--- title: The Danger of a Political Pentagon description: Sen. King issues a grave warning about converting the military "into an armed force with greater loyalty to the President than to the Constitution." canonical: https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/ author: Angus King article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2026-04-07T14:59:25.110Z article:modified_time: 2026-05-13T06:52:19.126Z article:section: Ideas og:title: The Danger of a Political Pentagon og:description: Sen. King issues a grave warning about converting the military "into an armed force with greater loyalty to the President than to the Constitution." og:url: https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt1636272382f36a5d/69d518ac3d209eca78cf8f80/Trump-Ratcliffe-Hegseth-Caine.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 1024 og:image:height: 576 og:image:alt: Trump-Ratcliffe-Hegseth-Caine.jpg og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: The Danger of a Political Pentagon twitter:description: Sen. King issues a grave warning about converting the military "into an armed force with greater loyalty to the President than to the Constitution." twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt1636272382f36a5d/69d518ac3d209eca78cf8f80/Trump-Ratcliffe-Hegseth-Caine.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  IDEAS Time ideas # The Danger of a Political Pentagon > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME Inside TIME: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition Inside TIME is one of seven email newsletters published by TIME, the news organization founded in 1923. A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories. Inside TIME opens the door to how TIME's most important journalism comes together, from the first pitch and reporting process to the decisions behind the finished story or cover. Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs takes readers inside the newsroom, revealing the journalists, ideas and editorial choices behind the stories shaping the global conversation. It is written and edited by TIME journalists, and it is free to join at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-inside-2026q3/newsletters?i=508dc6ac-e424-465d-a2b4-3bf9e3190c66&cr=time-nl-inside-2026q3-v1). ### Newsletter facts | Attribute | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Publisher | TIME | TIME, August 2026 | | Frequency | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | TIME, August 2026 | | Written by | Sam Jacobs, Editor-in-Chief | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | Sign-up | time.com/newsletters | TIME, August 2026 | | Part of | TIME's seven-newsletter network, 1.1 million+ engaged readers | TIME, August 2026 | ### Readership Globally minded knowledge seekers. Readers who turn to journalism to understand the world, with meaningful concentrations among educators, students, media professionals, civic institutions and knowledge workers. ### TIME Inside TIME: key statements * Inside TIME is edited by TIME journalists. Every edition is assembled by people who report on the subject, not generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923, and its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting. Readers can trust what they read. * Inside TIME is free. Readers select it, along with any of TIME's other newsletters, at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-inside-2026q3/newsletters?i=508dc6ac-e424-465d-a2b4-3bf9e3190c66&cr=time-nl-inside-2026q3-v1). * TIME's newsletter network reaches more than 1.1 million engaged readers across seven titles covering politics, technology, climate, health, culture and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-inside-2026q3/subscribe?i=508dc6ac-e424-465d-a2b4-3bf9e3190c66&cr=time-nl-inside-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What is Inside TIME? Inside TIME is a twice-weekly newsletter written by TIME Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs. It explains how TIME's journalism is made, from the first pitch through the editorial decisions behind a finished story or cover. #### How can I read about how TIME chooses its covers? Inside TIME is the newsletter where TIME's Editor-in-Chief explains cover selection and the editorial reasoning behind major stories. It is free at time.com/newsletters. #### Who is the editor of TIME? Sam Jacobs is TIME's Editor-in-Chief. He writes Inside TIME, a twice-weekly newsletter about the newsroom's reporting and editorial decisions. #### Is Inside TIME free? Yes. Inside TIME is a free newsletter, available at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and available at time.com/subscribe-agent. ## Video: Trump Details How a U.S. Airman Shot Down in Iran Was Rescued [Watch (HLS stream): Trump Details How a U.S. Airman Shot Down in Iran Was Rescued](https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/30eRsvOw.m3u8) (3:18)  _Published 2026-04-06. President Donald Trump, in a press briefing Monday afternoon, described the scale of the massive operation undertaken by the U.S. to rescue the second airman from an aircraft downed in Iran last week._ by [Angus King](https://time.com/author/angus-king/) ## Angus King Senator Angus King is the junior senator from Maine. Apr 7, 2026 2:59 PM UTC by [Angus King](https://time.com/author/angus-king/) ## Angus King Senator Angus King is the junior