Will Hegseth be in trouble by order killing everybody?

Here’s a breakdown of what we know so far about Pete Hegseth allegedly ordering “kill everybody,” whether he could be in trouble — and how Donald Trump is reacting.

---

What happened — the “kill everybody” allegation

• According to a report by The Washington Post, during a September?2,?2025 U.S. military strike on a suspected drug?smuggling boat in the Caribbean, Hegseth allegedly issued a verbal command to “kill everybody” — meaning kill all aboard the vessel. The Washington Post+2Hindustan Times+2

• After the first strike, two survivors reportedly clung to the wreckage. The Post says a second strike was ordered — allegedly to carry out Hegseth’s directive — which killed those survivors. The Washington Post+2AOL+2

• The broader campaign has reportedly led to over 80 deaths across multiple such strikes. The Washington Post+2The Guardian+2

---

? Legal and ethical implications — why this could get Hegseth (and others) in trouble

• Many legal experts, former military lawyers, and lawmakers argue that if true, the order would violate both U.S. and international laws and amount to a war crime. Targeting shipwrecked or incapacitated individuals is generally prohibited under the laws of armed conflict. TheWrap+2The Washington Post+2

• One conservative legal commentator described the alleged orders as “at best, a war crime.” TheWrap

• A group of former military attorneys called the targeting of defenseless individuals “unlawful,” stating that international law requires rescuing shipwrecked survivors or treating them as prisoners of war — not killing them. The Washington Post+1

• Congress has responded: lawmakers from both parties have called for a full investigation, seeking the orders, recordings, and legal basis for the strikes. Benzinga+2The Washington Post+2

So, yes — depending on the evidence, Hegseth could be in serious trouble: criminal investigations, possible war?crimes charges, and broad reputational and political fallout.

---

? How Trump is reacting

• Trump has publicly backed Hegseth. He said he has “great confidence” that Hegseth did not give a spoken order to kill everyone aboard the boat. “He said he didn’t do it, and I believe him 100 percent,” Trump said. The Washington Post+1

• At the same time, Trump said he didn’t “want that second strike” — implying that, even if Hegseth issued some order, Trump would have preferred a different course. The Washington Post+1

• The administration defends the broader boat?strike campaign as targeted at “narco?terrorists,” claiming the operations are lawful under U.S. and international law — though critics dispute whether drug smugglers qualify as combatants. Breitbart+2Yahoo News+2

Bottom line: Trump is standing by Hegseth — at least publicly — and has asked for a review of the events.

---

Where things stand now — why it’s still uncertain

• Hegseth has denied the allegation, calling the Washington Post’s report “fake news,” “fabricated,” and “inflammatory.” Breitbart+2Yahoo News+2

• The reported second strike — the one killing the survivors — remains under scrutiny. Congressional committees have opened oversight proceedings to evaluate classified material, orders, and the legal reasoning behind the operation. Benzinga+2The Washington Post+2

• International law experts warn that, even if the targets were traffickers or part of a designated terrorist organization, killing survivors who are incapacitated or shipwrecked violates the law of armed conflict. TheWrap+2Atlanta Black Star+2

Because of these uncertainties — conflicting accounts, classified evidence, and legal complexity — it’s not clear yet whether Hegseth will be charged, absolved, or face some other outcome.