About That Pentagon Press Policy

I have hesitated to write about the kerfuffle over the press policy that has caused so much angst among journalists who cover the Pentagon. 

The reason is simple: I hadn't taken the time to read it in its entirety (I have been a little busy, and it always fell below the line of to-dos until now), and I was pretty confident that I wasn't getting the full story from media accounts, although I knew that I could be wrong in that assumption. 

Well, I finally got the time, and boy am I glad I did. What the media are feeding you is complete horse do-do. 

First, let's take a look at the line being fed to the American people by whining media folks. There is lots of talk of First Amendment violations and an attack on freedom of the press, and claims being made that the military is demanding to vet everything that reporters write or say before it goes out to the public. Reporters have left in a huff, having turned in their press passes rather than obey the rules laid out by the Secretary of War.

Good riddance. And stop lying. The policy is very clear.
The Pentagon will be better off without liars like you. pic.twitter.com/HoFQFLr6BI

— Lee Ebbs (@GraceAloneSaved) October 15, 2025

From all the storm and strife, it sure looks as if the Pentagon has stepped over the line, and if Pete Hegseth were actually demanding that the media run everything they report before it gets released, the journalists would have a good point and be right in their refusal to obey the rules. 

But, of course, they are not right, as usual. Whether it is because they lack reading comprehension--a possibility--or because they are lying--also a possibility--is up to you to decide. 

Sidenote:

I talk ALL THE TIME about doing your own news research based on PRIMARY SOURCES.

This is a perfect example of how that works.

I kept seeing that bogus quote over and over and over, and it puzzled me why none of those reports bothered to link to the primary source.…

— Cynical Publius (@CynicalPublius) October 16, 2025

There is SO MUCH lying and distortion on this matter, we need to cut through the garbage.

So I’m here for it.

Go ahead and Google this phrase (you'll see it everywhere in sooooo many legacy media reports):

“. . . information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if it is unclassified."

Google it with quotes around it so you get that EXACT phrase.  See how much it shows up, VERBATIM, with those EXACT WORDS in that EXACT ORDER in so, so, so many media reports?

Go look for yourself.  I’ll wait.

______________________

Welcome back.

Now.

This quote strongly suggests that what the Pentagon is saying is that the media cannot publish an article without Pentagon prior approval.  If this were true, that would, in fact, be an egregious example of prior restraint and a grotesque First Amendment violation.

But…

See…

That VERBATIM quote is NOT TRUE.  Here is the actual quote:

“. . . information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released by any military member, DoW civilian employee or contract employee, even if it is unclassified.”

(I’ll link to the source document in my post immediately below, because the algorithm hates links.)

Notice the words that are DIFFERENT in the actual quote.  (I bolded and italicized them.)

The lying media—the ones mewling about First Amendment violations—PURPOSELY LEFT OUT THOSE KEY WORDS.

Liars, liars, pants on fire.

Let me explain the difference:

1. In the media’s distorted, untrue quote, the language suggests that any news story requires pre-approval by the DoW.  If this were true, it would be a clear First Amendment violation.

But it’s not true.  

2.  The ACTUAL quote merely says that people who work in the Department of War are not allowed to provide important defense-related information to the media without the appropriate national security approval party in the DoW authorizing that DoW employee to share such information first.

THIS IS NOT A FIRST AMENDMENT VIOLATION.  THIS IS NOT PRIOR RESTRAINT.  The press is still allowed to write whatever it wants.  The limitation is on DoW employees, military and civilian, and NO ONE ELSE.  

THERE ARE NO LIMITS ON THE PRESS IN THIS MATTER, and the press is purposely and deliberately lying to you about this issue—lying by omission.

Please spread the word.  Otherwise well-meaning people are being snookered by this propagandistic sleight of hand these evil journotards are foisting on them.

Cynical Publius is absolutely correct. The Pentagon policy merely quotes rules for Department of War employees that are longstanding, and imposes absolutely no new restrictions on what the media report. So what the "journalists," who have just LIED to you about "new" restrictions on what they can report, are complaining about is being informed about the legal limits that have always applied to Pentagon employees. 

It's simple: unauthorized people cannot leak to the media without facing consequences. Only authorized personnel may speak to the media, which has always been the case. The punishment for leaking classified material is harsh, and the potential punishment for leaking unclassified material is less so, but potentially significant. 

Everybody should know that. Reporters can still report whatever they like, but people who leak to them are at risk of punishment. 

This sort of restriction is not only nothing new, but also applies at any workplace. If an employee talks to the media without being authorized to do so, chances are they will face consequences, whether they work at Target or for the government. It's why reporters will insert lines like "the source asked to be anonymous because they are not authorized to speak for..." 

Geez. 

So...the big complaint is that Pete Hegseth is reminding reporters that when they speak to Pentagon employees, they are putting those people at risk. They SHOULD know that, as should the employees. It's a pretty obvious thing everybody there should know. 

As for the rest of the restrictions...who actually thinks that journalists should be wandering the halls of the Pentagon without restriction? It's kind of amazing that a rule against this was not being strictly enforced before Hegseth got there. 

With all this said, if a Pentagon employee feels that it is his duty to blow the whistle on some practice or policy they find immoral, they can do so and face the consequences. It has always been thus, and will remain so. All the best scoops are not reports of rumors from random employees, but disclosures of illegal activities or gross ethical violations that people chose to risk their jobs or freedom to get out into public. 

This policy is more of the "loose lips can sink ships" variety. It will reduce the amount of gossip or inadvertent slips of the tongue that winds up in public, not important news stories. 

Ironically, leaving the Pentagon--the means by which the media folks express their objection--achieves the same goal Hegseth is pursuing. 

So there. 

Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.

Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.