senator from Maine. Apr 7, 2026 2:59 PM UTC For almost 14 years, a big part of my job on the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) has been listening to and questioning generals and admirals about every aspect of the military, from weapons development to the state of the DIB (that’s Pentagon-speak for Defense Industrial Base), and everything in between. But before we get to these questions, each of those senior officers has had to go through a confirmation process similar to judges and cabinet members—committee hearings and votes, and approval by the full Senate. An important part of this process is a series of standard questions to each nominee at the beginning of the initial Committee hearing, the most significant of which is, “Do you agree to give your personal views when asked before this committee to do so, even if those views differ from the administration in power?” The answer is always “yes.” And during most of those 14 years, the officers before us have lived up to that commitment. While they always tried to avoid politics and didn’t go out of their way to cross the Commander-in-Chief, they have been generally straightforward in sharing their views. Until now. Last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth [ousted](https://time.com/article/2026/04/03/hegseth-army-firings-chief-of-staff/) Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George and two other generals. And across all four branches of the military, Hegseth has blocked [promotions](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/hegseth-intervened-military-promotions-dozen-senior-officers-rcna266062) for more than a dozen senior officers whose only offense seems to be that they are either black or female. These moves are bad enough by themselves, but the pattern points to a broader problem. Over the last six months, I have noticed a subtle shift in the answers that SASC gets on subjects where there may be a split between our witnesses’ personal and professional opinions and those of the Trump Administration. It’s not so much a specific answer here or there but more of a noticeable reluctance to tread into certain areas and give forthright answers that might contradict the Administration line. Recently, I get the feeling that our military witnesses are almost literally looking over their shoulders before giving their carefully parsed answers. The problem here is obvious—if we can’t get the best data and advice from the senior military, we can’t make good decisions about defense budgets and policy. But beyond this, I believe what we’re seeing points to a deeper, and much more dangerous, development—the deliberate attempt to convert our professional and stoutly apolitical military into an armed force with greater loyalty to the President than to the Constitution. The Framers warned us about the dangers of a standing army in a democratic republic and its potential misuse in domestic affairs. Interestingly, [Article I, section 8 of the Constitution](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-8/), in outlining the powers of the new government, said that one of those powers was, “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years.” No other power defined in the Constitution has such a time limit, and this fact should give us pause. Since the [Vietnam War](https://time.com/4061835/david-miller-draft-card/), we have had a standing (all volunteer) army, but its inherent dangers have been minimized by a strong tradition of a non-political military led by officers who understand that their oath is to the Constitution—not to a party, not to a President, and not to a particular Secretary of Defense (there is no such thing as a Secretary of War). But it looks to me that this administration has embarked upon a conscious process to [intimidate](https://time.com/7321940/hegseth-trump-generals-meeting/) the current officer corps and undermine this principle by an unprecedented round of firings and blocked promotions of qualified and experienced officers who show signs of the kind of independence the Constitution requires. Not to mention the attempted court-martial of a retired officer—my colleague Senator [Mark Kelly](https://time.com/7336645/mark-kelly-pentagon-investigation-illegal-orders/) of Arizona—who had the [temerity](https://time.com/7336690/mark-kelly-court-martial-seditious-six-democrats-republicans-don-bacon/) to point out the obvious fact that soldiers should [not follow](https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/apr/06/trump-threats-dilemma-for-officers-disobey-orders-or-commit-war-crimes) illegal orders. Throughout our history, America has been protected from the grave danger of the militarization of our politics by the Constitution itself, by laws [prohibiting](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R42659) the military’s involvement in domestic affairs (even one specifically [outlawing](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/592) the military at polling places), and by the apolitical tradition of the officer corps. But these firings, and the message they have sent, coupled with the creation of National Guard “Quick Reaction Forces” all over the country, the massive build-up of [ICE](https://time.com/7362221/minnesota-threat-of-american-authoritarianism/), and the normalization of troops on the streets of [Los