Donald Trump Is Purging the Defense Department to Elevate His Most Fervent Supporters

The lame-duck president is getting his revenge on the national security state.

Michael Brochstein/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Six days ago, chief Pentagon spokesperson Jonathan Hoffman took to Twitter to shoot down an NBC story claiming that Defense Secretary Mark Esper had prepared a letter of resignation. “He continues to serve the nation as the Secretary of Defense at the pleasure of the President,” Hoffman tweeted. By the next week, it was clear how fleeting it is for any national security official in the Trump era to serve “at the pleasure of the President.” 

President Trump tweeted on Monday that “Esper has been terminated” and announced that Christopher Miller, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, would replace him. While Miller still commands respect from his former colleagues in the military and government—one of whom told veteran intelligence reporter Jeff Stein that he would be no “yes man”—the rest of the Pentagon’s senior leadership now looks much friendlier to Trump.

Policy chief James Anderson, intelligence head Joseph Kernan, and Esper’s chief of staff Jen Stewart are all gone, replaced by true believers with a history of echoing Trump’s most conspiratorial views on Russian election interference and the Deep State. The sudden nature of the departures was reflected in a terse Pentagon statement, which said Kernan’s exit had been “planned for several months,” but said nothing of Anderson or Stewart’s reasons for resigning. 

In a typical administration, new Pentagon policy chief Anthony Tata would not have sniffed a senior Defense role. A former Army brigadier general who retired following an investigation into his extramarital affairs, he’s become a perennial Fox News guest with a fiery Twitter feed, whose best hits include calling for former CIA director John Brennan to be arrested, urging Trump to oust the “Deep State Cabal,” and referring to Islam as the “most oppressive violent religion I know of.” Trump initially nominated him for the same policy job over the summer, but after his most inflammatory statements were dug up by CNN, his nomination was withdrawn.

“Anthony Tata is patently unqualified to helm the Pentagon’s policy shop. He’s a segregationist who is hostile to women, people of color and Muslims,” Muslim Advocates public advocacy director Scott Simpson said in a statement after Tata’s new role had been reported. “That’s why his own party refused to confirm him. Every day that he serves as undersecretary of Defense is a day where all Americans are in danger. President-elect Biden must remove him as soon as possible.”

His untimely rise to one of the Pentagon’s top roles is yet another reminder of how hollowed out the department’s civilian leadership has become under Trump. After he was denied the top policy job, Tata was installed as the No. 2 policy official. Once Anderson resigned, Tata assumed the duties of the top role, giving him wide latitude “to demand more resignations across the department,” Foreign Policy reported.

Joining him in the senior ranks are new chief of staff Kash Patel, a former aide to Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), and intelligence head Ezra Cohen-Watnick, a National Security Council official whose role funneling top-secret documents about government surveillance to Nunes sparked an ethics investigation. As chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Nunes became the main congressional cheerleader against the so-called Deep State and a key cog in Trump’s effort to delegitimize the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election on his behalf. At the National Security Agency, which is part of the Defense Department, another former Nunes aide, Michael Ellis, was named general counsel.

“This is the Night of the Long Knives, but it’s not about policy. It’s about loyalty,” Gordon Adams, a former Clinton White House official who has written extensively about the interplay between the Pentagon, White House, and Congress, told me. “This is the community that has been disloyal—the national security one.” 

Since his election in 2016, Trump has compared intelligence officers to Nazis and mockingly instructed them to “go back to school” when they delivered testimony to Congress that contradicted his worldview. He’s also taken direct steps to have loyalists placed atop the vast intelligence community, installing Richard Grenell and Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas)—both outward Trump supporters—as director of national intelligence and firing FBI Director James Comey, who initially approved the investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. When Trump’s presidency has seemed most vulnerable, either during the run-up to Robert Mueller’s appointment as special counsel, or his impeachment last year, it’s been national security officials who have often provided the most damning testimony.

“He wants a national security community that’s willing to kiss his ass and do what he tells them to do,” Adams said. 

Less clear right now is what exactly Trump wants these officials to do, if anything at all. Alex Ward at Vox reported Wednesday that the personnel changes could precede a troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. The White House has long leaned on the Pentagon to remove troops more quickly from Afghanistan, but Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have been reluctant to meet Trump’s timeline. If Trump is still intent on getting all US troops out of Afghanistan before the end of the year, he might just have the people in place to pull it off. Will Ruger, Trump’s nominee as ambassador to Afghanistan, has publicly supported a rapid withdrawal and, on Wednesday, retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor joined the Pentagon as an adviser to Miller, adding another prominent pro-withdrawal voice to the mix.  

Even if no substantial policies come to pass from this brief interregnum, Trump’s new appointees have achieved much by their mere presence. Other Pentagon employees now know the price of stepping out of line, even this close to a future Joe Biden administration. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate