune tried to put it in perspective: “This defense authorization act, although it doesn’t have as much in there for defense as a lot of us would like, is a step in the right direction… to ensure that in a dangerous world, we are prepared to defend America and American interests.” Legislative fatigue, perhaps, but no less conviction.Now with the legislation all but locked in, Congress faces a familiar marathon—confirming nearly 100 of the president’s nominees and wrangling over spending bills before the next funding deadline hits. The dust-up over secrecy and lawful orders lingers—a subplot unlikely to fade soon.For the moment, the military budget is secure. Lawmakers, restless as ever, now turn to the next round. Washington, after all, rarely sleeps.