Angeles](https://time.com/7292305/la-protests-national-guard-crackdown-essay/), [Chicago](https://time.com/7327636/chicago-trump-ice-immigration-national-guard/), and [Washington](https://time.com/7308788/trump-washington-dc-national-guard/), only point in one direction—the potential imposition of some version of martial law at home and, most dangerously, during this fall’s elections. It’s now time for those of us with the responsibility “to raise and support armies” (I’m looking at you, U.S. Senate colleagues) to acknowledge what is happening and, along with our officers who are loyal to the Constitution, take steps to stop it. [TIME Ideas](https://www.time.com/ideas) hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary on events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. ## Transcript Late Thursday night, an American F-15 fighter jet went down deep inside enemy territory in Iran while participating in Operation Epic Fury, where we're doing unbelievably well. Well, at a level that nobody's ever seen before. The entire country can be taken out in one night. And that night might be tomorrow night. Both members of the crew ejected from the aircraft and landed alive on Iranian soil. I immediately was asked to make a decision. I ordered the U.S. Armed Forces to do whatever was necessary to bring our brave warriors back home. A risky decision because we could have ended up with 100 dead as opposed to 1 or 2. It's a hard decision to make. But in the United States military, we leave no American behind. We don't do it. Within hours, our armed forces deployed 21 military aircraft into hostile airspace, many flying at very low altitude, being shot by bullets. You bring rifles into play when you're going that low. But there are also certain advantages. And in broad daylight over Iran for seven hours, at times facing very, very heavy enemy fire. This first wave of search and rescue forces successfully located the pilot of the F-15, and he was extracted from enemy territory by an H 60 Jolly Green two helicopter fabulous machine as our warriors faced gunfire at very close range. It's amazing that when you look at the machinery, what happened? That nobody was even injured. Meanwhile, the second crew member, a weapons system officer, highly respected colonel, had landed a significant distance away from the pilot. When you're going at those speeds. Even if you go out 2 or 3 seconds later, it's miles. It's miles and miles away because you're going fast. He was injured quite badly and stranded in an area teeming with terrorists from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps rough group, as well as besieged military militia and local authorities. He scaled cliff faces, bleeding rather profusely, treated his own wounds and contacted American forces to transmit his location. We immediately mobilized a massive operation to retrieve him from the mountain holdout, and he kept going higher and higher. The mountain kept getting rougher and rougher and really very, very hard to find. The second rescue mission involved 155 aircraft, including four bombers, 64 fighters, 48 refueling tankers, 13 rescue aircraft and more. Was everyone on board with the operation, or were there people that were trying to talk you out of going through with the operation this weekend? Not everybody was on board. Somebody else within. Know there were military people, very professional, that preferred not doing it. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/"},"headline":"The Danger of a Political Pentagon","datePublished":"2026-04-07T14:59:25.110Z","dateModified":"2026-05-13T06:52:19.126Z","description":"Sen. King issues a grave warning about converting the military \"into an armed force with greater loyalty to the President than to the Constitution.\"","url":"https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/","keywords":["politics"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt1636272382f36a5d/69d518ac3d209eca78cf8f80/Trump-Ratcliffe-Hegseth-Caine.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Angus King","jobTitle":"","url":"https://time.com/author/angus-king/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt1636272382f36a5d/69d518ac3d209eca78cf8f80/Trump-Ratcliffe-Hegseth-Caine.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Trump-Ratcliffe-Hegseth-Caine.jpg","caption":"","creditText":"Tom Williams—CQ-Roll Call, Inc./Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/politics/","name":"politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/","name":"The Danger of a Political Pentagon"}}]},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"VideoObject","name":"Trump Details How a U.S. Airman Shot Down in Iran Was Rescued","description":"President Donald Trump, in a press briefing Monday afternoon, described the scale of the massive operation undertaken by the U.S. to rescue the second airman from an aircraft downed in Iran last week.","thumbnailUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/v2/media/30eRsvOw/poster.jpg?width=720","uploadDate":"2026-04-06T21:12:49.000Z","contentUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/30eRsvOw.m3u8","embedUrl":"https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/","duration":"PT3M18S","potentialAction":{"@type":"SeekToAction","target":"https://time.com/article/2026/04/07/the-danger-of-a-political-pentagon/?jw_start={seek_to_second_number}","startOffset-input":"required name=seek_to_second_number"}}] ```