David Sterman
@davidsterman.bsky.social
1.1K followers 320 following 630 posts
Deputy Director, New America Future Security program
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Can’t tell if this is supposed to be ironic. But he did, it did, what’s more in an article from the OP. www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/u...
As Election Nears, Kelly Warns Trump Would Rule Like a Dictator
www.nytimes.com
Reposted by David Sterman
“The Defense Department has confiscated the badges of the Pentagon reporters from virtually every major media organization in America,” the Pentagon Press Association said

Oct. 15, 2025
PENTAGON PRESS ASSOCIATION
STATEMENT
Today, the Defense Department confiscated the badges of the Pentagon reporters from virtually every major media organization in America. It did this because reporters would not sign onto a new media policy over its implicit threat of criminalizing national security reporting and exposing those who sign it to potential prosecution.
The Pentagon Press Association's members are still committed to reporting on the U.S. military. But make no mistake, today, Oct. 15, 2025 is a dark day for press freedom that raises concerns about a weakening U.S. commitment to transparency in governance, to public accountability at the Pentagon and to free speech for all.
PPA
Reposted by David Sterman
WaPo joins NYT, CNN, The Atlantic, Guardian and others, according to @ScottNover, in announcing it won't sign the Pentagon's controversial new press policy.
The weirdness of assuming death is the key thing worth coverage is also clear in other parts of this. As if mentions/coverage of Covid-19 is only driven by the death count and not system wide sociopolitical consequences.
This seems silly.

Wonder if there was an event in 2023 globally that might explain high media coverage of terrorism and pose issues around assuming some clear connection between what should be covered and deaths in the U.S.

Wonder if that might be further illustrated when a keyword is “hostage”
There’s still a roiling of local/regional stories on this and yet so little pick up in major US press of a case that even if AFRICOM was right about the target raises serious questions.

www.hiiraan.com/news4/2025/O...
Still weird there’s not been more coverage of the U.S. strike in Somalia that might have been civcas and at least raises all sorts of qs about the political context and dynamics of the U.S. strike campaign.

I’ve seen local/regional coverage and occasional mil trade press piece but that’s all.
Yes and even before this such target focused assumptions about motive were deeply flawed. Especially for targets that are attacked across the spectrum by various groups/ideologies - notably Jews and Jewish spaces.

Also just bad practice to assume from target without info.
Yes. Really important point. Much far-right violence is internecine and fratricidal. So, Pape's argument that "although using the partisan identity of targets as a proxy for the partisan motivations of perpetrators is not a perfect approach, it is a fairly good one" does not hold up.
What Bob leaves out is that the rise in threats against Republican officials is driven, in no small measure, by stochastic MAGA terrorism aimed at cowing anyone who does, or might, cross Trump.
Few more details.

Somalia is at 81 confirmed strikes plus a ground raid.

Yemen may include an alleged but not confirmed strike on AQAP not just the anti-Houthi campaign.
Yesterday's Syria strike puts US combat actions during the second Trump administration at:

—1,000+ air strikes in Yemen (March-April)
—75+ air strikes in Somalia
—7 air strikes and 3 JSOC ground raids in Syria
—4 air strikes in the Caribbean
—B-2 strikes on 3 sites in Iran
—1 air strike in Iraq
Reposted by David Sterman
Yesterday's Syria strike puts US combat actions during the second Trump administration at:

—1,000+ air strikes in Yemen (March-April)
—75+ air strikes in Somalia
—7 air strikes and 3 JSOC ground raids in Syria
—4 air strikes in the Caribbean
—B-2 strikes on 3 sites in Iran
—1 air strike in Iraq
Apparently there was another strike in Syria against an AQ figure per CENTCOM.

Been a few of these. www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-...
www.centcom.mil
I very much agree with critiques of Hegseth’s concepts of warrior ethos etc especially the lower ROEs mean more winning.

I do worry a bit some of the criticism may be overemphasizing the role of logistics, and industrial capacity. And especially that some args assume only specific kinds of war.
Reposted by David Sterman
Senator Slotkin asks Army GC nominee about how many "designated terrorist organizations" the US is now supposedly in an armed conflict with and whether he can name them.

Army GC nominee refuses to answer.

Administration refuses to tell American public and Congress who POTUS has declared war on.
Could well be wrong and gov data for this kind of thing is often a mess. But I’d be wary with how one portrays this number. Especially as it’s touted by Patel to defend against criticisms of undermining investigations.
If I’m doing my math right, if you’re suggesting there’s been a 300% increase in DT investigations overall, based on Patel’s numbers you’d think there were 425 last year which would have been about a 84% decrease from 2023.

That seems on face wrong to me atop wording being different.
Here’s that link. www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/do...

Also seems like maybe a small drop in international terror investigations.

Would be cool if folks clarified when reporting and linked to specific testimony.
Another question I have is that in 2023 Wray testified there were 2,700 open DT cases. Maybe that dropped in 2024, but seems Patel’s count is 1,700 DT cases.

His statement makes it sound like his % is newly opened not the total number. As does the reply to McBath that makes it seem NVE specific
Looking through Patel’s testimony and it doesn’t seem entirely clear he’s saying there’s a 300% increase in DT cases.

In the statement, it seems unspecified after a series of possible referents (international, DT, and NVE)

He then later seems to give it for NVE.

Has it been clarified anywhere?
Reposted by David Sterman
Simple question that AG Pam Bondi refuses to answer: "What happened to the $50,000 that the FBI delivered to Mr. Holman in a paper bag?"
Pam Bondi is incapable of answering simple questions.
Here’s link for that quote: www.rev.com/transcripts/...

And here’s the opening statement www.fbi.gov/news/speeche...
Looking at this response to McBath makes it seem like he’s talking a specific set of cases not DT generally?

“We have 1,700 current DT managed programs. We're up 300% in the amount of cases we brought against nihilistic violent extremists including 764 wishing to harm our children.”
Looking through Patel’s testimony and it doesn’t seem entirely clear he’s saying there’s a 300% increase in DT cases.

In the statement, it seems unspecified after a series of possible referents (international, DT, and NVE)

He then later seems to give it for NVE.

Has it been clarified anywhere?
Not doing the unredacted version?

If not, how does the audio version handle the redactions?