U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced on Wednesday on X: “Message to IRAN: We see your LETHAL support to The Houthis. We know exactly what you are doing. You know very well what the U.S. Military is capable of — and you were warned. You will pay the CONSEQUENCE at the time and place of our choosing.”
Not all MAGA supporters approve of Hegseth’s threat. As one replied: “Trump voter here – this is UNACCEPTABLE. STOP THE WARMONGERING.”
Message to IRAN:
— Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (@SecDef) May 1, 2025
We see your LETHAL support to The Houthis. We know exactly what you are doing.
You know very well what the U.S. Military is capable of — and you were warned. You will pay the CONSEQUENCE at the time and place of our choosing.
Republican Congressman Thomas Massie (R-WV) also responded to Hegseth with disapproval.
Massie wrote on X: “I support this administration, but the Secretary of Defense doesn’t have the Constitutional authority to declare war on a sovereign country. A planned military attack on Iran is an Act of War and requires a vote of Congress according to the U.S. Constitution.”
I support this administration, but the Secretary of Defense doesn’t have the Constitutional authority to declare war on a sovereign country.
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) May 1, 2025
A planned military attack on Iran is an Act of War and requires a vote of Congress according to the U.S. Constitution. https://t.co/cQhUPFQxt5
Massie’s comment is being met with opposition from other MAGA supporters who are leaving rabble-rousing comments including “Did you just publicly give comfort and aid to an enemy? I think you did, do you know what they call that?”
Massie actually replied, writing “we call it free speech in this country.”
When another replied to Massie “You’re right but it’s also just a tweet. There isn’t anything wrong with posturing,” the Congressman replied: “And there’s nothing with me telling the administration that an attack without congressional authorization would be unconstitutional.”
The SecDef’s language itself demonstrates he isn’t responding to the type of imminent danger that would authorize unilateral military action by the executive branch under the War Powers Act (even if the War Powers Act were Constitutional).
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) May 1, 2025
Massie added: “The SecDef’s language itself demonstrates he isn’t responding to the type of imminent danger that would authorize unilateral military action by the executive branch under the War Powers Act (even if the War Powers Act were Constitutional).”
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}